I am an (almost finished) PhD student in biostatistics and infectious disease modelling (population-level); my research focuses on Bayesian statistical methods to produce improved estimates of the number of new COVID-19 infections. During the pandemic, I was a member of SPI-M-O (the UK government committee providing expert scientific advice based on infectious disease modelling and epidemiology).
I enjoy applying my knowledge broadly, including to models of future pandemics, big picture thinking on pandemic preparedness, and forecasting.
I'm currently nearing PhD competition with nothing lined up for after. I'm interested in opportunities in biosecurity and global health, especially answering questions about cost-effectiveness and prioritisation using modelling / stats / epidemiology skills. Please DM if of even vague interest.
Happy to chat about my experience providing scientific advice to government, the biosecurity field, epidemic modelling, doing a PhD, or pretty much anything else!
Why are you ballparking $10b when all of the examples given are many multiples of that? $100b seems like a better estimate.
I also suspect we're targeting easy to eradicate diseases. Those without animal reservoirs that will cause resurgences and where there are effective interventions. Therefore, I'd suggest this is a lower bound.
Your objections seem reasonable but I do not understand their implications due to a lack of finance background. Would you mind helping me understand how your points affect the takeaway? Specifically, do you think that the estimates presented here are biased, much more uncertain than the post implies, or something else?
My top line summary is: in several areas, EV were operating below the standard the commission would expect, but have rectified the issues to the commission's satisfaction.