Abstract
At the outset of the COVID-19 epidemic in the UK, infectious disease modellers advised the government that unless a lockdown was imposed, most of the population would be infected within a few months and critical care capacity would be overwhelmed. This paper investigates the quantitative arguments underlying these predictions, and draws lessons for future policy.
The modellers assumed that within age bands all individuals were equally susceptible and equally connected, leading to predictions that more than 80% of the population would be infected in the first wave of an unmitigated epidemic. Models that relax this unrealistic assumption to allow for selective removal of the most susceptible and connected individuals predict much smaller epidemic sizes. In most European countries no more than 10% of the population was infected in the first wave, irrespective of what restrictions were imposed. The modellers assumed that about 2% of those infected would require critical care, far higher than the proportion who entered critical care in the first wave, and failed to identify the key role of nosocomial transmission in overloading health systems. Model-based forecasts that only a lockdown could suppress the epidemic relied on a survey of contact rates in 2006, with no information on the types of contact most relevant to aerosol transmission or on heterogeneity of contact rates.
In future epidemics, modellers should communicate the uncertainties associated with their assumptions and data, especially when these models are used to recommend policies that have high societal costs and are hard to reverse. Recognition of the gap between models and reality also implies a need to rebalance in favour of greater reliance on rapid studies of real-world transmission, robust model criticism, and acceptance that when measurements contradict model predictions it is the model that needs to be changed.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
This paper uses only publicly available data. R code to generate the figures and numbers in the manuscript is provided in the Markdown source document.
