Influential Covid-19 Models Were Horrifically Inaccurate & The Economic Decision To Shutdown The Economy Based On Them Was Wrong

[berg80]

'Interesting' how Congress awarded Harvard, whose Epidemiologist 'expert' pushed for the IHME model - the most inaccurate and unreliable of 3 models - to be used to base economic policy to shut down the strongest economy in decades (if not ever) with BILLIONS of dollars in COVID-19 Relief cash designated to help Small Businesses (which Pelosi and Democrats screwed by shutting down the House before passing a relief bill to further help small Businesses).....despite Harvard sitting on $41 BILLION for 'helping the kids' as they claim the COVID-19 Small Business Relief money will be used for....and they have declared they have no intention of paying the money back.

Harvard clashes with Trump over coronavirus relief, rebuffs call to return money

Harvard University rejected calls from President Trump on Tuesday to return coronavirus relief money to the federal government, maintaining that the funds from a higher education program under the CARES Act are being used to provide direct assistance to students facing financial turmoil due to...

www.foxnews.com

Didn't read your own linked story did you? Typical Trump supporter. Low information.

But a Harvard spokesman noted that the nearly $9 million in taxpayer aid it claimed did not come from the PPP program but rather from the CARES Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund, which helped many universities and colleges.
“Harvard did not apply for, nor has it received any funds through the U.S. Small Business Administration’s Paycheck Protection Program for small businesses,” Harvard spokesman Jason Newton said in a statement late Tuesday. “Reports saying otherwise are inaccurate. President Trump is right that it would not have been appropriate for our institution to receive funds that were designated for struggling small businesses.”

Unfortunately, factual refutation of lies provided by Trumpette's has no effect on them. He'll tell the same lie over and over.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

For at least the second time...............https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/mar/27/donald-trump/fact-checking-whether-biden-called-trump-xenophobi/

So according to the liberally biased and laughable 'politifact', Biden responding to Trump's travel ban by saying "This is no time for Donald Trump's record of hysteria xenophobia, hysterical xenophobia, and fear-mongering to lead the way instead of science" Biden was NOT saying / inferring / calling Trump's Travel Ban 'xenophobic' / 'hysterical Xenophobia'?!

View attachment 326606

BWUHAHAHAHAHA...WTF?!

My 2yo grandson can make up better bullshit than that, dude!

Says the person who just overuses lame memes and gifs. Hmmm....looks like Trump should have known...you know, if he read at all.
Person-to-Person Spread of Novel Coronavirus Confirmed in China

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

March Trump:

The United States government shut down one of the strongest economies this nation has ever seen as it was still roaring, and the catastrophic decision to do so was based on projections by liberal academia experts who used obviously a flawed model / flawed models...

Numerous articles that have been written the last few weeks have begun to question HOW COULD 'EXPERTS' COULD HAVE CREATED A COVID-19 MODEL ADOPTED AND USED TO BASE SUCH MONUMENTAL POLICY UPON BE / HAVE BEEN SO EXTREMELY FAR OFF / FLAWED?


“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week, referring to projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington."

So the US Government, specifically the Trump administration, was pressured to accept this model and to base the decision to shut down the country - and the roaring economy - on this model advocated by such experts as this member of elitist Liberal academia, an 'expert' on epidemiology from Harvard.
-- Can anyone tell me the last time professors and experts rom liberal elitist indoctrination camps, er...colleges...ever supported Conservatives, Conservative ideology, or a Conservative President?

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

Epidemiologists are now speaking out against the model advocated as the one this administration's policies should be based off of in this pandemic....

Several scientists have come out to say that 'experts' SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THIS FAR OFF on their modeling...and more than one scientist is questioning WHY there was so much pressure applied to use it as the basis for critical policy decision:

"Others experts, including some colleagues of the model-makers, are even harsher. “That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool,” said epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, who has served on a search committee for IHME. “That it is being used for policy decisions and its results interpreted wrongly is a travesty unfolding before our eyes.”

The catastrophic impact on our economy due to policy decisions based on this horrifically flawed model will inevitably cause the government to make the argument that the final / actual infected and mortality rates are so far off the models due to the policy decisions made; however, this will be more 'political posturing' than a more factual assessment and confirmation that the models were inexplicably off.


There are 2 tried-and-true models that were completely ignored. Instead the model pushed was one that inspired far less confidence:

There are two tried-and-true ways to model an epidemic. The most established, dating back a century, calculates how many people are susceptible to a virus (in the case of the new coronavirus, everyone), how many become exposed, how many of those become infected, and how many recover and therefore have immunity (at least for a while).

"IHME uses neither a SEIR nor an agent-based approach. It doesn’t even try to model the transmission of disease, or the incubation period, or other features of Covid-19, as SEIR and agent-based models at Imperial College London and others do. It doesn’t try to account for how many infected people interact with how many others, how many additional cases each earlier case causes, or other facts of disease transmission that have been the foundation of epidemiology models for decades.

Instead, IHME starts with data from cities where Covid-19 struck before it hit the U.S., first Wuhan and now 19 cities in Italy and Spain."

The most obvious problem with IHME is the blind trust placed in China and the WHO when the virus was 1st reported, trust that was unwarranted. Evidence shows that China was NOT forthcoming with information about the virus in a timely manner - in fact, evidence shows China hid the outbreak. For example, evidence shows China knew about the outbreak as early as OCTOBER 2019 and not only hid news of the outbreak but also allowed the epidemic to spread globally by refusing to cancel international travel from the very epicenter of its outbreak. Furthermore, evidence shows the WHO knew about the epidemic sooner than revealed and were actually misleading the rest of the world by claiming COVID-19 was not a problem, that China was containing the outbreak, and encouraging countries NOT to close its border and impose Travel Bans. CHINA AND THE WHO MISLED THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR MONTHS, AND IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TIME = LIVES LOST!

Based on the fact that the IHME begins with and is based on honest, complete data shared by countries / governments / scientists - which China and the WHO STILL has not done, the model was disastrously wrong / inaccurate from the very start.

Many epidemiologists are now pointing out this is why the IHME should never have been considered and definitely should not been pushed as the model to use over the other 2 that do not rely on other governments' / bodies' transparency / willingness to share data.

After OFFICIALLY reporting their epidemic to the WHO China refused to share data, refused to allow the CDC to come in to assess and offer help, they hid / falsified their numbers, and even engaged in propaganda by attempting to claim the USN was responsible for introducing / releasing COVID-19 in China....

So how the hell did an 'expert epidemiologist' from Liberal elitist academia come to the conclusion that US policy should be based IHME that relied on non-existent cooperation, transparency, and virus data-sharing by the Chinese?

Influential Covid-19 model uses flawed methods and shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say

A widely followed model for projecting #coronavirus deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever.

www.statnews.com

.

The shutdown was caused by the asswipePINO's failure to act on January 10th. I have four bipartican MOC's that prove my case.

You are an idiot. I have proven this countless times. You wanted Trump to shut down the Super Bowl? Moron.

Listen and weep.

Man. You guys really do just repeat whatever Trump says.

That video had zero to do with Trump. How can you possibly say that. This is why you have zero credibility with me. Please explain that statement. I posted a video that had NOTHING to do with him. Everything with leftists comes back to Trump. TDS?

Because this just so happens to be the new narrative that Trump has been pushing.

Is that a coincidence? Of course not. That’s why you have zero credibility.

The clips in the video are from January and early February when we had just a handful of cases. It’s dishonest.

But these are LIVE VIDEOS?!?!?!!? How can you dispute them?!?!?! From various sources. Illogical.

