In your model, is there a factor taking into account better hygiene outside Africa?
In other words, the transmissivity of the virus should be lower in the developed world.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 51906308 Yes, I established a baseline set of socio-economic statuses for western africa, and assumed that the socio-economic standards would be 1 quintile higher (on average) in the US and southern Europe, and 1.5 quintiles higher than baseline in northern Europe.
But the fact is that, as this "status" goes up, hygiene isn't the only factor which receives a boost - the number of typical "encounters" with other people per day increases, as does the probability that the person will get on a plane or train and travel to another city, whether for business or holiday.
Apologies, but the "social status improves hygiene and therefore reduces transmission rate" assumption is a wash. (pardon the pun).
It does change transmission *patterns*, though - Wealthier people tend to send the infection further afield each time they transmit it, whereas the poorest tend to transmit to their own families and neighbors in more than 60% of instances.
Fact is, from what I've read "the poor" don't begin to have any impact upon the geographic distribution of cases, until they start to flee the epidemic en mass.
Makes sense?
