Politics Coronavirus Politics Edition!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
yankeesince59 said:
Besides, if as you put it, "The Administration is always basing their estimates to the failed IHME model.", isn't that kinda dumb on their part? I mean why keep using a certain model if it it has indeed been proven "failed" info in the past?
Click to expand...

Because it was the model that gave the lowest estimates?

barfo
 
barfo said:
Because it was the model that gave the lowest estimates?

barfo
Click to expand...
That was the model that predicted 2.2 million deaths without mitigation, 140-240k deaths with mitigation just a month ago. They were even more outlandish with the ICU beds and hospitalization estimates. Like 4-5x over in estimations.

mags
 
yankeesince59 said:
He's been all over the place...among other inane comments/predictions, his absolute best was his claim that the virus would "miraculously disappear"...there is no way to defend his incompetence.
Click to expand...
I do enjoy the “yeah but” responses. Let’s just agree that the IHME estimates were dead wrong. I can agree that the Trump Administration were fools to put faith in such a broken model.
 
magnifier661 said:
I do enjoy the “yeah but” responses. Let’s just agree that the IHME estimates were dead wrong. I can agree that the Trump Administration were fools to put faith in such a broken model.
Click to expand...

They were simply "estimates", Trump was the one who decided to exacerbate them by spewing them to the American public.

... So where's he getting his numbers from now, and how long before they will be deemed dead wrong?
 
here's a radical idea: maybe a president shouldn't spend any time guessing about the number of dead Americans under his watch.

I saw Fauci talk about it a month ago and he estimated as 100K-240K, which is a pretty wide range. But he was also careful to add several qualifiers to that estimate because he said data was always changing, being updated, and being better understood. He also talked about the mitigation of the mortality as we develop treatments and a potential vaccine. In other words, he estimated, and cautioned, like someone trained in public health. Like somebody who knew what he was talking about. That's part of his job. It's not trump's job and he shouldn't be babbling about it like some hyper-caffeinated blogger
 
wizenheimer said:
here's a radical idea: maybe a president shouldn't spend any time guessing about the number of dead Americans under his watch.

I saw Fauci talk about it a month ago and he estimated as 100K-240K, which is a pretty wide range. But he was also careful to add several qualifiers to that estimate because he said data was always changing, being updated, and being better understood. He also talked about the mitigation of the mortality as we develop treatments and a potential vaccine. In other words, he estimated, and cautioned, like someone trained in public health. Like somebody who knew what he was talking about. That's part of his job. It's not trump's job and he shouldn't be babbling about it like some hyper-caffeinated blogger
Click to expand...
That’s right. Dr. Fauci used the IHME model for those estimations. Trump was using the same one, based on what Fauci told him.

like I said, they were fools believing such a failed model.
 
magnifier661 said:
That’s right. Dr. Fauci used the IHME model for those estimations. Trump was using the same one, based on what Fauci told him.

like I said, they were fools believing such a failed model.
Click to expand...

100,000-240,000 is kind of looking like a good estimate right now. We'll probably cross the 70,000 threshold today, and that would be 69,000 in 6 weeks. How many weeks are left to this? 30? 50? 100? I'm not seeing the failure because I can't see where the end of this will be

besides that, my point was that trump shouldn't be the one guessing about mortality, especially when he's making a different guess every 4 or 5 days.
 
wizenheimer said:
100,000-240,000 is kind of looking like a good estimate right now. We'll probably cross the 70,000 threshold today, and that would be 69,000 in 6 weeks. How many weeks are left to this? 30? 50? 100? I'm not seeing the failure because I can't see where the end of this will be

besides that, my point was that trump shouldn't be the one guessing about mortality, especially when he's making a different guess every 4 or 5 days.
Click to expand...
He isn’t guessing. Those statements are based on the pandemic team, who based theirs on the faulty models.
 
magnifier661 said:
He isn’t guessing. Those statements are based on the pandemic team, who based theirs on the faulty models.
Click to expand...

of course he's guessing...everybody is. If I say 100,000, based on some model...I'm guessing. That's the nature of predicting the future, it's all guesses.
 
wizenheimer said:
100,000-240,000 is kind of looking like a good estimate right now. We'll probably cross the 70,000 threshold today, and that would be 69,000 in 6 weeks. How many weeks are left to this? 30? 50? 100? I'm not seeing the failure because I can't see where the end of this will be

besides that, my point was that trump shouldn't be the one guessing about mortality, especially when he's making a different guess every 4 or 5 days.
Click to expand...

