Data’s wildly off so Berenson wants you to explain the national folly

5
462

The projections from the data were wildly off base but were the basis for this national lockdown. Remember when you hear that social distancing and other measures are why the projections are now being revised down: key data models assumed full social distancing.

Check out this thread and give me your views:

And check out this:

From the April 1 model:

IT’S ENOUGH ALREADY

You can comment on the article after the ads and subscribe to the Daily Newsletter here if you would like a quick view of the articles of the day and any late news:

PowerInbox
0 0 votes
Article Rating
5 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Greg
5 years ago

With the polls that Fox came out with we’ll be lucky if the economy is, at the Very best, sluggish. Even that may be an overstatement. It appears people will Not just go out and do business.

Immunity Certificate Please Comrade
5 years ago

Garbage in, garbage out. Did the Boeing engineers do the input?
Tell us what to do digital god, save us from ourselves.
Alexa why am I a hivemind slave?

Greg
5 years ago

This is a chart of the computed R0 factor over time. The site doesn’t link to where the data comes from but it does show the decline. The pro-lockdown MAGA crowd told us the CDC had the R0 factor at 4, which would be devastating because of the exponential curve it produces. It seems they believe that is a constant, but even the CDC says it does dwindle over time. If it Does drop down to 1 or below, that is significant. If we stretch out the infection rate until later in the year, we will have the seasonal flu along with this virus and that could create problems.

https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallerynr=7922

Greg
5 years ago

The doctor on Fox said some patients were in the hospital for about 4 weeks before passing on. That patient would certainly be counted as a “new death”. Doesn’t that by itself say a great deal. Essentially there is NO data that is truly “real time”. It all lags by varying degrees. Doesn’t THIS say even more. When speaking of timelines and mitigation it is quantified but not qualified. It is impossible to do so. It’s guesswork, the same as the seasonal flu. THAT’S why the numbers don’t remain the same. It’s not, “oh, we are doing so much better with mitigation”. You’ll have to compensate the charts with root infection data, the date before hospitalization, the date at hospitalization, and then the date of death. It’s most notably seen when a person goes from initial sickness to very serious. In some people it can take weeks and others within a few days. The assumption is the statistics occur the same with everyone. The question IS, WHY the secrecy in the model’s code. Whether this or climate, models are proprietary. Is there a fear of mistakes, or assumptions that aren’t valid? Certainly, we’ll never know.

pa l
5 years ago
Reply to  Greg

If a patient lingers in the hospital for 4 weeks before passing, then either the treatment of HCQ and zinc was not administered, or the patient actually transpired from some other illness and the death was attributed to coronavirus, or the hospital care was inept. Wuflu does not let someone linger that long, either they get better in a week, (ususally do with HCQ and zinc) or the do die in the next week without treatment of HCQ and zinc..