 

[Brain357]

For at least the second time...............https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/mar/27/donald-trump/fact-checking-whether-biden-called-trump-xenophobi/

So according to the liberally biased and laughable 'politifact', Biden responding to Trump's travel ban by saying "This is no time for Donald Trump's record of hysteria xenophobia, hysterical xenophobia, and fear-mongering to lead the way instead of science" Biden was NOT saying / inferring / calling Trump's Travel Ban 'xenophobic' / 'hysterical Xenophobia'?!

View attachment 326606

BWUHAHAHAHAHA...WTF?!

My 2yo grandson can make up better bullshit than that, dude!

Says the person who just overuses lame memes and gifs. Hmmm....looks like Trump should have known...you know, if he read at all.
Person-to-Person Spread of Novel Coronavirus Confirmed in China

If easyt is right trump really messed up closing the country.

 

[colfax_m]

For at least the second time...............https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/mar/27/donald-trump/fact-checking-whether-biden-called-trump-xenophobi/

So according to the liberally biased and laughable 'politifact', Biden responding to Trump's travel ban by saying "This is no time for Donald Trump's record of hysteria xenophobia, hysterical xenophobia, and fear-mongering to lead the way instead of science" Biden was NOT saying / inferring / calling Trump's Travel Ban 'xenophobic' / 'hysterical Xenophobia'?!

View attachment 326606

BWUHAHAHAHAHA...WTF?!

My 2yo grandson can make up better bullshit than that, dude!

Yours and 'politiHACK's attempt to re-write the history of failed Democrat comments and policy decisions just bombed horribly!

Kinda like how Trump wasn’t claiming the virus was a hoax. It was implied.

 

[easyt65]

Unfortunately, factual refutation of lies provided by Trumpette's has no effect on them. He'll tell the same lie over and over.

Unfortunately for you the link and information I provided came from some of the world's most renowned Epidemiologist who pointed out the IHME model pushed by small business relief fund-stealing Harvard was the worst model, the most inaccurate and unreliable, something you and your clown posse have failed to debunk / dispute with your continuous spew of talking points and opinion.....

 

[bripat9643]

The initial model itself had to have been a shot in the dark as they had very little information, and I'm sure, plenty of unreliable information. Any data scientist will tell you, it's "garbage in, garbage out". The models are only as good as the data and due to the necessity of confronting this unknown virus, no country had the luxury of waiting to find out and get the best data. This fact alone, indicts the Communist Party in CHina for their secrecy. Arguments about the models used can happen, but it will always come down to the immediate data available at the time.

I'm not sure Canada or the U.S could have avoided some major shut down order of some kind. The important aspect at this time is not letting the MSM keep promoting this as "the new norm" and suggesting a shutdown for 18 months, It's preposterous, and even potentially wrong headed since you need some to build immunity.

Also, to make sure the slow return to normal and free market capitalism is done correctly. If those areas hardly impacted by this virus come on line properly and with vigor, it will convince other areas to do the same by replicating their approach. Sadly, it almost seems some DON'T want the world to return to normal, playing the role of fear mongerer in order to extract more control and, political gain. THAT is scary.

In the long run, the number of people who become infected will be the same as if we had no shutdown. Fauci has admitted this. All the shutdown was intended to accomplish is to "flatten the curve" so that our medical facilities are not overwhelmed. Since it's clear this won't happen, then the shutdown is pointless. People over 65 or who have medical conditions should isolate themselves, but it makes little sense to isolate anyone else. In fact, the quicker people expose themselves to the virus and acquire immunity, the quicker this thing will be over.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The United States government shut down one of the strongest economies this nation has ever seen as it was still roaring, and the catastrophic decision to do so was based on projections by liberal academia experts who used obviously a flawed model / flawed models...

Numerous articles that have been written the last few weeks have begun to question HOW COULD 'EXPERTS' COULD HAVE CREATED A COVID-19 MODEL ADOPTED AND USED TO BASE SUCH MONUMENTAL POLICY UPON BE / HAVE BEEN SO EXTREMELY FAR OFF / FLAWED?


“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week, referring to projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington."

So the US Government, specifically the Trump administration, was pressured to accept this model and to base the decision to shut down the country - and the roaring economy - on this model advocated by such experts as this member of elitist Liberal academia, an 'expert' on epidemiology from Harvard.
-- Can anyone tell me the last time professors and experts rom liberal elitist indoctrination camps, er...colleges...ever supported Conservatives, Conservative ideology, or a Conservative President?

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

Epidemiologists are now speaking out against the model advocated as the one this administration's policies should be based off of in this pandemic....

Several scientists have come out to say that 'experts' SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THIS FAR OFF on their modeling...and more than one scientist is questioning WHY there was so much pressure applied to use it as the basis for critical policy decision:

"Others experts, including some colleagues of the model-makers, are even harsher. “That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool,” said epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, who has served on a search committee for IHME. “That it is being used for policy decisions and its results interpreted wrongly is a travesty unfolding before our eyes.”

The catastrophic impact on our economy due to policy decisions based on this horrifically flawed model will inevitably cause the government to make the argument that the final / actual infected and mortality rates are so far off the models due to the policy decisions made; however, this will be more 'political posturing' than a more factual assessment and confirmation that the models were inexplicably off.


There are 2 tried-and-true models that were completely ignored. Instead the model pushed was one that inspired far less confidence:

There are two tried-and-true ways to model an epidemic. The most established, dating back a century, calculates how many people are susceptible to a virus (in the case of the new coronavirus, everyone), how many become exposed, how many of those become infected, and how many recover and therefore have immunity (at least for a while).

"IHME uses neither a SEIR nor an agent-based approach. It doesn’t even try to model the transmission of disease, or the incubation period, or other features of Covid-19, as SEIR and agent-based models at Imperial College London and others do. It doesn’t try to account for how many infected people interact with how many others, how many additional cases each earlier case causes, or other facts of disease transmission that have been the foundation of epidemiology models for decades.

Instead, IHME starts with data from cities where Covid-19 struck before it hit the U.S., first Wuhan and now 19 cities in Italy and Spain."

The most obvious problem with IHME is the blind trust placed in China and the WHO when the virus was 1st reported, trust that was unwarranted. Evidence shows that China was NOT forthcoming with information about the virus in a timely manner - in fact, evidence shows China hid the outbreak. For example, evidence shows China knew about the outbreak as early as OCTOBER 2019 and not only hid news of the outbreak but also allowed the epidemic to spread globally by refusing to cancel international travel from the very epicenter of its outbreak. Furthermore, evidence shows the WHO knew about the epidemic sooner than revealed and were actually misleading the rest of the world by claiming COVID-19 was not a problem, that China was containing the outbreak, and encouraging countries NOT to close its border and impose Travel Bans. CHINA AND THE WHO MISLED THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR MONTHS, AND IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TIME = LIVES LOST!

Based on the fact that the IHME begins with and is based on honest, complete data shared by countries / governments / scientists - which China and the WHO STILL has not done, the model was disastrously wrong / inaccurate from the very start.

Many epidemiologists are now pointing out this is why the IHME should never have been considered and definitely should not been pushed as the model to use over the other 2 that do not rely on other governments' / bodies' transparency / willingness to share data.

After OFFICIALLY reporting their epidemic to the WHO China refused to share data, refused to allow the CDC to come in to assess and offer help, they hid / falsified their numbers, and even engaged in propaganda by attempting to claim the USN was responsible for introducing / releasing COVID-19 in China....

So how the hell did an 'expert epidemiologist' from Liberal elitist academia come to the conclusion that US policy should be based IHME that relied on non-existent cooperation, transparency, and virus data-sharing by the Chinese?

Influential Covid-19 model uses flawed methods and shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say

A widely followed model for projecting #coronavirus deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever.

www.statnews.com

.

The shutdown was caused by the asswipePINO's failure to act on January 10th. I have four bipartican MOC's that prove my case.

THE WHO and CHINA were both saying that the virus was not human to human communicable. We didnt even have ONE fucking case in the US until the 21st of January. Your telling me that we should have tanked our economy for a ghost?

They never said it was not human to human transmittable. They did say they didn't think it was highly contagious until they actually visited Wuhan. By Jan 21 they began to realize how transmittable it is.

‘I never said there was no human-to-human transmission’: China CDC chief

George Gao Fu says medical team concluded ‘very efficient’ transmission between people as soon as it visited Wuhan.

www.scmp.com

The WHO and China both stated as late as February 12th that there was no human to human transmission.. Epic fail at trying to rewrite history.

Not even close. The last issued statement that they did not believe it was transmitted this way was January 16th. Then on January 30th, they reversed.
WHO Calls Coronavirus ‘Emergency’ as Person-to-Person Spread Confirmed in U.S.

That was almost a full two months AFTER Taiwan warned the WHO that it was human to human... You just proved my point the China was LYING and so are you.

 

[easyt65]

If easyt is right trump really messed up closing the country.

Gee, who didn't see that spin coming...?!

If Easy is right the Leftists conned the President into backing the 'science' to shutdown the economy - destroying the strongest economy we have seen in our lifetime - so they would have a better shot at defeating Trump in Nov.

As I have believed, the Democrats would burn down the economy and hurt every citizen if it meant getting rid of taking back power and getting rid of Trump.....or they were just dumbfucks who convinced the President to go along with them.

 

[colfax_m]

March Trump:

The United States government shut down one of the strongest economies this nation has ever seen as it was still roaring, and the catastrophic decision to do so was based on projections by liberal academia experts who used obviously a flawed model / flawed models...

Numerous articles that have been written the last few weeks have begun to question HOW COULD 'EXPERTS' COULD HAVE CREATED A COVID-19 MODEL ADOPTED AND USED TO BASE SUCH MONUMENTAL POLICY UPON BE / HAVE BEEN SO EXTREMELY FAR OFF / FLAWED?


“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week, referring to projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington."

So the US Government, specifically the Trump administration, was pressured to accept this model and to base the decision to shut down the country - and the roaring economy - on this model advocated by such experts as this member of elitist Liberal academia, an 'expert' on epidemiology from Harvard.
-- Can anyone tell me the last time professors and experts rom liberal elitist indoctrination camps, er...colleges...ever supported Conservatives, Conservative ideology, or a Conservative President?

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

Epidemiologists are now speaking out against the model advocated as the one this administration's policies should be based off of in this pandemic....

Several scientists have come out to say that 'experts' SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THIS FAR OFF on their modeling...and more than one scientist is questioning WHY there was so much pressure applied to use it as the basis for critical policy decision:

"Others experts, including some colleagues of the model-makers, are even harsher. “That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool,” said epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, who has served on a search committee for IHME. “That it is being used for policy decisions and its results interpreted wrongly is a travesty unfolding before our eyes.”

The catastrophic impact on our economy due to policy decisions based on this horrifically flawed model will inevitably cause the government to make the argument that the final / actual infected and mortality rates are so far off the models due to the policy decisions made; however, this will be more 'political posturing' than a more factual assessment and confirmation that the models were inexplicably off.


There are 2 tried-and-true models that were completely ignored. Instead the model pushed was one that inspired far less confidence:

There are two tried-and-true ways to model an epidemic. The most established, dating back a century, calculates how many people are susceptible to a virus (in the case of the new coronavirus, everyone), how many become exposed, how many of those become infected, and how many recover and therefore have immunity (at least for a while).

"IHME uses neither a SEIR nor an agent-based approach. It doesn’t even try to model the transmission of disease, or the incubation period, or other features of Covid-19, as SEIR and agent-based models at Imperial College London and others do. It doesn’t try to account for how many infected people interact with how many others, how many additional cases each earlier case causes, or other facts of disease transmission that have been the foundation of epidemiology models for decades.

Instead, IHME starts with data from cities where Covid-19 struck before it hit the U.S., first Wuhan and now 19 cities in Italy and Spain."

The most obvious problem with IHME is the blind trust placed in China and the WHO when the virus was 1st reported, trust that was unwarranted. Evidence shows that China was NOT forthcoming with information about the virus in a timely manner - in fact, evidence shows China hid the outbreak. For example, evidence shows China knew about the outbreak as early as OCTOBER 2019 and not only hid news of the outbreak but also allowed the epidemic to spread globally by refusing to cancel international travel from the very epicenter of its outbreak. Furthermore, evidence shows the WHO knew about the epidemic sooner than revealed and were actually misleading the rest of the world by claiming COVID-19 was not a problem, that China was containing the outbreak, and encouraging countries NOT to close its border and impose Travel Bans. CHINA AND THE WHO MISLED THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR MONTHS, AND IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TIME = LIVES LOST!

Based on the fact that the IHME begins with and is based on honest, complete data shared by countries / governments / scientists - which China and the WHO STILL has not done, the model was disastrously wrong / inaccurate from the very start.

Many epidemiologists are now pointing out this is why the IHME should never have been considered and definitely should not been pushed as the model to use over the other 2 that do not rely on other governments' / bodies' transparency / willingness to share data.

After OFFICIALLY reporting their epidemic to the WHO China refused to share data, refused to allow the CDC to come in to assess and offer help, they hid / falsified their numbers, and even engaged in propaganda by attempting to claim the USN was responsible for introducing / releasing COVID-19 in China....

So how the hell did an 'expert epidemiologist' from Liberal elitist academia come to the conclusion that US policy should be based IHME that relied on non-existent cooperation, transparency, and virus data-sharing by the Chinese?

Influential Covid-19 model uses flawed methods and shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say

A widely followed model for projecting #coronavirus deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever.

www.statnews.com

.

The shutdown was caused by the asswipePINO's failure to act on January 10th. I have four bipartican MOC's that prove my case.

You are an idiot. I have proven this countless times. You wanted Trump to shut down the Super Bowl? Moron.

Listen and weep.

Man. You guys really do just repeat whatever Trump says.

That video had zero to do with Trump. How can you possibly say that. This is why you have zero credibility with me. Please explain that statement. I posted a video that had NOTHING to do with him. Everything with leftists comes back to Trump. TDS?

Because this just so happens to be the new narrative that Trump has been pushing.

Is that a coincidence? Of course not. That’s why you have zero credibility.

The clips in the video are from January and early February when we had just a handful of cases. It’s dishonest.

But these are LIVE VIDEOS?!?!?!!? How can you dispute them?!?!?! From various sources. Illogical.

I put them into context. The media was saying there were very few cases in the country. They were correct at the time.

When things got worse in late February and early March, many in the media correctly stated that this is going to be a huge problem. They were also correct at the time.

But that’s also the point in time that Trump was accusing the media of overhyping the virus as a hoax to get him.

And now Trump is propagating that the media was minimizing it.

And you’re just going along with it.

Go ahead, tell me that you came up with this independently after Trump started pushing this narrative last week during a briefing which you have indicated you watch on a regular basis.

Maybe you don’t even remember that. You have a habit of conveniently forgetting things.

 

[colfax_m]

The United States government shut down one of the strongest economies this nation has ever seen as it was still roaring, and the catastrophic decision to do so was based on projections by liberal academia experts who used obviously a flawed model / flawed models...

