Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, May 04, 2020

An influential coronavirus model often cited by the White House is now forecasting that 134,000 people will die of Covid-19 in the United States, nearly double its previous prediction.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

The Re-election Wash-Over Rag

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2020-05-05 01:17 AM | Reply

What was previously the White House's favorite model was removed from the CDC's website immediately after they doubled their projected death numbers.

#2 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2020-05-05 01:45 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If a patient dies in covid forest, but no one records it, did it really happen?

#3 | Posted by bored at 2020-05-05 03:02 AM | Reply | Funny: 2

Based on my limited experience with MAGAts, I expect the death toll to hit 200k in the fall. America is overrun by a death cult.

#4 | Posted by bored at 2020-05-05 03:03 AM | Reply

"White House's favorite model was removed from the CDC's website immediately after they doubled their projected death numbers."

Trump fired a CDC model! ~~

You know we're getting jaded when this doesn't even ring the gong bell any more.

#5 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-05-05 04:10 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Thanks Dotard and (R)tarded governors.

#6 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2020-05-05 05:42 AM | Reply

IMpotus can finally kickoff infrastructure week by digging a bunch of Trump trenches for the victims of his negligence.

#7 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2020-05-05 06:23 AM | Reply

Algorithms!

Garbage in ~ garbage out.

Trump will make sure the CDC keeps working until they find one that supports his re-election.

#8 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-05-05 07:10 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Some background on that model...

This coronavirus model keeps being wrong. Why are we still listening to it?
A model that the White House has relied on has come under fire for its flawed projections.
www.vox.com

...One analysis of the IHME model found that its next-day death predictions for each state were outside its 95 percent confidence interval 70 percent of the time -- meaning the actual death numbers fell outside the range it projected 70 percent of the time. That's not great! (A recent revision by IHME fixed that issue; more on this below.)

This track record has led some experts to criticize the model. "It's not a model that most of us in the infectious disease epidemiology field think is well suited" to making projections about Covid-19, Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch told reporters.

But if that's the case, how has it risen to such prominence among policymakers? Other models have done better than IHME's at predicting the course of the epidemic, and many of them use approaches epidemiologists believe are more promising. Yet it's the IHME model that has generally guided policymakers, for the most part, in the direction of focusing on a return to normal.

One potential explanation for its outsize influence: Some of the factors that make the IHME model unreliable at predicting the virus may have gotten people to pay attention to it. For one thing, it's more simplistic compared to other models. That means it can be applied in ways more complicated models could not, such as providing state-level projections (something state officials really wanted), which other modelers acknowledged that they didn't have enough data to offer.

Meanwhile, its narrow confidence intervals for state-by-state estimates meant it had quotable (and optimistic) topline numbers. A confidence interval represents a range of numbers wherein the model is very confident the true value will lie. A narrow range that gives "an appearance of certainty is seductive when the world is desperate to know what lies ahead," a criticism of the IHME model published in the Annals of Internal Medicine argued. But the numbers and precise curves the IHME is publishing "suggests greater precision than the model is able to offer."...


A long-ish article, but worth a read, imo.

#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-05-05 11:48 AM | Reply

I noticed the Conservatives on here have been running and hiding or just banned for lying.

#10 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-05-05 02:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 1

I noticed the Conservatives on here have been running and hiding or just banned for lying.

#10 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020

They'll be back when Trump provides them with some form of words that gets him off the hook for a few hundred thousand deaths.

#11 | Posted by Zed at 2020-05-05 03:38 PM | Reply

the Conservatives on here

#10 | Posted by Sycophant at

Have really been Trumpites, not conservatives at all. Their value set is whatever Trump --------- out.

#12 | Posted by Zed at 2020-05-05 03:42 PM | Reply

Regardless of what the official number is, we all know that the actual number of deaths will be far, far more. There is no going back.

As Americans we are used to everything having a happy ending for us. We are used having our way. Driving our over-sized SUVs. Flying out to Vegas or the Islands for a weekend. Having plenty of entertainment. And relatively little responsibility. But the times are now changing. And very few of us seem to actually understand that. What we have been going through the last 6 weeks will not just be a short term blip. We are on the cusp of a new long term change. A paradigm shift that will not go away by mobbing a State House with AK-47s and loud protests.

For example, you currently do not have a de facto right to a jury trial. No way to gather about 70 people in a courtroom to choose a jury and then hear evidence. And I don't think that is changing anytime soon. We may be entering a brave new world where trials are all done via Zoom conference.

For example, I am a season ticket holder for the LA Rams. Do any of you actually believe there will be an NFL season with fans in attendance come September?

For example, with meat shortages and other types of food shortages in coming months, we may eventually have to convert to some sort of rationing system for food. Especially in large urban areas.

For example, with 30 million people applying for unemployment benefits, and tens of millions more people out of work who do not qualify for such benefits, does anybody really believe life goes back to normal for most Americans just because at some point they may no longer need to wear face mask everywhere they go?

I really, at a gut level, do not believe that most of us understand just how thoroughly everything has changed for good. There is no going back to the old 'normal'.

#13 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-05-05 05:15 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort