Pain in muscles and joints?

the First February, should the authorities have introduced a strict 14-day quarantine for all innreisende to the country. This is not hindsight and there is an explanation of why almost no country did that, in retrospect, seems reasonable.

In Norway was no infected and no one died before the first of February. Thus, wouldn’t the authorities know for sure that the pandemic would be severe for the health and economy? But was it necessary to know this with certainty? We assure the house, without having to know exactly how broken it will be by fire. Yes, but we are confident we are not against any conceivable accident, there must be a certain degree of probability that the accident occurs.

When it comes to infection, so it is not lack of scientific knowledge to say something about probabilities.

In 1927 as the so-called SIR-model the light of day. The model describes well how the infection spreads. The more people who are infected and spreading the infection, the more become infected. The vicious circle gives rise to exponential growth, i.e. a smitterate that increases faster and faster over time, until the lack of more to the infection brings smitteraten down.

An article in the New England Journal of Medicine about the outbreak in Wuhan, published 29. January, told of a growth rate of 9.4 per cent per day, a reproduksjonstall R of 2.2, and an average incubation period of 5.2 days. The Media told of many dead.

He will investigate the corona-crisis

Together with a minimum of knowledge about reisemønstrene in the world, this was more than enough knowledge to understand that the infection would reach Norway within a short time and that a quarantine added on the 14 days would reveal whether the innreisende the country was infected or not. A few of the infected would probably still have come into the country.

These, and the environments they move in, it would have been affordable to recover and isolate. Thus, we would through the whole winter had a situation we, in retrospect, to have wagered a huge cost on to now. The country could have been in almost full activity while waiting to find out of the long-term effects, duration of immunity, and vaccines.

“Why use almost no land out of the existing knowledge? Research within the fields of cognitive psychology and systemdynamikk provides important answers for all emergency preparedness.”

Psychologists Tversky and Kahneman pointed out in 1974 that we all have a tendency to put excessive weight on the observations and to ignore the underlying information that we already have. In line with this found Kunreuther in 1996 that people takes out insurance against floods and earthquakes right after the events, and they say up assurances after a few years without new events.

Within systemdynamikk we have found that people’s actions are dominated by a “wait and see”strategy. This strategy works great when we are waiting to shut off the faucet until we see the glass fill up. The subconscious controls without we even being aware of what we do.

When a pandemic is approaching , screaming the subconscious after the observations of the infected, ill, and died before the decisions about the quarantine can be lifted.

Since this is common to all of us, is it not risky for the authorities to choose a “wait and see”strategy. On the other hand feels it’s risky and “entirely unrealistic” to implement very costly measures that go across their own and others ‘ emotions. Thus we are all involved through our feelings and it becomes very difficult to prevent and to cope with crises.

Turn On the LydErrorAllerede plus customer? Log into herError FACT: This are the differences in the classic symptoms of pollenallergi, and coronaviruset. Video: Actually.en Show more

A number of experts make matters worse by its “scientific” focus on secure evidence. But empirical as, for example, says that just 10 people are seriously sick, may as well mute as to strengthen the felt need for action.

on the other hand, if a introduces 10 infected in the SIR model, as is the need for the measures very clearly. The SIR model is an example of systems analysis, where one uses basic knowledge of how things hang together. While the university and media are studied to produce more data, there is almost no that offer systems analysis. Formal systems analysis require a long education, but the insight it brings is important and need not be so complicated.

One insight is that we must be critical of our own hunches. Another insight is that we need to ask more questions. Can the infection come to the Uk? How quickly can it spread in the Uk? What is the value of waiting on secure observations of the deaths? What is the cost of to wait to put innreisende in quarantine?

“Wait and see”strategy is not only problematic for pandemics. It leads to costly overinvesteringer, overfishing, klimakrise, overpopulation, and a large global ecological footprint. A number of systemdynamiske laboratory experiment confirms these claims.

systems analysis, humility, and simple questions needed to prevent and to cope with new crises. Words are not enough, granskingskommisjonen must consider whether we have good enough education to bring up the option to “wait and see”strategy and if we have public institutions that are sufficiently independent to provide clear information.

Mysterious barnesykdom increases

Want to discuss?

Visit Dagbladet debate!