Numerous articles that have been written the last few weeks have begun to question HOW COULD 'EXPERTS' COULD HAVE CREATED A COVID-19 MODEL ADOPTED AND USED TO BASE SUCH MONUMENTAL POLICY UPON BE / HAVE BEEN SO EXTREMELY FAR OFF / FLAWED?


“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week, referring to projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington."

So the US Government, specifically the Trump administration, was pressured to accept this model and to base the decision to shut down the country - and the roaring economy - on this model advocated by such experts as this member of elitist Liberal academia, an 'expert' on epidemiology from Harvard.
-- Can anyone tell me the last time professors and experts rom liberal elitist indoctrination camps, er...colleges...ever supported Conservatives, Conservative ideology, or a Conservative President?

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

Epidemiologists are now speaking out against the model advocated as the one this administration's policies should be based off of in this pandemic....

Several scientists have come out to say that 'experts' SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THIS FAR OFF on their modeling...and more than one scientist is questioning WHY there was so much pressure applied to use it as the basis for critical policy decision:

"Others experts, including some colleagues of the model-makers, are even harsher. “That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool,” said epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, who has served on a search committee for IHME. “That it is being used for policy decisions and its results interpreted wrongly is a travesty unfolding before our eyes.”

The catastrophic impact on our economy due to policy decisions based on this horrifically flawed model will inevitably cause the government to make the argument that the final / actual infected and mortality rates are so far off the models due to the policy decisions made; however, this will be more 'political posturing' than a more factual assessment and confirmation that the models were inexplicably off.


There are 2 tried-and-true models that were completely ignored. Instead the model pushed was one that inspired far less confidence:

There are two tried-and-true ways to model an epidemic. The most established, dating back a century, calculates how many people are susceptible to a virus (in the case of the new coronavirus, everyone), how many become exposed, how many of those become infected, and how many recover and therefore have immunity (at least for a while).

"IHME uses neither a SEIR nor an agent-based approach. It doesn’t even try to model the transmission of disease, or the incubation period, or other features of Covid-19, as SEIR and agent-based models at Imperial College London and others do. It doesn’t try to account for how many infected people interact with how many others, how many additional cases each earlier case causes, or other facts of disease transmission that have been the foundation of epidemiology models for decades.

Instead, IHME starts with data from cities where Covid-19 struck before it hit the U.S., first Wuhan and now 19 cities in Italy and Spain."

The most obvious problem with IHME is the blind trust placed in China and the WHO when the virus was 1st reported, trust that was unwarranted. Evidence shows that China was NOT forthcoming with information about the virus in a timely manner - in fact, evidence shows China hid the outbreak. For example, evidence shows China knew about the outbreak as early as OCTOBER 2019 and not only hid news of the outbreak but also allowed the epidemic to spread globally by refusing to cancel international travel from the very epicenter of its outbreak. Furthermore, evidence shows the WHO knew about the epidemic sooner than revealed and were actually misleading the rest of the world by claiming COVID-19 was not a problem, that China was containing the outbreak, and encouraging countries NOT to close its border and impose Travel Bans. CHINA AND THE WHO MISLED THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR MONTHS, AND IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TIME = LIVES LOST!

Based on the fact that the IHME begins with and is based on honest, complete data shared by countries / governments / scientists - which China and the WHO STILL has not done, the model was disastrously wrong / inaccurate from the very start.

Many epidemiologists are now pointing out this is why the IHME should never have been considered and definitely should not been pushed as the model to use over the other 2 that do not rely on other governments' / bodies' transparency / willingness to share data.

After OFFICIALLY reporting their epidemic to the WHO China refused to share data, refused to allow the CDC to come in to assess and offer help, they hid / falsified their numbers, and even engaged in propaganda by attempting to claim the USN was responsible for introducing / releasing COVID-19 in China....

So how the hell did an 'expert epidemiologist' from Liberal elitist academia come to the conclusion that US policy should be based IHME that relied on non-existent cooperation, transparency, and virus data-sharing by the Chinese?

Influential Covid-19 model uses flawed methods and shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say

A widely followed model for projecting #coronavirus deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever.

www.statnews.com

.

The shutdown was caused by the asswipePINO's failure to act on January 10th. I have four bipartican MOC's that prove my case.

THE WHO and CHINA were both saying that the virus was not human to human communicable. We didnt even have ONE fucking case in the US until the 21st of January. Your telling me that we should have tanked our economy for a ghost?

They never said it was not human to human transmittable. They did say they didn't think it was highly contagious until they actually visited Wuhan. By Jan 21 they began to realize how transmittable it is.

‘I never said there was no human-to-human transmission’: China CDC chief

George Gao Fu says medical team concluded ‘very efficient’ transmission between people as soon as it visited Wuhan.

www.scmp.com

The WHO and China both stated as late as February 12th that there was no human to human transmission.. Epic fail at trying to rewrite history.

Not even close. The last issued statement that they did not believe it was transmitted this way was January 16th. Then on January 30th, they reversed.
WHO Calls Coronavirus ‘Emergency’ as Person-to-Person Spread Confirmed in U.S.

That was almost a full two months AFTER Taiwan warned the WHO that it was human to human... You just proved my point the China was LYING and so are you.

That’s also false.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The initial model itself had to have been a shot in the dark as they had very little information, and I'm sure, plenty of unreliable information. Any data scientist will tell you, it's "garbage in, garbage out". The models are only as good as the data and due to the necessity of confronting this unknown virus, no country had the luxury of waiting to find out and get the best data. This fact alone, indicts the Communist Party in CHina for their secrecy. Arguments about the models used can happen, but it will always come down to the immediate data available at the time.

I'm not sure Canada or the U.S could have avoided some major shut down order of some kind. The important aspect at this time is not letting the MSM keep promoting this as "the new norm" and suggesting a shutdown for 18 months, It's preposterous, and even potentially wrong headed since you need some to build immunity.

Also, to make sure the slow return to normal and free market capitalism is done correctly. If those areas hardly impacted by this virus come on line properly and with vigor, it will convince other areas to do the same by replicating their approach. Sadly, it almost seems some DON'T want the world to return to normal, playing the role of fear mongerer in order to extract more control and, political gain. THAT is scary.

In the long run, the number of people who become infected will be the same as if we had no shutdown. Fauci has admitted this. All the shutdown was intended to accomplish is to "flatten the curve" so that our medical facilities are not overwhelmed. Since it's clear this won't happen, then the shutdown is pointless. People over 65 or who have medical conditions should isolate themselves, but it makes little sense to isolate anyone one else. In fact, the quicker people expose themselves to the virus and acquire immunity, the quicker this thing will be over.

And this is precisly where 24 states are headed. They have prepared an abundance of hospital beds just in case but are going ahead with plans to open up. The next three to five weeks will tell the tale for the five who open up tomorrow...

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

March Trump:

The United States government shut down one of the strongest economies this nation has ever seen as it was still roaring, and the catastrophic decision to do so was based on projections by liberal academia experts who used obviously a flawed model / flawed models...

Numerous articles that have been written the last few weeks have begun to question HOW COULD 'EXPERTS' COULD HAVE CREATED A COVID-19 MODEL ADOPTED AND USED TO BASE SUCH MONUMENTAL POLICY UPON BE / HAVE BEEN SO EXTREMELY FAR OFF / FLAWED?


“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week, referring to projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington."

So the US Government, specifically the Trump administration, was pressured to accept this model and to base the decision to shut down the country - and the roaring economy - on this model advocated by such experts as this member of elitist Liberal academia, an 'expert' on epidemiology from Harvard.
-- Can anyone tell me the last time professors and experts rom liberal elitist indoctrination camps, er...colleges...ever supported Conservatives, Conservative ideology, or a Conservative President?