Seems like it would depend on whether you're talking projections for this first wave, through the second wave, or throughout the pandemic.
 
wizenheimer said:
of course he's guessing...everybody is. If I say 100,000, based on some model...I'm guessing. That's the nature of predicting the future, it's all guesses.
Click to expand...
sigh... Your statement is "Trump is guessing." My statement is< "Trump is not guessing, he is using the numbers from the pandemic team."

If you want to say they are guessing, then that's fine, but his numbers are what the team is guessing for him.
 
e_blazer said:
Seems like it would depend on whether you're talking projections for this first wave, through the second wave, or throughout the pandemic.
Click to expand...
The 140-200k projections from IHME were what the numbers would be in June. It wasn't focusing additional waves.
 
magnifier661 said:
sigh... Your statement is "Trump is guessing." My statement is< "Trump is not guessing, he is using the numbers from the pandemic team."

If you want to say they are guessing, then that's fine, but his numbers are what the team is guessing for him.
Click to expand...

yes, I'm saying he's guessing, and I'm also saying he should put a cork in it. But of course, a spastic aardvark with a learning disorder could figure out what his motivation is for continuing to try and peg the number
 
wizenheimer said:
yes, I'm saying he's guessing, and I'm also saying he should put a cork in it. But of course, a spastic aardvark with a learning disorder could figure out what his motivation is for continuing to try and peg the number
Click to expand...
Definitely agree to put a cork in it when it comes to repeating anything from these shitty models
 
magnifier661 said:
Definitely agree to put a cork in it when it comes to repeating anything from these shitty models
Click to expand...

trump might be able to project better information if he actually listened to briefings and the experts rather than his "gut".
 
magnifier661 said:
That was the model that predicted 2.2 million deaths without mitigation, 140-240k deaths with mitigation just a month ago. They were even more outlandish with the ICU beds and hospitalization estimates. Like 4-5x over in estimations.

mags
Click to expand...
100,000 to 240,000 with mitigation seems like a credible number. I'm going to predict that it's closer to 240,000 than 100,000.
 
Lanny said:
100,000 to 240,000 with mitigation seems like a credible number. I'm going to predict that it's closer to 240,000 than 100,000.
Click to expand...
I want to see the national death numbers under 60 that are from coronavirus only, as some doctors are stating there is pressure on them to note C19 on the death certificate even if it wasn't the main reason for death.
 
e_blazer said:
Seems like it would depend on whether you're talking projections for this first wave, through the second wave, or throughout the pandemic.
Click to expand...

I would think the count should be for the calendar year as that's how other deaths and illnesses are listed aren't they?
 
Lanny said:
100,000 to 240,000 with mitigation seems like a credible number. I'm going to predict that it's closer to 240,000 than 100,000.
Click to expand...
I don’t trust the models one bit. It’s not about modeling anymore. I think we know how infectious this disease is. It’s just gonna have to run its course and mitigate on every spike until a vaccine or therapeutic treatment is discovered.
 
Hoopguru said:
I want to see the national death numbers under 60 that are from coronavirus only, as some doctors are stating there is pressure on them to note C19 on the death certificate even if it wasn't the main reason for death.
Click to expand...

I think that's kind of a false way of looking at it. My mom had lung cancer, but s. he died of respitory failure but it was because of the cancer. If we don't keep accuraate numbers of covid related illnesses and deaths then the scientist won't have accurate data. We need to be able to create an accurate data base to understand it better because before this we had none.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Featured content

Back
Top