- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Dr. Fauci in New England Journal of Medicine Concedes the Coronavirus Mortality Rate May
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:15 am to The Maj
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:15 am to The Maj
quote:
We started with bad models, then moved to making knee jerk decisions based off of those same bad models be damned the other consequences...
Some of those “bad” models assumed that we did nothing to combat the spread of COVID-19.
quote:
Not saying we should not have done anything BUT what is coming out now damn sure doesn't look like it warranted shutting this country down...
That’s the thing about policy based on predictions. You determine what is likely to occur and you enact policy to change the probabilities. We will never know how bad it would have been had we not enacted those policies.
4
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:16 am to LSU2a
quote:
Some of those “bad” models assumed that we did nothing to combat the spread of COVID-19.
And they're pretty clear about that in their assumptions
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:19 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
But we have to live in reality. Probabilities don't put food on the table or pay your bills do they? They don't around my house.
The real world doesn’t allow policy makers to see into the future and enact policy based on what WILL happen but based on what we THINK will happen. You clearly don’t put food on the table making decisions for others.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:20 am to Powerman
quote:
And they're pretty clear about that in their assumptions
Right - and there should be no suggestion that the measures had zero effect. The science is going to tell us whether or not we overreacted (which we likely did) and help tailor a better, more cost effective response next time.
I can't fault the executives (POTUS, Govs, Mayors) for being risk averse in this situation. The MSM had the Karens in an absolute tizzy a few weeks ago, so the economy would have died a death of a thousand cuts. This way is like surgery - controllable, predictable, manageable with a reasonable time for recovery.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:20 am to LSU2a
quote:
That’s the thing about policy based on predictions. You determine what is likely to occur and you enact policy to change the probabilities. We will never know how bad it would have been had we not enacted those policies.
This is a cop out. If the prediction was for 1M deaths and we end up with 10,000, the model was disastrously and embarrassingly wrong.
This post was edited on 3/27/20 at 8:22 am
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:20 am to LSU2a
quote:
Some of those “bad” models assumed that we did nothing to combat the spread of COVID-19.
The Imperial College model everyone is going off of reduced UK deaths from 500,000 to 260,000 with control measures.
Now it’s suddenly 20,000.
Whoever created that study needs to be taken out back and two bullets put in the back of their skull.
This post was edited on 3/27/20 at 8:21 am
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:22 am to uway
quote:
Have they sent a hospital ship to New Orleans yet?
Nope. They are restarting the battleship USS Alabama in Mobile and sending it. Heavily armed.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:31 am to the808bass
quote:
This is a cop out.
Is it not the truth?
quote:
If the prediction was for 1M deaths and we end up with 10,000, the model was disastrously and embarrassingly wrong.
Typically you would use the same model with a multitude of assumptions. In this case, the first set of assumptions would include doing nothing to stop the spread. The second set of assumptions would be if we enacted the proposed policies. The third set would include draconian shutdowns. You match the results with the model iteration that has the most accurate set of assumption and then you can come to the conclusion that it’s good or bad.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:32 am to LSU2a
quote:
Typically you would use the same model with a multitude of assumptions. In this case, the first set of assumptions would include doing nothing to stop the spread. The second set of assumptions would be if we enacted the proposed policies. The third set would include draconian shutdowns. You match the results with the model iteration that has the most accurate set of assumption and then you can come to the conclusion that it’s good or bad.
Yeah. I read it. And it said staying inside for a year is the only way to stop from overwhelming the surge capacity of ICU. The author has already admitted he was way off. There’s no need for you to defend what he’s not.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:33 am to CleverUserName
quote:
They are restarting the battleship USS Alabama in Mobile and sending it. Heavily armed.
It's way too early for this kind of humor, but that's funny right there - I don't care who you are.
That reminds me of the old joke:
Man: I don't understand all the fuss about the violence in New Orleans. I worked down there for many years and never had a single problem.
Friend: What did you do?
Man: I was a door gunner on a bread truck.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:36 am to LSU2a
quote:
You determine what is likely to occur and you enact policy to change the probabilities.
You simply cannot have tunnel vision in these decisions and the world jumped straight to these decisions based on bad information from the start... They took the models from a think tank that is historically known for their overblown climate change models...
No way in hell the numbers available at the time were adding up to the actions that were taken...
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:40 am to Powerman
quote:
And they're pretty clear about that in their assumptions
No they were not and this is not the first time that this guy from the Imperial College was involved in producing terrible models... He produced similar models for H1N1 and Ebola that were dismissed early...
Why in the hell did no one look at his model and question it from the start as potentially bad for use in decision making?
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:41 am to LSU2a
quote:
Typically you would use the same model with a multitude of assumptions.
Your first mistake is using a single model without verification from other independent models and on the ground data...
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:44 am to The Boat
quote:
The Imperial College model everyone is going off of reduced UK deaths from 500,000 to 260,000 with control measures.
Now it’s suddenly 20,000.
They should get with the climate scientists and get some of those super accurate models.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:46 am to The Maj
quote:
Your first mistake is using a single model without verification from other independent models and on the ground data...
This right here.
Policy that will impact tens of millions of people in a negative way should not be based on the assumptions of a single model. And this model was being torn apart by other researchers from prestigious institutions like Oxford and Stanford for the last week before it suddenly reduced its casualty figures.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:46 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
They should get with the climate scientists and get some of those super accurate models.
You’re gonna love to know that Imperial College is BIG into Climate Change. This whole situation needs to be investigated big time.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:53 am to ShortyRob
quote:Nor destroy the Constitution and Bill of Rights that many of our family members fought and died for
It's also not something to destroy an economy over
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:56 am to Powerman
quote:
Yeah that's not really something to throw a party over
Better than it being the end of the world.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 8:58 am to The Maj
quote:
No they were not
They were clear in the paper.
Posted on 3/27/20 at 9:02 am to Boatshoes
It still doesn't change the fact that as many as 100 million people died from the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918-20.
This post was edited on 3/27/20 at 9:04 am
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News