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

Epidemiologists are now speaking out against the model advocated as the one this administration's policies should be based off of in this pandemic....

Several scientists have come out to say that 'experts' SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THIS FAR OFF on their modeling...and more than one scientist is questioning WHY there was so much pressure applied to use it as the basis for critical policy decision:

"Others experts, including some colleagues of the model-makers, are even harsher. “That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool,” said epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, who has served on a search committee for IHME. “That it is being used for policy decisions and its results interpreted wrongly is a travesty unfolding before our eyes.”

The catastrophic impact on our economy due to policy decisions based on this horrifically flawed model will inevitably cause the government to make the argument that the final / actual infected and mortality rates are so far off the models due to the policy decisions made; however, this will be more 'political posturing' than a more factual assessment and confirmation that the models were inexplicably off.


There are 2 tried-and-true models that were completely ignored. Instead the model pushed was one that inspired far less confidence:

There are two tried-and-true ways to model an epidemic. The most established, dating back a century, calculates how many people are susceptible to a virus (in the case of the new coronavirus, everyone), how many become exposed, how many of those become infected, and how many recover and therefore have immunity (at least for a while).

"IHME uses neither a SEIR nor an agent-based approach. It doesn’t even try to model the transmission of disease, or the incubation period, or other features of Covid-19, as SEIR and agent-based models at Imperial College London and others do. It doesn’t try to account for how many infected people interact with how many others, how many additional cases each earlier case causes, or other facts of disease transmission that have been the foundation of epidemiology models for decades.

Instead, IHME starts with data from cities where Covid-19 struck before it hit the U.S., first Wuhan and now 19 cities in Italy and Spain."

The most obvious problem with IHME is the blind trust placed in China and the WHO when the virus was 1st reported, trust that was unwarranted. Evidence shows that China was NOT forthcoming with information about the virus in a timely manner - in fact, evidence shows China hid the outbreak. For example, evidence shows China knew about the outbreak as early as OCTOBER 2019 and not only hid news of the outbreak but also allowed the epidemic to spread globally by refusing to cancel international travel from the very epicenter of its outbreak. Furthermore, evidence shows the WHO knew about the epidemic sooner than revealed and were actually misleading the rest of the world by claiming COVID-19 was not a problem, that China was containing the outbreak, and encouraging countries NOT to close its border and impose Travel Bans. CHINA AND THE WHO MISLED THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR MONTHS, AND IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TIME = LIVES LOST!

Based on the fact that the IHME begins with and is based on honest, complete data shared by countries / governments / scientists - which China and the WHO STILL has not done, the model was disastrously wrong / inaccurate from the very start.

Many epidemiologists are now pointing out this is why the IHME should never have been considered and definitely should not been pushed as the model to use over the other 2 that do not rely on other governments' / bodies' transparency / willingness to share data.

After OFFICIALLY reporting their epidemic to the WHO China refused to share data, refused to allow the CDC to come in to assess and offer help, they hid / falsified their numbers, and even engaged in propaganda by attempting to claim the USN was responsible for introducing / releasing COVID-19 in China....

So how the hell did an 'expert epidemiologist' from Liberal elitist academia come to the conclusion that US policy should be based IHME that relied on non-existent cooperation, transparency, and virus data-sharing by the Chinese?

Influential Covid-19 model uses flawed methods and shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say

A widely followed model for projecting #coronavirus deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever.

www.statnews.com

.

The shutdown was caused by the asswipePINO's failure to act on January 10th. I have four bipartican MOC's that prove my case.

You are an idiot. I have proven this countless times. You wanted Trump to shut down the Super Bowl? Moron.

Listen and weep.

Man. You guys really do just repeat whatever Trump says.

That video had zero to do with Trump. How can you possibly say that. This is why you have zero credibility with me. Please explain that statement. I posted a video that had NOTHING to do with him. Everything with leftists comes back to Trump. TDS?

Because this just so happens to be the new narrative that Trump has been pushing.

Is that a coincidence? Of course not. That’s why you have zero credibility.

The clips in the video are from January and early February when we had just a handful of cases. It’s dishonest.

But these are LIVE VIDEOS?!?!?!!? How can you dispute them?!?!?! From various sources. Illogical.

I put them into context. The media was saying there were very few cases in the country. They were correct at the time.

When things got worse in late February and early March, many in the media correctly stated that this is going to be a huge problem. They were also correct at the time.

But that’s also the point in time that Trump was accusing the media of overhyping the virus as a hoax to get him.

And now Trump is propagating that the media was minimizing it.

And you’re just going along with it.

Go ahead, tell me that you came up with this independently after Trump started pushing this narrative last week during a briefing which you have indicated you watch on a regular basis.

Maybe you don’t even remember that. You have a habit of conveniently forgetting things.

Until you agree not to bring Trump into this, I am not debating it. Trump is neither a doctor or a scientist. I want to discuss the video and all the experts saying the flu is much worse.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The United States government shut down one of the strongest economies this nation has ever seen as it was still roaring, and the catastrophic decision to do so was based on projections by liberal academia experts who used obviously a flawed model / flawed models...

Numerous articles that have been written the last few weeks have begun to question HOW COULD 'EXPERTS' COULD HAVE CREATED A COVID-19 MODEL ADOPTED AND USED TO BASE SUCH MONUMENTAL POLICY UPON BE / HAVE BEEN SO EXTREMELY FAR OFF / FLAWED?


“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week, referring to projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington."

So the US Government, specifically the Trump administration, was pressured to accept this model and to base the decision to shut down the country - and the roaring economy - on this model advocated by such experts as this member of elitist Liberal academia, an 'expert' on epidemiology from Harvard.
-- Can anyone tell me the last time professors and experts rom liberal elitist indoctrination camps, er...colleges...ever supported Conservatives, Conservative ideology, or a Conservative President?

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

Epidemiologists are now speaking out against the model advocated as the one this administration's policies should be based off of in this pandemic....

Several scientists have come out to say that 'experts' SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THIS FAR OFF on their modeling...and more than one scientist is questioning WHY there was so much pressure applied to use it as the basis for critical policy decision:

"Others experts, including some colleagues of the model-makers, are even harsher. “That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool,” said epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, who has served on a search committee for IHME. “That it is being used for policy decisions and its results interpreted wrongly is a travesty unfolding before our eyes.”

The catastrophic impact on our economy due to policy decisions based on this horrifically flawed model will inevitably cause the government to make the argument that the final / actual infected and mortality rates are so far off the models due to the policy decisions made; however, this will be more 'political posturing' than a more factual assessment and confirmation that the models were inexplicably off.


There are 2 tried-and-true models that were completely ignored. Instead the model pushed was one that inspired far less confidence:

There are two tried-and-true ways to model an epidemic. The most established, dating back a century, calculates how many people are susceptible to a virus (in the case of the new coronavirus, everyone), how many become exposed, how many of those become infected, and how many recover and therefore have immunity (at least for a while).

"IHME uses neither a SEIR nor an agent-based approach. It doesn’t even try to model the transmission of disease, or the incubation period, or other features of Covid-19, as SEIR and agent-based models at Imperial College London and others do. It doesn’t try to account for how many infected people interact with how many others, how many additional cases each earlier case causes, or other facts of disease transmission that have been the foundation of epidemiology models for decades.

Instead, IHME starts with data from cities where Covid-19 struck before it hit the U.S., first Wuhan and now 19 cities in Italy and Spain."

