- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: UW model updates again overnight
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:19 am to bfniii
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:19 am to bfniii
quote:
this is absolutely false because of the high number of people who were asymptomatic.
That's not true unless you believe that the percentage of asymptotic cases increased as lockdown initiatives were implemented. There is absolutely no evidence for that and defies logic.
0
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:19 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
quote:
The model assumes the entire US moves to shelter-in-place until August 4th.
The first sentence on the model website:
quote:
COVID-19 projections assuming full social distancing through May 2020
Ok. They must have changed that with the latest update, b/c the page that I had open from yesterday was still using the August 4th date. In the supporting paper they discuss using the Wuhan lockdowns for social distancing. Overall, I don't think this is a very good model but I'm not arguing that it is too low or too high with deaths.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:21 am to Dawgfanman
quote:
We were told to lockdown to “flatten the curve” specifically being told that it would NOT lead to a lower overall death toll
That's categorically false. It's the entire reason for the "flatten the curve" narrative.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:23 am to rds dc
quote:
In the supporting paper they discuss using the Wuhan lockdowns for social distancing
No, they are using the New Zealand Level 4 restrictions as the basis for model.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:23 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
quote: We were told to lockdown to “flatten the curve” specifically being told that it would NOT lead to a lower overall death toll That's categorically false. It's the entire reason for the "flatten the curve" narrative.
You are full of shite. The flatten the curve push was to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed, to spread out the infections..not stop them. You frickers who pushed this shite are lying sacks of shite
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:24 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
No, it isn't. It projects between 207-1,837 deaths in Alabama.
So the “range” is just a factor of 9, which allows people like yourself to claim “muh models”. That’s not a model, that’s a swag. It’s like a hurricane forecaster giving you a damn cone from Miami to New Jersey and claiming he fricking nailed it when it hits Jacksonville.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:24 am to Dawgfanman
quote:
You are full of shite. The flatten the curve push was to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed, to spread out the infections..not stop them. You frickers who pushed this shite are lying sacks of shite
Which will decrease the fatality rate of the disease which will decrease the overall death toll.
Are you being serious with this post?
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:25 am to anc
This modeling is as bad as election polling and monthly to weekly down to daily weather forecasting.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:26 am to Flats
quote:
So the “range” is just a factor of 9, which allows people like yourself to claim “muh models”.
It's an infectious disease, the spread is going to be wide because of the probabilities of rapid transmission.
See Italy and Spain.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:31 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Which will decrease the fatality rate of the disease which will decrease the overall death toll. Are you being serious with this post?
Yeah, without shutting down the economy bodies woulda been piled up in waiting rooms and lines at the hospital. Gtfo. We destroyed our economy for nothing.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:32 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Which will decrease the fatality rate of the disease which will decrease the overall death toll
An infection rate of the population is assumed in the models. Social distancing, in their models, only serves to slow the spread. It does not change the infection rate of the population in the long run.
I think they’re wrong. But they do not believe that.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:32 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
It's an infectious disease, the spread is going to be wide because of the probabilities of rapid transmission.
If this is the absolute best that infectious disease models can manage then they’re all garbage and we shouldn’t have trashed the economy over one of them.
I don’t know that that’s true, but you seem to think it is. Since the lower end of the guess....um, the “range” was 30,000 can I safely assume you had no issue with people comparing it to a bad flu season?
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:35 am to Flats
quote:
you had no issue with people comparing it to a bad flu season?
Following.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:36 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
No, they are using the New Zealand Level 4 restrictions as the basis for model.
Did you read the paper?
LINK
They use the New Zealand model as a way to identify various levels of social distancing but they assume that Level 4 has impact similar to what occurred in Wuhan.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:39 am to Dawgfanman
quote:
Yeah, without shutting down the economy bodies woulda been piled up in waiting rooms and lines at the hospital. Gtfo. We destroyed our economy for nothing.
That’s not even responsive to my point.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:41 am to the808bass
quote:
An infection rate of the population is assumed in the models. Social distancing, in their models, only serves to slow the spread. It does not change the infection rate of the population in the long run.
They are assuming pandemic waves, but you are basically correct.
My point was death toll/fatality rates. It’s a pretty easy concept - that is playing out in real life - that is apparently lost on some people.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:42 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
That’s not even responsive to my point.
Your point was that the models would be correct without social distancing..that’s bullshite. The models were wrong, social distancing does reduce hospital overtaxing...both can be true. The fact is the scientists and modelers fricked up and now we will all suffer for it in economic terms.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:45 am to Flats
quote:
don’t know that that’s true, but you seem to think it is. Since the lower end of the guess....um, the “range” was 30,000 can I safely assume you had no issue with people comparing it to a bad flu season?
No, comparing it to the flu was dumb because of its incubation period and nCFR. It’s worse than the flu. It’s not the Black Death, but it’s worse than the flu.
The low end projections account for highly effective social distancing and lockdown measures. Getting a similar outcome as the flu in terms of death would be a tremendous accomplishment due to effective parameters.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:45 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
They are assuming pandemic waves, but you are basically correct.
They always assume pandemic waves. It’s one reason we shouldn’t trust them.
They always say social distancing until we have a vaccine. That’s another reason we shouldn’t trust them.
Posted on 4/8/20 at 9:52 am to Dawgfanman
quote:
Your point was that the models would be correct without social distancing..that’s bullshite.
I never said that. It doesn't even make sense.
What I said was that upper range projections on March 26/30 take into account scenarios where social distancing and lockdown measures are ineffective and transmission rates remain high.
So if on March 26th, all these states implemented these restrictions and the restrictions, for whatever reason, are completely ineffective, then a worst case scenario of resource use and death would look like this.
At the same time, the model, on March 26th, took that same information and projected out what he outcome may look like if social distancing and lockdown measures were highly effective - hence the low end projections.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News