Re: [admin-discuss] Suggestion for COVID management at future meetings - London Nov. 2022 covid wave forecast

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Hi, John,

Thank you for approaching my thoughts too, among others.

I would reply with respect to forecasting the future of the covid wave.

Le 30/08/2022 à 21:55, John C Klensin a écrit :
[...]
> we need to continue to make the possibility of going all-online a 
> realistic choice if we discover, as a meeting approaches, that "the 
> meeting place is at a peak".

The shape of the covid wave in London at the beginning of November,
2022, can be forecast: is it a a peak or a trough?

The last peak in UK was on July 16th, approximately.  The distance
between past peaks, generally, varies between 2-7 months.

	Very cautiously speaking, London in Nov. might be around, or
	heading towards, a peak.

This estimation could further be refined, by identifying the precise
past wave shape in precisely London or its subdivisions.  This
refinement might drastically change the forecast result.

What do the pro forecasters say?

There should exist websites in UK which give more UK specific forecasts,
presumably more precise, with more than just PCR test data as input.  I
dont have them at hand.

Other than the UK websites,
a rough 2-month horizon forecast from healthdata.org for UK is at:
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom?view=infections-testing&tab=trend&test=positive_tests
It says that at the end of October the wave is slowly rising.

A 2 to 4 week horizon relatively safe forecast could be found on the
covid19forecasthub.eu website, at this URL:
https://covid19forecasthub.eu/visualisation.html?location=GB
It says in the next two weeks the wave is still descending.

A Swiss Institute of Global Health with JUHu data gives a safest 1-week
forecast for UK at:
https://renkulab.shinyapps.io/COVID-19-Epidemic-Forecasting/_w_7d07beee/_w_059c7e2d/?tab=jhu_pred&country=United%20Kingdom
It says in the next week the cases are stable.

Yours,

Alex

> 
> How close we can cut the timing before deciding is presumably a SHMOO
> matter, and maybe a contractual one, not specifically a COVID 
> management one.
> 
> My hope for meetings 116 and beyond is that we can discuss the issues
> with a minimum of repetition, insistence that one group is right and
> everyone else is wrong, or strongly expressed opinions based on
> forecasts of relatively distant futures. Optimistic, no, but
> definitely hope.
> 
> john
> 
> 
> --On Tuesday, August 30, 2022 16:58 +0100 Stephen Farrell 
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hiya,
>> 
>> On 30/08/2022 15:13, Jay Daley wrote:
>>> Hi All
>>> 
>>> I've had an offlist suggestion for a different COVID management 
>>> policy for future IETF meetings (i.e. 116 and possibly after 
>>> that), which is that we ask all onsite participants to take a 
>>> rapid antigen test each morning and confirm that is clear before
>>>  participating and then masks are optional and there is no 
>>> vaccination requirement.  It would be useful to hear what people
>>>  think of that.
>> 
>> Three points:-
>> 
>> - I'd have a not-that-strong preference for requiring vaccination 
>> over tests for IETF meetings on the basis that that may reduce the
>>  probability those who do get infected suffer more serious illness,
>>  but also due to the inconvenience of daily testing
>> 
>> - I suspect it's to early to talk about this for IETF 116 as the 
>> rules in place at that location are still changing and could change
>> more after we'd conclude a discussion we have now
>> 
>> - More generally, I think discussing this topic between each 
>> meeting as they come up is probably still the right way to go, 
>> (despite the objections it'll raise each time:-() as the future 
>> related to COVID doesn't seem to be getting sufficiently 
>> predictable to try agree a longer term policy
>> 
>> Cheers, S.
>> 
>> PS: None of the above is arguing for being more restrictive or less
>> btw, while I'm happy that most restrictions where I live have been
>> relaxed, I'm also ok putting up with a bit of inconvenience if that
>> makes others more comfortable with turning up at meetings.
>> 
> 
>