Numbers in, whirrrrrr, clunk clunk, flashing lights, spinning tape spools, crunch crunch, ping! Numbers out.
It is not like that in real life, of course. That rather childish 1960s science-fiction view of computing is useful only to illustrate that computer modelling is step-based, and that you need to put something in at one end to get something more useful out of the other.
But always we need to remember the old axiom: Rubbish in, rubbish out.
In the last couple of weeks, as the Omicron variant of Covid-19 has steadily begun rippling across the landscape of Aotearoa, we have been hearing more and more from modellers about the likely scale of the infection here.
There have been various possible case numbers bandied about, but one thing all these predictions share is the alarmingly rapid rise into what could be tens of thousands of new infections a day at the peak of the wave, within the next couple of months.
For a country with a population of just 5 million or thereabouts, tens of thousands of new cases a day sounds horrific. Especially if you let your imagination run wild and add in the doubling of case numbers every few days which some modellers have talked about.
Using the logic of such an accelerating rate, it would seem that just about everyone in New Zealand would have Omicron by the end of March, which common sense tells us cannot be right. Fortunately, booster vaccines, masks and the self-imposed exile that some will carry out will push those numbers down.
University of Canterbury Covid-19 modeller Prof Michael Plank says the very recent genesis of the variant means there is still a lot of uncertainty about how it behaves. He believes the Red phase of the traffic light alert system may not go far enough to protect Kiwis but will at least slow infection rates and flatten, and lengthen, the curve.
On Monday, the Ministry of Health said it was no longer going to report whether new cases were Omicron or Delta, given Omicron is now our dominant strain.
When it comes to predictions of case numbers, what should we focus on? Is it better to accept the worst-case scenarios so we are better prepared, or should we take the forecasts with a grain, or tonne, of salt so we don’t all descend into a pit of despair as we continue doomscrolling on our mobile phones?
Such modelling is crucial for life and livelihood. It’s similar to severe weather warnings of torrential rain, heavy snow or gales. MetService issues these to ensure everyone has the best possible information on which to prepare and act. Also for a time after the major Canterbury and Kaikoura earthquakes, GNS Science was issuing aftershock forecasts.
For those in hospitals and healthcare, for policy makers, planners and the Government, modelling is invaluable. It helps ensure resources are in the right place when they are most needed, with the logistics of increasing hospital-bed capacity and the deployment of vaccines and testing equipment, and with rostering staff and making contingencies for sickness. For the rest of us, what matters is that the information is out there and available. People can then make the best decisions for their families and households based on that. If it is withheld for fear it might panic the public, then that will ultimately backfire on the Government.
Should we worry constantly about the numbers of Omicron cases computer modelling is predicting in the next couple of months? No – that would be unhealthy and not good for anyone’s mental health.
But should we take notice of the numbers in a more peripheral sense, tucking them away in the backs of our minds to inform our personal and societal behaviours? Yes, definitely. Forecasts are just forecasts. But they are our experts’ best estimates of what may happen and need to be taken, if not as the gospel truth, then pretty seriously at least.
