Neverending Covid-19 Coronavirus

www.dailywire.com

Epidemiologist Behind Highly-Cited Coronavirus Model Drastically Downgrades Projection

Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson, who created the highly-cited Imperial College London coronavirus model, which has been cited by organizations like The New York Times and has been instrumental in governmental policy decision-making, offered a massively downgraded projection of the potential...
www.dailywire.com www.dailywire.com

Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson, who created the highly-cited Imperial College London coronavirus model, which has been cited by organizations like The New York Times and has been instrumental in governmental policy decision-making, offered a massively downgraded projection of the potential deathtoll on Wednesday.


Ferguson’s model projected 2.2 million dead people in the United States and 500,000 in the U.K. from COVID-19 if no action were taken to slow the virus and blunt its curve.

However, after just one day of ordered lockdowns in the U.K., Ferguson is presenting drastically downgraded estimates, revealing that far more people likely have the virus than his team figured. Now, the epidemiologist predicts, hospitals will be just fine taking on COVID-19 patients and estimates 20,000 or far fewer people will die from the virus itself or from its agitation of other ailments, as reported by New Scientist Wednesday.

Ferguson thus dropped his prediction from 500,000 dead to 20,000.
Click to expand...

Essentially 1/2 of people who test positive never show any symptoms. This drastically cuts back projects of worst case scenarios.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
www.dailywire.com

Epidemiologist Behind Highly-Cited Coronavirus Model Drastically Downgrades Projection

Epidemiologist Neil Ferguson, who created the highly-cited Imperial College London coronavirus model, which has been cited by organizations like The New York Times and has been instrumental in governmental policy decision-making, offered a massively downgraded projection of the potential...
www.dailywire.com www.dailywire.com



Essentially 1/2 of people who test positive never show any symptoms. This drastically cuts back projects of worst case scenarios.
Click to expand...

Somewhat good news, at least!
 
[IMG]
 
dhodo said:
This is fascinating. If only most companies, or even our government, were as aware, proactive, and interested in being prepared as Howard E Butt's stores.

www.texasmonthly.com

Inside the Story of How H-E-B Planned for the Pandemic

The grocer started communicating with its Chinese counterparts in January and was running tabletop simulations a few weeks later. (But nothing prepared it for the rush on toilet paper.)
www.texasmonthly.com www.texasmonthly.com
Click to expand...
As a Texan and San Antonio resident
“MY BRAND Y’ALL!!!”

it’s honestly my career goal to work for H-E-B, they’re a great company that focus on community outreach and employee welfare!
 
Indymisanthrope said:
Proposal that we don’t uncritically repeat The Daily Wire:
www.nationalreview.com

No, a COVID Scientist Didn’t Walk Back His Prediction | National Review

From the beginning he has said that lockdowns work.
www.nationalreview.com www.nationalreview.com
Click to expand...

I agree - you should always look at data critically. Models provide results using the best available information at the time. When new information becomes available, you need to run it again. It doesn't make the model wrong. It's especially important when you're looking at a pre-print manuscript like this was. The public and the media don't always realize that these things are a work in progress. The main conclusion that "social distancing" is the best approach should stand despite that change in input data.

In this case, the fact that 50% of the population is asymptomatic was not clear even a week ago. That affects things in two ways - it lowers the death rate but it also increases the Ro quite a bit. It will be interesting how that changes things. Still a lot of deaths in the "do nothing curve" I'm sure, but I suspect it's less and the curve should be tighter.

There is criticism that the effects of testing & tracing wasn't considered but that's irrelevant to the "do nothing" curve. It's just another simulation that must be run.
 
Anyone in need of TP and don’t want to leave their homes check out this site which automatically shows several kinds toilet paper when it goes back in stock on Amazon. Amazon recently removed the “notify me” option, probably because people abused it for essential goods.

Was not able to get any from the very kind Instacart delivery person today. So I’m trying my luck here. Prices are normal and not gouged. I’ve got 5 left so ideally getting some sooner than later. I only plan on purchasing one pack if I can get any.

Toilet Paper & Flushable Wipes In Stock Tracker - NowInStock.net

Looking for Toilet Paper but having no luck? Maybe our FREE Toilet Paper In Stock Tracker can help!
www.nowinstock.net
 
wokeupnew said:
Anyone in need of TP and don’t want to leave their homes check out this site which automatically shows several kinds toilet paper when it goes back in stock on Amazon. Amazon recently removed the “notify me” option, probably because people abused it for essential goods.

Was not able to get any from the very kind Instacart delivery person today. So I’m trying my luck here. Prices are normal and not gouged. I’ve got 5 left so ideally getting some sooner than later. I only plan on purchasing one pack if I can get any.

Toilet Paper & Flushable Wipes In Stock Tracker - NowInStock.net

Looking for Toilet Paper but having no luck? Maybe our FREE Toilet Paper In Stock Tracker can help!
www.nowinstock.net
Click to expand...
This works FYI! Just scored a 30 pack for $20. Doesn’t go in stock until the 29th but it’ll come in two days after that 💩
 
For me it says everything is out of stock. The 2 that are listed as pre-order bring me to the amazon homepage and not the product page so yeah.

No luck with me. But at least I have 3 spare rolls still.
 
Turbo said:
I agree - you should always look at data critically. Models provide results using the best available information at the time. When new information becomes available, you need to run it again. It doesn't make the model wrong. It's especially important when you're looking at a pre-print manuscript like this was. The public and the media don't always realize that these things are a work in progress. The main conclusion that "social distancing" is the best approach should stand despite that change in input data.

In this case, the fact that 50% of the population is asymptomatic was not clear even a week ago. That affects things in two ways - it lowers the death rate but it also increases the Ro quite a bit. It will be interesting how that changes things. Still a lot of deaths in the "do nothing curve" I'm sure, but I suspect it's less and the curve should be tighter.

There is criticism that the effects of testing & tracing wasn't considered but that's irrelevant to the "do nothing" curve. It's just another simulation that must be run.
Click to expand...

In my particular modeling community we have a saying (maybe all modeling disciplines have it - i don't know)...
all models are wrong but some models are useful
why? because they're only as good as the data, assumptions, and conceptual models that fuel them

that doesn't mean they don't provide us with useful information... they're just not crystal balls or nostredamus as some people believe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top