If this has to do with some sort of high school football rivalry it's because I said I thought Kyler Murray was a better quarterback than JT Daniels. I guess some people take that sort of code red, level 10 insult very seriously.
"He has dozens of videos and you couldn't possibly know what I was referencing. But don't let that stop you from being wrong... we wouldn't want to break the streak."
I guess if you don't refute something specific in his vlogs, well, yea i can't know what you were referencing. But, then again you can take it up with him. I simply pointed out his vlogs had more detail.
Farr's Law summary for those who care:
"Farr's Law states that the behaviour of epidemics in terms of evolution over time, can be forecasted by following a bell-shaped curve. Farr made this assumption, based on his observations of past infectious disease outbreaks and epidemics, closely studying the chronological order and occurrences of life and death, during key events. The aforementioned events include the rise, peak, and fall, of both the infection and death statistics, represented by the bell-shaped curve. Farr famously stated: “The death rate is a fact, anything beyond this is an inference.” This emphasized that in uncertain times filled with alternative explanations based on weak evidence – leading to rumors, fake news and conspiracy theories – scientific facts such as death statistics are the only numbers we should trust. Once we take this statistic one step further in making assumptions, we are at the stage of inference.
joefutbol said re: Farr's law
"Uh, because it's a model base on ONE equation using exactly TWO inputs."
The models you are referring to "take this statistic one step further in making assumptions, we are at the stage of inference"
Two ways of looking at any given set of data:
"This is our hypothesis can we make this data support it?"
or We have this set of data, what does it tell us"
First method is "If you torture data long enough it will confess to anything" second is "let the data drive the conclusion"
My interpretation of the graphs right off the OC/CA Covid sites is OC peaked in July/August. That is based on the fact that our hospitalization is back down to April levels, our infection rate of tests is way down too.
Please refute my statement with facts joefutbol. For Orange County. How exactly am I wrong?
How is that *NOT* textbook Farr's law joefutbol? hmm?
I'm giving a huge benefit of the doubt by not bringing up the problems with testing and how deaths are counted. It's not clear those are being input by the actual dates of testing/death vs. the date it's uploaded to the system.
I'm making the assumption the datasets are correct, which is probably wrong. *if* those are wrong then the entire curve will shift to earlier in the year. Why earlier? cuz, you could not have had a positive case or had died *after* the data was input. So, the only logical *error* could be the data was input *after* the actual testing/death date and those dates are *later* than the actual testing/death dates.
And as far as data modeling, that's what I do Joefutbol. Cuz, i sure can't predict QB talent, right?
Here's my biggest problem with him from what I did watch -- He made the assumption that none of the measures taken had any effect on the virus. Masks, social distancing, lockdowns, quarantining... nothing. I have a major problem with that, and I would hope you do, too.
"Farr’s law has not been widely used as other models using differential-equations were instead employed, such as the susceptible-infectious-removed (SIR) model . The main reason is that it does not consider other important variables as population characteristics (immunity and susceptibility), public health interventions, and political actions against the pandemic"
Based on that graph, that's an accurate statement. Why on earth would I refute that?
Nobody whose job is data modeling would ever claim the Imperial College model was wrong because "it predicted 2 million deaths and was way off." So then I guess I was wrong? And you are, in fact, intentionally peddling fake news?
as far as cloth masks, i don't think they help much and this study concurs. I have MD friends who are puzzled that cloth and surgical masks are being mandated when there is no evidence of them helping. I feel like the sneetches and I need to get a star on my belly to fit in. I wear one just so the "karens" don't stroke out at the store. But, i have no illusion that it's helping me.
"A study conducted in the United States in July found that when they compared 154 “case-patients,” who tested positive for COVID-19, to a control group of 160 participants from health care facilities who were symptomatic but tested negative, over 70 percent of the case-patients were contaminated with the virus and fell ill despite “always” wearing a mask."
I claimed it was sh*tcode. Here is a review of the Imperial College model by a Google Engineer
"Conclusions. All papers based on this code should be retracted immediately. Imperial’s modelling efforts should be reset with a new team that isn’t under Professor Ferguson, and which has a commitment to replicable results with published code from day one.
On a personal level, I’d go further and suggest that all academic epidemiology be defunded. This sort of work is best done by the insurance sector. Insurers employ modellers and data scientists, but also employ managers whose job is to decide whether a model is accurate enough for real world usage and professional software engineers to ensure model software is properly tested, understandable and so on. Academic efforts don’t have these people, and the results speak for themselves."
