Given its a virus, would the improved weather be having an impact on these numbers?
Run a few more Cheltenham festivals this year.
There are strong indicators that sunlight helps this.
1 Like
Getting messy in Limerick
Police baton-charged hundreds of people who had flocked to liquor shops when they opened on Monday for the first time in a relaxation of the world’s biggest lockdown, which is set to run until 17 May.
Government issued yokes and a massive rave in the Phoenix park. Spread the disease from all the hugging and kissing.
They came call it coming up with the Phoenix or something
For anyone with the inclination to read into it, the corruption at play is mesmerising, and Ferguson appears to be in the middle of it.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01003-6
Here are a few key quotes from the Nature article:
…it’s natural to wonder how reliable any of the simulations are. Unfortunately, during a pandemic it is hard to get data - such as on infection rates - against which to judge a model’s projections.
‘You can project forwards and then compare against what you get. But the problem is that our surveillance systems are pretty rubbish’, says John Edmunds, who is a modeller at the LSHTM [London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine]. ‘The total numbers of cases reported, is that accurate? No. Accurate anywhere? No’.
‘Forecasts made during an outbreak are rarely investigated during or after the event for their accuracy, and only recently have forecasters begun to make results, code, models and data available for retrospective analysis,’ Edmunds and his team noted last year in a paper that assessed the performance of forecasts made in a 2014-15 Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone. They found that it was possible to reliably predict the epidemic’s course one or two weeks ahead of time, but no longer, because of the inherent uncertainty and lack of knowledge about the outbreak.
The 16 March simulations that the [Neil Ferguson] team ran to inform the UK government’s COVID-19 response used an agent-based model built in 2005 to see what would happen in Thailand if H5N1 avian flu mutated to a version that could spread easily between people.
The last section is bolded for good reason. 5 days ago, I posted an article from Business Insider on Neil Ferguson (Reopen the counties - the COVID-19 Edgy thread).
Here is the key quote:
Similarly, he was accused of creating panic by overestimating the potential death toll during the 2005 Bird Flu outbreak. Ferguson estimated 200 million could die. The real number was in the low hundreds.
So, this is the underlying model Ferguson has used to project deaths from COVID-19. The guy is a charlatan, albeit a well-funded one with friends in very high places. It’s a disgrace that so many countries have been locked down based on a failed model by a guy with a track record that is questionable at best. He’ll get away with it too, because, his model is a black box and it hasn’t been and won’t be properly interrogated.
Real-time forecasts based on mathematical models can inform critical decision-making during infectious disease outbreaks. Yet, epidemic forecasts are rarely evaluated during or after the event, and there is little guidance on the best metrics for assessment.
Most viruses don’t do well in summer
People will never trust a scientist again
Sure, how could you?
Back in April the doomsday merchants were predicting Sweden would implode, but that was based on how it was tracking against the fraudster’s model.
2 Likes
Their daily ICU admissions and deaths are falling all the time. Seems to be very similar to here, a huge spike in care homes and then a fall in society at large. I wonder how accurate this really is?
How can they accurately say what the R rate was when the UK tested SFA people in March and they weren’t accurately reporting deaths?
Averaged across all countries, we estimate initial reproduction numbers of around 3.87 [3.01-4.66],
which is in line with other estimates.
1,8 These estimates are informed by our choice of serial interval
distribution and the initial growth rate of observed deaths. A shorter assumed serial interval results in
lower starting reproduction numbers (Appendix 8.4.2, Appendix 8.4.6). The initial reproduction
numbers are also uncertain due to (a) importation being the dominant source of new infections early
in the epidemic, rather than local transmission (b) possible under-ascertainment in deaths particularly
before testing became widespread.
There is going to be a lot of effort to “prove” the effectiveness of severe lockdowns.
Give it two weeks and Sweden won’t exist anymore though
Are we saying its fizzling out so?
1 Like
Sure until recently scientists told us the earth was flat
It’ll probably stay burning in the US for a while just because they seem to earlier in the trajectory, but it seems to be fizzling somewhat in the places that had it worst. Italy, Spain, France etc. The deaths will take a long time to gradually fall off though and when you are starting from very high numbers, you could be talking the same again from where we are for the UK
Freddy’s latest interview with the virologist who studies the carnival town in Germany with the outbreak.
The professor is conservatively estimating an IFR of .24%-.36%.
Big into viral loads being a huge issue. Firmly states that the carnival had super spreaders; indoors, bar man going around with a whistle, lots of kissing etc. Doesn’t see a lot of transmission in family environments. Possibly accounts for the virus being here for a long period of time and not seeing a tipping point for a while.
Doesn’t see schools as an issue.
What a shambles. Total hypocrisy in fairness.
You’re quoting a study by imperial college London which proves how they saved the UK??
Please.
1 Like
His staats didnt add up.
1 Like