Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffk
If you want a discussion of "facts", HERE is a good article that clearly discusses the difficulty of getting useful information at this time.
It has nothing to do with who is speaking or where they get their numbers or their reliability or smartness. There are simply too many moving parts and too much uncertainty to get numbers to plug in that give accurate answers. Garbage in (even if you think the numbers going in are right, they are not, per the article), Garbage out. This is being verified by the experts as their expectations are NOT being borne out by boots on the ground realities.
We do not know if this is going to be a typical seasonal flu impact or a bad pandemic. We do not know if the reaction to it is too much, too little, or just right. People are digging in to pick "winners" or "losers" of intentions or reactions based on personal favorites and politics. We CANNOT decide certainties based on data because the data and models based on it is shifting sand.
My gut tells me that the extremes are wrong. We will struggle but it will not be a disaster. We need to be nimble and react to changing realities. We need to work on being prepared.
In the end, those who were "right" about the course of this virus will be so because of luck, not knowledge. |
I’m glad you put “facts” in quotations marks because you really should when quoting a conservative blog.
Coronavirus: Dr Deborah Birx making ‘fundamental scientific errors’ in rush to reopen US, warns expert behind White House data
“A leading US epidemiologist has accused one of the doctors on the White House’s coronavirus task force of “false reassurance” after she said a model he helped develop to predict the spread of the virus overstated the number of people likely to develop Covid-19 – when in fact it referred to something more like a best-case scenario.”