Link to review
That's what my original post(s) were referring to, so, i'm a bit confused at how i'm full of sh*t. and posting "fake news"
still waiting for the tally sheet joefutbol. maybe you have a backup somewhere?
Then he ignores the fact that they closed secondary schools and did put out guidelines to mitigate the spread. It also doesn't factor in individuals choosing to quarantine, extra safety and sanitation measures, etc... He's pretending like he's comparing COVID lockdown to normal life. If you want to do that, then might as well use New York City as an example.jb914 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:36 pm The videos i viewed showed him comparing countries like Sweden to other EU countries. Sweden did NOT have a strict lockdown. The other countries did. Ivor was presented his view that there was not any correlation in the lockdown helping. If you disagree with that then you better back it up with some data and take it up with him. I think he makes a good argument.
You left this out --
"Adults with confirmed COVID-19 (case-patients) were
approximately twice as likely as were control-participants to have
reported dining at a restaurant in the 14 days before becoming
When people can start eating with masks on, then I'll say you might have an argument.
I'll read it in detail later, but regardless, at first glance, this is not proof of anything. People wear masks improperly. People touch their faces. People touch their masks and then their faces before washing. People shop for groceries then pick their noses before washing. You get the point.
It's not the accuracy of your analysis I'm critical of. It's the relevance.
You did. You also said this - "it predicted 2 million deaths and was way off."
Last two questions and you can claim victory --
Why did you say "it predicted 2 million deaths and was way off."?
Would you come to the same conclusion using Farr's Law in September 1918 after the first wave of the Spanish Flu?
Would I come to the same conclusion? I don't know I have not looked at the spanish flu data. I think we are further along towards herd immunity that we think.
I also think the virus has been around longer than December. Some articles I read indicated huge uptick in hospitalizations in China back in summer 2019 for respiratory/pneumonia illnesses.
Ivor mentioned sewage samples from some countries from back in 2019 too had covid19. So, *if* that is true then a lot more people have been infected. If they have sewage samples it's true.
And since the overwhelming majority of the infected have no symptoms or a very mild case like a cold or flu then we could expect this final bell curve to be the final one. is that a certainty? of course not.
I have said to friends since this started the lockdowns will cause more damage to lives, business, etc than any saved "deaths". I can show you dozens of family, friends, etc that have been harmed and are under extreme stress from this lock down. generational businesses that have failed and will never come back. Bankruptcy, etc etc etc.
regarding masks. the box of surgical masks have always said they do not protect you from a virus.
and as you said most people do not wear the mask properly ro clean it, so, it's essentially useless. it's like swimming in the non-peeing section of a pool.
But, the groupthink and the media have declared it, so it is written, so it shall be done.
If i had time I would study historical deaths for comorbidities over the past 10 years. Then compare covid deaths to that historical data and we can see the REAL effect of covid deaths. In the past when someone had cancer, etc, and got the flu did we list the cause of death as the flu? or was it cancer?
I'd guesstimate half of the covid deaths are people who died *with* covid, but, not *from* covid. If you have stage 4 lung cancer and you catch covid the odds are against you. IF you catch a cold the odds are against you too since the treatments harm the immune system. Same for Emphysema, COPD, many cardiac issues and the list goes on.
If you are in a nursing home and over 85 you have a 30% chance of death if you catch covid in OC. If you have those problems and catch a cold, the flu, get an infection, etc, etc, you are much more likely die from that as well. As my 89 year old aunt says "they were old and there gonna die of something anyway, that's life"
But, those are all counted as covid deaths right now. why? well, the hospitals get paid more if you *had* covid.
totally with you here. That's what pisses me off with the sensationalization of this by the media and the scare tactics that are sold to everyone. Kids are afraid to socialize and that tension is harmful. More harmful than covid, IMHO.
joefutbol are you a servite guy?
I'm aware. As ventura, the guy on your side can attest, I referenced the model as well as the 2.2 million figure in a private exchange with him no more than a few days ago. I asked you that question for a reason... to find out about you, not the model. But you still didn't answer the question of why you said it. Again, you either lied to strengthen your argument or you were ignorant of the facts. After stating you're a modeler, I'm now leaning the other way. But whatever.
