Wuhan Virus Model Sees Another Dramatic Downward Revision

[SAN compnerd]

Remember, we were told in the begining that 200k deaths was the best we can hope for with full mitigation, lockdown and social distancing. Claiming the curve changed due to mititation is moving the goalposts. The models and 'experts' were wrong.

https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/202...ward-revision/

[cleonard]

One of the big unknown in these models is not the virus, but how people behave. They had to guess about social distancing and what the compliance to the recommendations was going to be. Get it a little wrong and the results vary wildly.

There was zero way to measure this. They had to guess. They guessed wrong.

[viet4lifeOC]

One of the big unknown in these models is not the virus, but how people behave. They had to guess about social distancing and what the compliance to the recommendations was going to be. Get it a little wrong and the results vary wildly.

There was zero way to measure this. They had to guess. They guessed wrong.

IMO... There are two big unknowns... the virus and governmental policies/ people's behavior.

There's still a lot we don't know about ther virus from what I've read.

[rklapper]

good news, looks like this is working

[SAN compnerd]

good news, looks like this is working

No. Models calling for 200k deaths was with full mitigation/lockdown. That's moving the goalposts.

[sd_shooter]

One of the big unknown in these models is not the virus, but how people behave. They had to guess about social distancing and what the compliance to the recommendations was going to be. Get it a little wrong and the results vary wildly.

There was zero way to measure this. They had to guess. They guessed wrong.

This wasn't just off by 10%, it was off by an order of magnitude. Not worthy of being called a 'model', it's not modeling anything close to reality.

[Doheny]

Wuhan Virus Model Sees Another Dramatic Downward Revision

Remember, we were told in the begining that 200k deaths was the best we can hope for with full mitigation, lockdown and social distancing. Claiming the curve changed due to mititation is moving the goalposts. The models and 'experts' were wrong.



https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/202...ward-revision/

Are you saying 200k deaths were the minimum we were told to expect? If so, what model was that? All the ones I saw said 100-200k with mitigation.

[stonefly-2]

Ok, so who all is tired of winning raise your hands.

[AR15fan]

Are you saying 200k deaths were the minimum we were told to expect? If so, what model was that? All the ones I saw said 100-200k with mitigation.

The original model was 2.2m deaths in the USA.

Later downgraded to 100,000 to 240,000

Now downgraded AGAIN to between 26,000 and 155,000

AND FOR THIS WE CREATE A DEPRESSION.

[sd_shooter]

The original model was 2.2m deaths in the USA.

Later downgraded to 100,000 to 240,000

Now downgraded AGAIN to between 26,000 and 155,000

AND FOR THIS WE CREATE A DEPRESSION.

Sshhhhh... it's now considered "trolling" to post things like this.

[POLICESTATE]

The original model was 2.2m deaths in the USA.

Later downgraded to 100,000 to 240,000

Now downgraded AGAIN to between 26,000 and 155,000

AND FOR THIS WE CREATE A DEPRESSION.

No ****.

[DrjonesUSA]

The original model was 2.2m deaths in the USA.

Later downgraded to 100,000 to 240,000

Now downgraded AGAIN to between 26,000 and 155,000

AND FOR THIS WE CREATE A DEPRESSION.

Sshhhhh... it's now considered "trolling" to post things like this.

END THE LOCKDOWNS NOW!!!

[SAN compnerd]

The original model was 2.2m deaths in the USA.

Later downgraded to 100,000 to 240,000

Now downgraded AGAIN to between 26,000 and 155,000

AND FOR THIS WE CREATE A DEPRESSION.

No, this is incorrect. We were told 2.2m with zero mitigation, and 100k~200k with full mitigation.

[rklapper]

No. Models calling for 200k deaths was with full mitigation/lockdown. That's moving the goalposts.

so the models were wrong. are you saying mitigation didn't help at all?

[as_rocketman]

No, this is incorrect. We were told 2.2m with zero mitigation, and 100k~200k with full mitigation.

ETA: Sorry, misread. 2.2M without mitigation was indeed the claim.

For the record, 100K is still very much in the realm of possibility, in my opinion. You can ridicule me for that after the fact, and I hope you get to do so.