The most obvious problem with IHME is the blind trust placed in China and the WHO when the virus was 1st reported, trust that was unwarranted. Evidence shows that China was NOT forthcoming with information about the virus in a timely manner - in fact, evidence shows China hid the outbreak. For example, evidence shows China knew about the outbreak as early as OCTOBER 2019 and not only hid news of the outbreak but also allowed the epidemic to spread globally by refusing to cancel international travel from the very epicenter of its outbreak. Furthermore, evidence shows the WHO knew about the epidemic sooner than revealed and were actually misleading the rest of the world by claiming COVID-19 was not a problem, that China was containing the outbreak, and encouraging countries NOT to close its border and impose Travel Bans. CHINA AND THE WHO MISLED THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR MONTHS, AND IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TIME = LIVES LOST!

Based on the fact that the IHME begins with and is based on honest, complete data shared by countries / governments / scientists - which China and the WHO STILL has not done, the model was disastrously wrong / inaccurate from the very start.

Many epidemiologists are now pointing out this is why the IHME should never have been considered and definitely should not been pushed as the model to use over the other 2 that do not rely on other governments' / bodies' transparency / willingness to share data.

After OFFICIALLY reporting their epidemic to the WHO China refused to share data, refused to allow the CDC to come in to assess and offer help, they hid / falsified their numbers, and even engaged in propaganda by attempting to claim the USN was responsible for introducing / releasing COVID-19 in China....

So how the hell did an 'expert epidemiologist' from Liberal elitist academia come to the conclusion that US policy should be based IHME that relied on non-existent cooperation, transparency, and virus data-sharing by the Chinese?

Influential Covid-19 model uses flawed methods and shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say

A widely followed model for projecting #coronavirus deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever.

www.statnews.com

.

The shutdown was caused by the asswipePINO's failure to act on January 10th. I have four bipartican MOC's that prove my case.

THE WHO and CHINA were both saying that the virus was not human to human communicable. We didnt even have ONE fucking case in the US until the 21st of January. Your telling me that we should have tanked our economy for a ghost?

They never said it was not human to human transmittable. They did say they didn't think it was highly contagious until they actually visited Wuhan. By Jan 21 they began to realize how transmittable it is.

‘I never said there was no human-to-human transmission’: China CDC chief

George Gao Fu says medical team concluded ‘very efficient’ transmission between people as soon as it visited Wuhan.

www.scmp.com

The WHO and China both stated as late as February 12th that there was no human to human transmission.. Epic fail at trying to rewrite history.

Not even close. The last issued statement that they did not believe it was transmitted this way was January 16th. Then on January 30th, they reversed.
WHO Calls Coronavirus ‘Emergency’ as Person-to-Person Spread Confirmed in U.S.

That was almost a full two months AFTER Taiwan warned the WHO that it was human to human... You just proved my point the China was LYING and so are you.

That’s also false.

LOL... Let me guess you watch CNN or MSDNC... who have lied to protect China.

 

[BlindBoo]

The United States government shut down one of the strongest economies this nation has ever seen as it was still roaring, and the catastrophic decision to do so was based on projections by liberal academia experts who used obviously a flawed model / flawed models...

Numerous articles that have been written the last few weeks have begun to question HOW COULD 'EXPERTS' COULD HAVE CREATED A COVID-19 MODEL ADOPTED AND USED TO BASE SUCH MONUMENTAL POLICY UPON BE / HAVE BEEN SO EXTREMELY FAR OFF / FLAWED?


“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week, referring to projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington."

So the US Government, specifically the Trump administration, was pressured to accept this model and to base the decision to shut down the country - and the roaring economy - on this model advocated by such experts as this member of elitist Liberal academia, an 'expert' on epidemiology from Harvard.
-- Can anyone tell me the last time professors and experts rom liberal elitist indoctrination camps, er...colleges...ever supported Conservatives, Conservative ideology, or a Conservative President?

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

Epidemiologists are now speaking out against the model advocated as the one this administration's policies should be based off of in this pandemic....

Several scientists have come out to say that 'experts' SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THIS FAR OFF on their modeling...and more than one scientist is questioning WHY there was so much pressure applied to use it as the basis for critical policy decision:

"Others experts, including some colleagues of the model-makers, are even harsher. “That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool,” said epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, who has served on a search committee for IHME. “That it is being used for policy decisions and its results interpreted wrongly is a travesty unfolding before our eyes.”

The catastrophic impact on our economy due to policy decisions based on this horrifically flawed model will inevitably cause the government to make the argument that the final / actual infected and mortality rates are so far off the models due to the policy decisions made; however, this will be more 'political posturing' than a more factual assessment and confirmation that the models were inexplicably off.


There are 2 tried-and-true models that were completely ignored. Instead the model pushed was one that inspired far less confidence:

There are two tried-and-true ways to model an epidemic. The most established, dating back a century, calculates how many people are susceptible to a virus (in the case of the new coronavirus, everyone), how many become exposed, how many of those become infected, and how many recover and therefore have immunity (at least for a while).

"IHME uses neither a SEIR nor an agent-based approach. It doesn’t even try to model the transmission of disease, or the incubation period, or other features of Covid-19, as SEIR and agent-based models at Imperial College London and others do. It doesn’t try to account for how many infected people interact with how many others, how many additional cases each earlier case causes, or other facts of disease transmission that have been the foundation of epidemiology models for decades.

Instead, IHME starts with data from cities where Covid-19 struck before it hit the U.S., first Wuhan and now 19 cities in Italy and Spain."

The most obvious problem with IHME is the blind trust placed in China and the WHO when the virus was 1st reported, trust that was unwarranted. Evidence shows that China was NOT forthcoming with information about the virus in a timely manner - in fact, evidence shows China hid the outbreak. For example, evidence shows China knew about the outbreak as early as OCTOBER 2019 and not only hid news of the outbreak but also allowed the epidemic to spread globally by refusing to cancel international travel from the very epicenter of its outbreak. Furthermore, evidence shows the WHO knew about the epidemic sooner than revealed and were actually misleading the rest of the world by claiming COVID-19 was not a problem, that China was containing the outbreak, and encouraging countries NOT to close its border and impose Travel Bans. CHINA AND THE WHO MISLED THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR MONTHS, AND IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TIME = LIVES LOST!

Based on the fact that the IHME begins with and is based on honest, complete data shared by countries / governments / scientists - which China and the WHO STILL has not done, the model was disastrously wrong / inaccurate from the very start.

Many epidemiologists are now pointing out this is why the IHME should never have been considered and definitely should not been pushed as the model to use over the other 2 that do not rely on other governments' / bodies' transparency / willingness to share data.

After OFFICIALLY reporting their epidemic to the WHO China refused to share data, refused to allow the CDC to come in to assess and offer help, they hid / falsified their numbers, and even engaged in propaganda by attempting to claim the USN was responsible for introducing / releasing COVID-19 in China....

So how the hell did an 'expert epidemiologist' from Liberal elitist academia come to the conclusion that US policy should be based IHME that relied on non-existent cooperation, transparency, and virus data-sharing by the Chinese?

Influential Covid-19 model uses flawed methods and shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say

A widely followed model for projecting #coronavirus deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever.

www.statnews.com

.

The shutdown was caused by the asswipePINO's failure to act on January 10th. I have four bipartican MOC's that prove my case.

THE WHO and CHINA were both saying that the virus was not human to human communicable. We didnt even have ONE fucking case in the US until the 21st of January. Your telling me that we should have tanked our economy for a ghost?

They never said it was not human to human transmittable. They did say they didn't think it was highly contagious until they actually visited Wuhan. By Jan 21 they began to realize how transmittable it is.

‘I never said there was no human-to-human transmission’: China CDC chief

George Gao Fu says medical team concluded ‘very efficient’ transmission between people as soon as it visited Wuhan.

www.scmp.com

The WHO and China both stated as late as January 14th that there was no human to human transmission.. Epic fail at trying to rewrite history.

