Can We Trust Covid Modeling?
BY Herschel Smith
4 years, 6 months ago
H. Sjödin et al: ‘Covid-19 health care demand and mortality in Sweden in response to non-pharmaceutical (NPIs) mitigation and suppression scenarios’, 7 April. The graph suggests critical care demand would peak above 16,000 patients per day by early May, and pre-pandemic intensive care unit capacity would be exceeded 30-fold.
Then came J. Gardner et al, ‘Intervention strategies against Covid-19 and their estimated impact on Swedish healthcare capacity’, 15 April. It was an even more pessimistic assessment, showing a peak of over 20,000 patients by early May – with an ICU requirement around 40 times the actual capacity.
Sweden’s Public Health Agency rejected the models. It instead planned for a worst-case scenario that was much less pessimistic, suggesting a peak around 1,700 ICU patients in the middle of May. Still more than three times more than the pre-pandemic capacity. Sweden, almost alone in the world, refused to lock down. And here is how things eventually worked out.
The number of patients in ICU has been fairly stable around 500-550 since mid-April. This means that capacity was never exceeded. At this moment, when the models suggested that Sweden would have 30 to 40 patients fighting over every available ICU bed, there is spare capacity in beds, equipment and personnel of around 30 percent (partly as a result of a doubling of the pre-pandemic capacity).
No.
We can’t trust your models because all of your models suck. They suck because the ones building the models suck.
I know science. I do science every day. This isn’t science. I don’t suck at my job.
On May 13, 2020 at 10:55 pm, George1 said:
And I still wonder. Since the models are so far off, can this just be a case of mass incompetence? Or are we dealing with something else.
On May 14, 2020 at 6:54 am, June J said:
When the “we’re all going to die” global warming models produced by so-called experts all failed to panic the sheeple adequately, the controllers had to change tactics.
Funny how when you start pulling the string on plandemic you find a bunch of the same people involved using some of the same verbiage used in global warming/climate change propaganda.
If the controllers don’t get their agenda accomplished this time I expect the next virus they unleash to actually kill millions…or perhaps this one just failed to work as desired.
On May 14, 2020 at 7:43 am, Bram said:
NO.
The lockdowns where supposed to prevent everyone from getting it at the same time – “flattening the curve”. Everyone who isn’t at risk probably will and should get it eventually. The idea of preventing it was invented after the lockdown and is preposterous
On May 14, 2020 at 7:59 am, Ned2 said:
“The lockdowns where supposed to prevent everyone from getting it at the same time”
This has been proven to be wrong, as the same people telling us that also told us the virus was already all over the country and more virulent than anything we’d ever seen, so “flattening the curve” was always a statistical impossibility.
It’ just one of the many contradictory statements coming from the Top Men.
Everyone has downplayed Sweden’s success since the beginning of this debacle.
The lockdowns are a weak knee jerk reaction at best, a much more sinister reaction at worst. We’ll find out eventually.
On May 14, 2020 at 8:09 am, Fred said:
Your problem Herschel is that you don’t take the fear based holistic approach. /sarc
@June, you assume, and it’s a big assumption, that this CV19 thing wasn’t planned earlier.
@Bram, It’s simply not true that everyone should or will get it. With flu, so called herd immunity occurs long before even 20% infection rates.
The coolest part of this whole thing is that TPTB are lining up to tyrant over both those who have had it, and to tyrant in other ways over those who have not. Got’s love ya some Tyranny.
In TN, the Governor has released the list of those who have had CV19 to state and local PD. Let that sink in real real good.
On May 14, 2020 at 8:11 am, Fred said:
@Ned2, several US states did not lockdown either. Find that in the news, anywhere…I’ll wait.
On May 14, 2020 at 10:45 am, George 1 said:
Some, like Herschel, who are very good with stats, are pointing out that when the nursing home related numbers are removed this is a less than average flu season.
A few of the big blue states basically murdered people in nursing homes, we know that. However that badly understates the issue. A great many of the nursing home staffs also are heavily involved in the home care industry. The nursing home employees were distributing the virus from the nursing homes to the vulnerable populations who were not in nursing homes but need home care.
Those numbers combined may account for nearly half the deaths attributed to CV-19. This is according to some of the experts that are brave enough to come forward.
On May 14, 2020 at 11:06 am, Herschel Smith said:
@George 1,
Honestly, when you think about it, it would have been better for everyone, especially the elderly, to have rolled them out into the elements, let them get sun, given them Vitamins C/D3, removed their masks, let them exercise a bit, and let them go home if their families could have cared for them.
They did everything ass backwards, put them on ventilators (for a disease that is a blood problem), and inflated their lungs unnecessarily.
This is a dark story of killing our elderly. America has another dark story of killing infants.
On May 14, 2020 at 1:12 pm, Bram said:
NY, NJ, and PA purposely forced nursing homes to accept infected patients. At least 10,000 deaths can be attributed to this policy in those 3 states. Like most things in government, I’m sure it was a mix of stupidity and malice.
On May 14, 2020 at 1:46 pm, I R A Darth Aggie said:
In addition to the models sucking, much of the data sucks, too. Anything the ChiComs or WHO provide should be considered a politically expedient fiction. Given the financial incentives to label everything COVID-19 in the USofA, that data is also suspect.
“Gunshot wound to the head, and COVID-19? make the COD COVID-19.”
On May 14, 2020 at 1:56 pm, I R A Darth Aggie said:
Since the models are so far off, can this just be a case of mass incompetence?
The computer models I’ve had to (code|deal with) are all physical processes. I’m not sure how much I know is applicable.
That said, if your model isn’t modelling the basic processes correctly you’re going to get garbage for results. That all the models are out to lunch, and in the same direction, suggests that the modelers have some shared preconceived notions about how things work that aren’t factual.
Or maybe the input data is really that terrible. To coin a phrase, embrace the power of “and”.
On May 14, 2020 at 9:01 pm, Wes said:
The virus is something that affects some people. The response is something that was perpetrated on everyone.
On May 15, 2020 at 12:45 pm, Heartland Patriot said:
@I R A Darth Aggie:
“That all the models are out to lunch, and in the same direction, suggests that the modelers have some shared preconceived notions about how things work that aren’t factual.”
I find your statement to be of the utmost importance to the heart of this mess. I think that arrogance, group think, and indeed, institutional incompetence among the scientists played into this more than even politics or money.