Thanks, Abhishek. Totally agree, should have been more careful with the usage of the phrase 'black swan', another reader pointed out the same to me.

Shreedhar Manek

The UK's numbers have been fairly consistent, I think, with what models in the later half have been predicting. Especially those that came out later, such as Cambridge's nowcasting - https://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/now-casting/. I agree with your concerns, though. I wouldn't say I have an opinion here, it's difficult for me to say. But this is what a scientist working on one model told me - "The modelling exercise is a difficult one, but it’s not astrology. It’s a difficult problem. It’s like weather prediction was 40 - 50 years ago. People would get it wrong, make jokes about it and so on. Now no one makes jokes about weather prediction because you get it correct 90% of the times.” Make what you will of it :) Also, to add, there are some ways in which the risk of over-relying on models can be mitigated. I've outlined them in my story but let me just put them together here. 1) Ignore hard numbers entirely. 2) Do not rely on one model. Get multiple models' inputs. Compare them. 3) To compare, you need to know what went behind those models. Any model that is not a 100% open with its methodologies - discard. Have independent researchers examine the accuracy of the models (just as RAMP is doing in the UK). 4) Based on informed, transparent inputs from multiple models: see what they recommend. Then weigh the pros and cons of going with the "most recommended" position vs the other options that are less recommended, taking into account socioeconomic factors. The answer of what needs to be done cannot come from a model alone. India, for example, is in dire straits economically. Smaller, richer countries in Europe? Perhaps not so much. The final decision would and should vary based on such considerations. There are so many variables any sane mind would need some sort of assistance in decision-making -- even if imperfect and to be taken with caution.

Shreedhar Manek

Hi Maumita. You're probably referring the same CDDEP model that I have referred to at the beginning of the story. The government needs some basis to make its decisions. As I've written in the story, the numbers are not important. In fact, one of the scientists I spoke to said, and I quote - "Numbers mean nothing to us". The CDDEP - John Hopkins model may or may not have been way off in terms of numbers, but it was a forewarning and a call to be prepared. Models today, however, can help in vital decision-making. Say the government decides that it has to open offices. Now how must they do that? They can work with a modeller to etch out various scenarios and see what works best (capacity, localities, kinds of transport that should be used, so many variables) and then proceed accordingly. Governments aren't used to working with researchers is, of course, one perspective. This might vary. Everyone would be better served, though, if the government were more transparent if that were to not be the case.

Shreedhar Manek

That's true. No one I spoke to was actively working with the governments, as I wrote in the story. It was more of "we'll inform them we have this and leave it up to them to whatever they want of it". Quite an unfortunate situation.

Shreedhar Manek

There may be, though I haven't come across it. The challenge, at this point, is to get the government to make use of them and not let them be an academic activity alone.

Shreedhar Manek

Most certainly, Sanjeev. But insisting on certificates only encourages companies to resort to the ones like in the story and also avoid due diligence on the part of the purchaser giving a false confidence. (Not to mention the longer term issues where a number of these companies are now "certified" and would no doubt continue to be in business.

Shreedhar Manek

Thanks, Anoop. If there are any new developments we'd be glad to cover those.

Shreedhar Manek

The tender mentioned in this story came out after we did the story last month. All of them had to realign in accordance to the specifications in the new tender, which broke the idea of having a minimal ventilator (notwithstanding the delay in the release of the final amendment). As of now, a ventilator from IIT-B is under production in the AMTZ in partnership with Innvolution Healthcare. Another from IIT-K is going to be produced by defence PSU Bharat Dynamics Limited. However, both are facing massive procurement issues since the new specs force them to rely on components that are in massive demand worldwide.

Shreedhar Manek

Thanks, Chaitanya. AgVa is founded by Prof. Diwakar Vaish and Dr. Deepak Agrawal of AIIMS. AgVa isn't incorporated yet and is a partnership, which is probably why. They do show up on the GST website if you enter their GST no. 07ABLFA3988M1ZP.

Shreedhar Manek

Thanks, Aakriti. The new "e-pass" that's coming about is of especially concerning.

Shreedhar Manek

Hey Manas, we spoke to Arnab Kumar of NITI Aayog the day this story was published and added an update to the story (before the introduction). The features of the app being extended are in line with what they had envisioned for the app, intentionally keeping the privacy policy sufficiently broad.

Shreedhar Manek

Thanks for the suggestion, Himanshu. Getting such mobility data would be a challenge, but I'd certainly keep an eye out :)

Shreedhar Manek