WHO haunted by old tweet saying China found no human transmission of coronavirus

The World Health Organization (WHO) is now haunted by a tweet it sent earlier this year when it cited Chinese health officials who claimed there had been no human transmissions of the novel coronav…

nypost.com

"On January 20, a Chinese official confirmed publicly for the first time that the virus could indeed spread among humans, and within days locked down Wuhan. But by then it was too late."

How China Deceived the WHO

U.S. senators are calling for investigations and the president is threatening to cut off funding. What happened?

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Pogo]

The United States government shut down one of the strongest economies this nation has ever seen as it was still roaring, and the catastrophic decision to do so was based on projections by liberal academia experts who used obviously a flawed model / flawed models...

Numerous articles that have been written the last few weeks have begun to question HOW COULD 'EXPERTS' COULD HAVE CREATED A COVID-19 MODEL ADOPTED AND USED TO BASE SUCH MONUMENTAL POLICY UPON BE / HAVE BEEN SO EXTREMELY FAR OFF / FLAWED?


“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week, referring to projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington."

So the US Government, specifically the Trump administration, was pressured to accept this model and to base the decision to shut down the country - and the roaring economy - on this model advocated by such experts as this member of elitist Liberal academia, an 'expert' on epidemiology from Harvard.
-- Can anyone tell me the last time professors and experts rom liberal elitist indoctrination camps, er...colleges...ever supported Conservatives, Conservative ideology, or a Conservative President?

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

Epidemiologists are now speaking out against the model advocated as the one this administration's policies should be based off of in this pandemic....

Several scientists have come out to say that 'experts' SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THIS FAR OFF on their modeling...and more than one scientist is questioning WHY there was so much pressure applied to use it as the basis for critical policy decision:

"Others experts, including some colleagues of the model-makers, are even harsher. “That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool,” said epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, who has served on a search committee for IHME. “That it is being used for policy decisions and its results interpreted wrongly is a travesty unfolding before our eyes.”

The catastrophic impact on our economy due to policy decisions based on this horrifically flawed model will inevitably cause the government to make the argument that the final / actual infected and mortality rates are so far off the models due to the policy decisions made; however, this will be more 'political posturing' than a more factual assessment and confirmation that the models were inexplicably off.


There are 2 tried-and-true models that were completely ignored. Instead the model pushed was one that inspired far less confidence:

There are two tried-and-true ways to model an epidemic. The most established, dating back a century, calculates how many people are susceptible to a virus (in the case of the new coronavirus, everyone), how many become exposed, how many of those become infected, and how many recover and therefore have immunity (at least for a while).

"IHME uses neither a SEIR nor an agent-based approach. It doesn’t even try to model the transmission of disease, or the incubation period, or other features of Covid-19, as SEIR and agent-based models at Imperial College London and others do. It doesn’t try to account for how many infected people interact with how many others, how many additional cases each earlier case causes, or other facts of disease transmission that have been the foundation of epidemiology models for decades.

Instead, IHME starts with data from cities where Covid-19 struck before it hit the U.S., first Wuhan and now 19 cities in Italy and Spain."

The most obvious problem with IHME is the blind trust placed in China and the WHO when the virus was 1st reported, trust that was unwarranted. Evidence shows that China was NOT forthcoming with information about the virus in a timely manner - in fact, evidence shows China hid the outbreak. For example, evidence shows China knew about the outbreak as early as OCTOBER 2019 and not only hid news of the outbreak but also allowed the epidemic to spread globally by refusing to cancel international travel from the very epicenter of its outbreak. Furthermore, evidence shows the WHO knew about the epidemic sooner than revealed and were actually misleading the rest of the world by claiming COVID-19 was not a problem, that China was containing the outbreak, and encouraging countries NOT to close its border and impose Travel Bans. CHINA AND THE WHO MISLED THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR MONTHS, AND IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TIME = LIVES LOST!

Based on the fact that the IHME begins with and is based on honest, complete data shared by countries / governments / scientists - which China and the WHO STILL has not done, the model was disastrously wrong / inaccurate from the very start.

Many epidemiologists are now pointing out this is why the IHME should never have been considered and definitely should not been pushed as the model to use over the other 2 that do not rely on other governments' / bodies' transparency / willingness to share data.

After OFFICIALLY reporting their epidemic to the WHO China refused to share data, refused to allow the CDC to come in to assess and offer help, they hid / falsified their numbers, and even engaged in propaganda by attempting to claim the USN was responsible for introducing / releasing COVID-19 in China....

So how the hell did an 'expert epidemiologist' from Liberal elitist academia come to the conclusion that US policy should be based IHME that relied on non-existent cooperation, transparency, and virus data-sharing by the Chinese?

Influential Covid-19 model uses flawed methods and shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say

A widely followed model for projecting #coronavirus deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever.

www.statnews.com

Good to know an obscure message board poster who literally starts threads asking for somebody to make his point for him because he has no evidence, can also out-think all the experts in the world. Lucky us.

 

[colfax_m]

March Trump:

The United States government shut down one of the strongest economies this nation has ever seen as it was still roaring, and the catastrophic decision to do so was based on projections by liberal academia experts who used obviously a flawed model / flawed models...

Numerous articles that have been written the last few weeks have begun to question HOW COULD 'EXPERTS' COULD HAVE CREATED A COVID-19 MODEL ADOPTED AND USED TO BASE SUCH MONUMENTAL POLICY UPON BE / HAVE BEEN SO EXTREMELY FAR OFF / FLAWED?


“It’s not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited” to projecting Covid-19 deaths, epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told reporters this week, referring to projections by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington."

So the US Government, specifically the Trump administration, was pressured to accept this model and to base the decision to shut down the country - and the roaring economy - on this model advocated by such experts as this member of elitist Liberal academia, an 'expert' on epidemiology from Harvard.
-- Can anyone tell me the last time professors and experts rom liberal elitist indoctrination camps, er...colleges...ever supported Conservatives, Conservative ideology, or a Conservative President?

"A widely followed model for projecting Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever, and now epidemiologists are criticizing it as flawed and misleading for both the public and policy makers. In particular, they warn against relying on it as the basis for government decision-making, including on “re-opening America.”

Epidemiologists are now speaking out against the model advocated as the one this administration's policies should be based off of in this pandemic....

Several scientists have come out to say that 'experts' SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THIS FAR OFF on their modeling...and more than one scientist is questioning WHY there was so much pressure applied to use it as the basis for critical policy decision:

"Others experts, including some colleagues of the model-makers, are even harsher. “That the IHME model keeps changing is evidence of its lack of reliability as a predictive tool,” said epidemiologist Ruth Etzioni of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, who has served on a search committee for IHME. “That it is being used for policy decisions and its results interpreted wrongly is a travesty unfolding before our eyes.”

The catastrophic impact on our economy due to policy decisions based on this horrifically flawed model will inevitably cause the government to make the argument that the final / actual infected and mortality rates are so far off the models due to the policy decisions made; however, this will be more 'political posturing' than a more factual assessment and confirmation that the models were inexplicably off.


There are 2 tried-and-true models that were completely ignored. Instead the model pushed was one that inspired far less confidence:

There are two tried-and-true ways to model an epidemic. The most established, dating back a century, calculates how many people are susceptible to a virus (in the case of the new coronavirus, everyone), how many become exposed, how many of those become infected, and how many recover and therefore have immunity (at least for a while).

