Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

How overly optimistic modeling distorted Trump team’s coronavirus response

Yet again, ITYS.  When the administration began basing statements and planning on models, experts began warning that there were too many unknowns and too few data points.  It did not matter. The University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation models looked like the pandemic would not be as bad as feared and that was the message the administration needed to hear.

IHME Director Christopher Murray said that IHME will update its estimates next week to reflect a gloomier future amid indications that states like Georgia will begin to reopen — and boost the odds of a prolonged pandemic.

 

 

 

As coronavirus cases climbed daily by the thousands and the nation entered its second month of an economic standstill, President Donald Trump latched onto a sign of hope: A pandemic model closely followed by political leaders and public health specialists projected the virus would kill as few as 60,000 Americans, a figure far below what officials previously feared.

In retrospect, public health experts said, the sudden downward shift in IHME’s numbers that gave the Trump administration, governors and some health professionals the confidence to float reopening the country by summer was also a prime example of the model’s inherent limitations — and the risk of relying on any model to accurately predict how a virus that scientists are still scrambling to understand will behave in the real world.

“You can’t oversell the models, and you have to view them within the correct context,” said Jeffrey Shaman, a coauthor of Columbia University’s coronavirus model, who warned of the difficulty in making projections based “on a highly fluid situation for which the information is woefully incomplete.”

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/24/trump-coronavirus-model-207582 

Honored Social Butterfly

    Digging through the information on the website, you can find some interesting numbers that are indeed wrong.     The prediction is that total deaths by Aug 4 will be 67, 641.     Anyone who has been looking at the actual data knows that the death rate in the US is already at 53,860 and the daily rate is about 2K/day.    

     As the testing for this disease is abyssmally low and many states are not reporting Nursing Home deaths etc.     It should make everyone who is relying on this data to rethink if it should be the only model to follow.  

 

      As I noted elsewhere Stanford studies are being trashed by other researchers.   https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/experts-demolish-studies-suggesting-covid-19-is-no-worse-tha...

     Validation of antibody testing ( IgG) is showing that a lot of the tests currently available are not worth the price https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/24/health/coronavirus-antibody-tests.html

PRO-LIFE is Affordable Healthcare for ALL .
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Does AARP donate to political parties or endorse candidates?

AARP is strictly non-partisan and always has been. We never endorse or donate to candidates, political parties or political action committees.

Learn more.

AARP Members Only Games

Play members only games, like FIll Ins, Lumeno, 2048 and a collaborative, multiplayer Let's Crossword.

Play Now
AARP Members Only Games Logos
AARP Rewards

Solve Crosswords. Earn Rewards. Activate AARP Rewards to earn points for games, quizzes and videos. Redeem for deals and discounts.

Get started with AARP Rewards now!
/html/assets/Rewards-program-badge-355x224.png