Id imagine you would. That's my point, and I know you've already connected the dots.
About a minute before reading your post I was on the front page of the Journal and this was a heading - Study Shows Covid-19 Antibodies Waning Over Time, Suggesting Immunity Might Wear Off
I haven't read it.
Yup. That's my guess.
I hope you're right, but I don't think the fireworks are over.
The virus can certainly make it through the mask, that much we know. But the virus isn't flying through the air like superman all by itself... it's attached to pathogen-transporting droplets and aerosols, the majority of which are too large to make it through a surgical or cloth mask. And we still don't know how big the particles are that transmit it the most. Is it 100% effective? No. Is it 0% effective? Hell no. They also stand as a reminder to stay 6 feet away from other people, and staying away from people has proven to be 100% effective against COVID. Since it costs next to nothing and requires virtually zero effort, I'll wear one until the science is settled. Right now you can find an article or a study or an opinion to support anything you want.
It sure is. But as I've told ventura, I have three people very close to me that will almost certainly die if they get it. Well, two would likely die, and the third is high-risk. But they aren't in nursing homes. Based on life expectancy, they have another 126 years to live between them. It sucks for a lot of people.
And I couldn't agree more. That's why I take such exception to you throwing the 2.2 million number at me. I'm glad you can appreciate that.
I took some classes there many years ago. Now I'm just a guy.
I'm out of time and won't be back for a while... life calls. Take care.
I look at it from a coding perspective. The code was not designed for covid, it was designed for influenza. but, they hacked it up into some "spagetti code" and used it anyway. So, one of the runs output a 2.2 million "projection" and they ran with it and sold that to the politicians. That was published in multiple articles. The predicted 500k deaths in UK and some other iterations predicted 1.1m deaths in US, but, i don't remember the exact details.
I hope you would agree that prediction was NOT good for anyone. But, that kind of stuff happens all the time in modeling. Reminds me of the hockey stick program years ago predicting a sharp rise in temperatures for climate change. If you saw Gore's movie I think it's in there. I didn't watch the movie, but, was told it's in there. Anyway, the "model" produced hockey stick graphs for multiple different datasets. I'm paraphrasing and it's been over 10 years, but, the bottom line is the model was spaghetti code/sh*tcode take your pick or make up your own.
But, because it came from someone who was considered an *expert* it was accepted without question. Then someone looked at the code. Same story here for the Imperial College code.
and I have family that are older and high risk. I'm not a low risk by any measure. We moved my aunt 2500 miles during this nightmare to prevent her from being placed into an east coast nursing home. I don't think covid is a hoax. It can be a very serious and deadly illness.
But, it's NOT as deadly as it was initially projected and to me it makes no sense to keep perfectly healthy young people "locked down". Those that are susceptible and have close living relatives at home need to be careful, but, we have to get on with life.
lock downs will only delay the spread, because this virus is going to spread. mask/no mask. lock down/ no lock down. Plexiglass/no plexiglass. People will say "f*ck it" and do there thing which is already happening and it will continue to spread. Even the WHO published something about not using lock downs as a primary way to prevent the spread.
Newsom announced the Disney rules which means they could be shut down for another year. Even when they open they are only allowing "local" residents to enter and at 25%. I doubt that's enough to even get them open. I likely costs more to run the park for a day than 25% occupancy brings in revenues. CSFU economist estimates 45k jobs will be lost and billions in lost revenues. If 3% of those people suffer from depression, die, stress, etc, etc, was it worth it? and that's just Disney area what about the rest of the county?
So, let me know when you find that tally sheet, coach.
Looks like someone already did this...
For goodness sake OPEN UP everything...more lives crushed from lock down then the damn CCP
Personal friends, working in OC hospitals forced to wright CoD as COVID when not the cause, second hand so add salt...
Probably they statistically fall into those who like scary movies or not. Regardless if you would like a more positive spin on what is really happening in the medical field listen to Dr Ray Casciari on AM 640 Mon and Thur at 6pm on the Tim Conway show. He tells it like it is not like it isn't.
The highest amount of deaths in Orange County took place in Santa Ana/Anaheim/Central Orange County. People working in high density jobs or living in high density housing situations. Should we talk about Asian American families that regardless of socioeconomic status live with elders and grandparents at higher rates. I guess the concerns of these folks don't matter when Mission and Capo can't play football.