"IHME uses neither a SEIR nor an agent-based approach. It doesn’t even try to model the transmission of disease, or the incubation period, or other features of Covid-19, as SEIR and agent-based models at Imperial College London and others do. It doesn’t try to account for how many infected people interact with how many others, how many additional cases each earlier case causes, or other facts of disease transmission that have been the foundation of epidemiology models for decades.

Instead, IHME starts with data from cities where Covid-19 struck before it hit the U.S., first Wuhan and now 19 cities in Italy and Spain."

The most obvious problem with IHME is the blind trust placed in China and the WHO when the virus was 1st reported, trust that was unwarranted. Evidence shows that China was NOT forthcoming with information about the virus in a timely manner - in fact, evidence shows China hid the outbreak. For example, evidence shows China knew about the outbreak as early as OCTOBER 2019 and not only hid news of the outbreak but also allowed the epidemic to spread globally by refusing to cancel international travel from the very epicenter of its outbreak. Furthermore, evidence shows the WHO knew about the epidemic sooner than revealed and were actually misleading the rest of the world by claiming COVID-19 was not a problem, that China was containing the outbreak, and encouraging countries NOT to close its border and impose Travel Bans. CHINA AND THE WHO MISLED THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR MONTHS, AND IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS TIME = LIVES LOST!

Based on the fact that the IHME begins with and is based on honest, complete data shared by countries / governments / scientists - which China and the WHO STILL has not done, the model was disastrously wrong / inaccurate from the very start.

Many epidemiologists are now pointing out this is why the IHME should never have been considered and definitely should not been pushed as the model to use over the other 2 that do not rely on other governments' / bodies' transparency / willingness to share data.

After OFFICIALLY reporting their epidemic to the WHO China refused to share data, refused to allow the CDC to come in to assess and offer help, they hid / falsified their numbers, and even engaged in propaganda by attempting to claim the USN was responsible for introducing / releasing COVID-19 in China....

So how the hell did an 'expert epidemiologist' from Liberal elitist academia come to the conclusion that US policy should be based IHME that relied on non-existent cooperation, transparency, and virus data-sharing by the Chinese?

Influential Covid-19 model uses flawed methods and shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say

A widely followed model for projecting #coronavirus deaths in the U.S. is producing results that have been bouncing up and down like an unpredictable fever.

www.statnews.com

.

The shutdown was caused by the asswipePINO's failure to act on January 10th. I have four bipartican MOC's that prove my case.

You are an idiot. I have proven this countless times. You wanted Trump to shut down the Super Bowl? Moron.

Listen and weep.

Man. You guys really do just repeat whatever Trump says.

That video had zero to do with Trump. How can you possibly say that. This is why you have zero credibility with me. Please explain that statement. I posted a video that had NOTHING to do with him. Everything with leftists comes back to Trump. TDS?

Because this just so happens to be the new narrative that Trump has been pushing.

Is that a coincidence? Of course not. That’s why you have zero credibility.

The clips in the video are from January and early February when we had just a handful of cases. It’s dishonest.

But these are LIVE VIDEOS?!?!?!!? How can you dispute them?!?!?! From various sources. Illogical.

I put them into context. The media was saying there were very few cases in the country. They were correct at the time.

When things got worse in late February and early March, many in the media correctly stated that this is going to be a huge problem. They were also correct at the time.

But that’s also the point in time that Trump was accusing the media of overhyping the virus as a hoax to get him.

And now Trump is propagating that the media was minimizing it.

And you’re just going along with it.

Go ahead, tell me that you came up with this independently after Trump started pushing this narrative last week during a briefing which you have indicated you watch on a regular basis.

Maybe you don’t even remember that. You have a habit of conveniently forgetting things.

Until you agree not to bring Trump into this, I am not debating it. Trump is neither a doctor or a scientist. I want to discuss the video and all the experts saying the flu is much worse.

I already gave my response to the video and you decided to ignore it. The individuals in the videos were right at the time. The flu was worse in late January. It wasn’t until later that it became clear that we were in serious trouble. At that time, the media was criticized for “over hyping” the virus.

Now you want us to believe that they were downplaying it all along?

It’s intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Brain357]

The initial model itself had to have been a shot in the dark as they had very little information, and I'm sure, plenty of unreliable information. Any data scientist will tell you, it's "garbage in, garbage out". The models are only as good as the data and due to the necessity of confronting this unknown virus, no country had the luxury of waiting to find out and get the best data. This fact alone, indicts the Communist Party in CHina for their secrecy. Arguments about the models used can happen, but it will always come down to the immediate data available at the time.

I'm not sure Canada or the U.S could have avoided some major shut down order of some kind. The important aspect at this time is not letting the MSM keep promoting this as "the new norm" and suggesting a shutdown for 18 months, It's preposterous, and even potentially wrong headed since you need some to build immunity.

Also, to make sure the slow return to normal and free market capitalism is done correctly. If those areas hardly impacted by this virus come on line properly and with vigor, it will convince other areas to do the same by replicating their approach. Sadly, it almost seems some DON'T want the world to return to normal, playing the role of fear mongerer in order to extract more control and, political gain. THAT is scary.

In the long run, the number of people who become infected will be the same as if we had no shutdown. Fauci has admitted this. All the shutdown was intended to accomplish is to "flatten the curve" so that our medical facilities are not overwhelmed. Since it's clear this won't happen, then the shutdown is pointless. People over 65 or who have medical conditions should isolate themselves, but it makes little sense to isolate anyone one else. In fact, the quicker people expose themselves to the virus and acquire immunity, the quicker this thing will be over.

You better tell trump to change his guidelines.

 

[Brain357]

If easyt is right trump really messed up closing the country.

Gee, who didn't see that spin coming...?!

If Easy is right the Leftists conned the President into backing the 'science' to shutdown the economy - destroying the strongest economy we have seen in our lifetime - so they would have a better shot at defeating Trump in Nov.

As I have believed, the Democrats would burn down the economy and hurt every citizen if it meant getting rid of taking back power and getting rid of Trump.....or they were just dumbfucks who convinced the President to go along with them.

So now you blame democrats for trump guidelines? Wow that is stupid. Isn’t pence leading the charge?

 

[easyt65]

I put them into context. The media was saying there were very few cases in the country. They were correct at the time.

When things got worse in late February and early March, many in the media correctly stated that this is going to be a huge problem. They were also correct at the time.

But that’s also the point in time that Trump was accusing the media of overhyping the virus as a hoax to get him.

And now Trump is propagating that the media was minimizing it.

And you’re just going along with it.

Go ahead, tell me that you came up with this independently after Trump started pushing this narrative last week during a briefing which you have indicated you watch on a regular basis.

Maybe you don’t even remember that. You have a habit of conveniently forgetting things.

Gee, where to start with your bullshit....

China knew how bad their outbreak was in NOV 2019....and Democrats never held 1 Intel Committee hearing on it because they were pushing their treasonous admitted partisan Political Impeachment based on zero crime / evidence / witnesses, one they had already admitted would end in failure. Even in the 2 week lapse between Impeaching the President and finally sending it to the Senate they never held 1 meeting.

Democrats and the media started out completely downplaying COVID-19
- Dems like Pelosi and Cuomo told people to continue to 'herd' and go about their lives

..while President Trump activated the CDC, stood up the virus committee, declared an emergency, and instituted a travel ban

The Democrats opposed the ban, calling it 'hysterically xenophobic', which Berg provided the link to confirming it,

The Democrats have since declared it was the right thing to do....and tried to sell the BS that they would have enacted it sooner despite their every action at the time was to oppose everything Trump had done, meaning no travel ban would have ever been imposed had the Democrats been in power.

Once the media realized Trump had been right and his actions had been the right thing to do from the start they began to OVER-hype the virus, pushing the horrifically inaccurate Harvard-backed model.