New research on this issue shows that the second wave of pandemic disease is quite different if there is a homogeneous circulation of a population compared to the situation of suboptimal people with a diverse number of contacts.
The research, by American authors from Oakland University, Novi High School, and California State Polytechnic University, used a simulation approach to model epilepsy progression in a network where each person’s connection changed over time, shaping the impact of political decisions. made with respect to various levels of quarantine. Published on December 23rd in Europhysics letters.
The authors said: “Recently, several quarantine authors applied COVID-19 modeling. However, these models were not network-based. In addition, they did not address the issue of pre- quarantine. The best way to reduce quarantine is to reduce the number of people with a disease – one of the key issues in this paper. “The benefits of a network – based model are that it more more precise on the peak circulation of individual disease eyebrows, which is a problem for continuous models; also, it does not need to assume the same number of connections for each individual, so it more accurately models the basic microscopic structure of the social network.
According to the authors, if a population of the number of contacts has a homogeneous circulation, “the total number of infectious people at the end of epilepsy is equal to if locking was not determined ( the health system will absorb to one side), “but, in terms of varying frequency of contacts, the total number of people with a disease can be much smaller.
The reason for this effect is simple. Once the individuals who have a large number of connective tissue (high-grade nodes) receive immunity, they prevent the disease from passing through, thus slowing down the spread of the disease through the Network. Therefore, the best time to allow the low-level nodes to increase connections (by raising the lock) would be after the high-level nodes are watertight; this will reduce the net number of people with disease over the course of the disease.
The results suggest the best step-based approach to building quarantine: “high levels go first. In practice, when the state lifts the quarantine tightly (or moves e from one level of quarantine to the next), there is always a choice.One can open smaller stores (where money is the high-end nodes) and / or one can allow collections (which is the case). often included low-level nodes.) The model suggests that the sources must be opened first: this way we can save a lot of individuals (mostly low-level nodes) from being low-level nodes. on the disease “.
The authors continue: “This has two important consequences: first, it confirms the appropriateness of adopting preventive measures to prevent the onset of disease, and secondly, it shows that the second wave and more waves could be calmer than expected. “
The results are contradictory, as is the controversy in the media over the appropriateness of adopting lock-in measures. This paper highlights the importance of a feature commonly observed in the analysis of how epidemics spread: how the heterogeneity of human behavior affects their potential protect themselves from pollution.
Source:
Magazine Reference:
Nimmagadda, V., et al. (2020) Path-dependent incident course: Are two levels of quarantine better than one? Europhysics letters. doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/132/28003.