Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Ferguson's Model of Pandemic Really Bad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ferguson's Model of Pandemic Really Bad

    Ferguson's programming code was what generated the outlandish numbers that the UK and USA relied upon for shutdown of the economy.

    Here's an excerpt of news about his resignation...
    Source: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/professor-lockdown-modeler-resigns-in-disgrace/158615/


    Elon Musk calls Ferguson an “utter tool” who does “absurdly fake science.” Jay Schnitzer, an expert in vascular biology and a former scientific direct of the Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center in San Diego, tells me: “I’m normally reluctant to say this about a scientist, but he dances on the edge of being a publicity-seeking charlatan.”

    Indeed, Ferguson’s Imperial College model has been proven wildly inaccurate. To cite just one example, it saw Sweden paying a huge price for no lockdown, with 40,000 COVID deaths by May 1, and 100,000 by June. Sweden now has 2,854 deaths and peaked two weeks ago. As Fraser Nelson, editor of Britain’s Spectator, notes: “Imperial College’s model is wrong by an order of magnitude.”

    Indeed, Ferguson has been wrong so often that some of his fellow modelers call him “The Master of Disaster.”

    Ferguson was behind the disputed research that sparked the mass culling of eleven million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that up to 150,000 people could die. There were fewer than 200 deaths. Charlotte Reid, a farmer’s neighbor, recalls: “I remember that appalling time. Sheep were left starving in fields near us. Then came the open air slaughter. The poor animals were panic stricken. It was one of the worst things I’ve witnessed. And all based on a model — if’s but’s and maybe’s.”

    © Copyright Original Source



    His software was reviewed by Microsoft and viewed as totally unreadable and untested.

    This should not have been a surprise to anyone.

  • #2
    Actually for once in a blue moon I agree.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
      Ferguson's programming code was what generated the outlandish numbers that the UK and USA relied upon for shutdown of the economy.
      Compared to other countries, the UK and US didn't do prompt or thorough shutdowns. Now we're seeing both countries, and Sweden, paying the price in their citizen's blood for their foolish actions with massive death rates compared to countries that locked down harder and earlier.

      Regardless of whether some guy's model's predictions of the future were correct or not, we can now see from the past data now we have it, that strong and early lockdowns were the correct decision. Hindsight is 20/20 in 2020, and from our hindsight we can see this guy happened to be right in terms of public policy in recommending lockdown, even if some of his wilder predictions about numbers were wrong.

      Sweden now has 2,854 deaths and peaked two weeks ago.
      Pure speculation. Their current levels are still very close to what they were two weeks ago. There's zero reason to think their numbers might not climb more or that 2 weeks ago represents their peak.
      "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
      "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
      "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        Compared to other countries, the UK and US didn't do prompt or thorough shutdowns. Now we're seeing both countries, and Sweden, paying the price in their citizen's blood for their foolish actions with massive death rates compared to countries that locked down harder and earlier.

        Regardless of whether some guy's model's predictions of the future were correct or not, we can now see from the past data now we have it, that strong and early lockdowns were the correct decision. Hindsight is 20/20 in 2020, and from our hindsight we can see this guy happened to be right in terms of public policy in recommending lockdown, even if some of his wilder predictions about numbers were wrong.

        Pure speculation. Their current levels are still very close to what they were two weeks ago. There's zero reason to think their numbers might not climb more or that 2 weeks ago represents their peak.
        We already know that most shutdowns were done on the totally false premise that they were needed to flatten the curve so that hospitals would not be overloaded. We already know that the economy collapse has begun because of this. Scientific analysis has already shown that that a one percent increase of unemployment in the States will lead to 58,000 deaths, but I believe the increase is a bunch more than that.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          Actually for once in a blue moon I agree.
          . . . but our reasoning may be a bit different. My objections are centered on the failure to take into consideration the evidence of the biological nature of viruses and hosts in history without all the fancy math, and bells and whistles..
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Starlight View Post
            Compared to other countries, the UK and US didn't do prompt or thorough shutdowns. Now we're seeing both countries, and Sweden, paying the price in their citizen's blood for their foolish actions with massive death rates compared to countries that locked down harder and earlier.

            Regardless of whether some guy's model's predictions of the future were correct or not, we can now see from the past data now we have it, that strong and early lockdowns were the correct decision. Hindsight is 20/20 in 2020, and from our hindsight we can see this guy happened to be right in terms of public policy in recommending lockdown, even if some of his wilder predictions about numbers were wrong.

            Pure speculation. Their current levels are still very close to what they were two weeks ago. There's zero reason to think their numbers might not climb more or that 2 weeks ago represents their peak.

            The NYT report for NYC was oddly stated as 6 times the normal deaths when it was more like 3 times the normal rate. (The table on the April 27 report showed 309% of normal rates.) It was still high. However, it seems that NYC kept sending sick people to the nursing homes and were inappropriately using the ventilators, which were had a 90% death rate when used – hardly a good cure for anything.

            It is hard to say that New York City was not shutdown soon enough. It is hardly likely that they could have done anything earlier. Plus, it was highly mismanaged there, so deaths many have been decreased if the hospitals treated people with proper adjustments on the ventilators. Plus, NYC may have suffered increased deaths due to the increased fear factor created by quarantines, plus the decreased ability to go to the hospital for non-COVID-19 cases.

            Another problem with common quarantine rules was that people often had to stay indoors. If people were spent more time outside, at parks or other open spaces, they would often have the health benefits of fresh air and sunshine.

            Sweden's numbers on NYT report by Apr 27 were for 35 days = 9.59 percent of the year

            The deaths per year in Sweden are about 90,000 per https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ber-of-deaths/

            So 9.59% * 90,000 = 8630 deaths in this period. The report showed 988 were marked as COVID-19, a large fraction of the normal death rates. This is not some crazy increase and does not necessarily relate to their decisions about massive quarantines.

            For NYT report to April 27 see https://web.archive.org/web/20200505...ng-deaths.html
            Last edited by mikewhitney; 05-07-2020, 09:02 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              He clearly didn't believe in his own recommendations based on his personal behavior.
              "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                He clearly didn't believe in his own recommendations based on his personal behavior.
                AFAICT he resigned purely due to the publicity around his sexual affair. The OP very misleadingly makes it sound like he resignation had to do with the accuracy or his model or the quality of his science, when actually neither were the case AFAICT. The current death totals in the UK suggest his original estimate of UK total deaths over the course of the pandemic from his model were approximately correct, depending on how long one thinks it's likely to last from now.

                The OP also mis-portrays numbers with regard to foot and mouth. Ferguson modelled a scenario where the disease jumped to humans and recommended extreme measures to prevent that occurring, which were then taken, hence the modelled scenario didn't come to pass because the preventative measures he recommended succeeded. The OP deceptively misrepresents that as an instance of his predictions not coming to pass.
                "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                Comment


                • #9
                  A reviewer of Ferguson's software found that the software is untrustworthy for making any determinations for scientific publication or public policy. The github site allows people to share software source code with other people. The software was released so that other researchers could verify Ferguson's model and test alternative scenarios. Apparently it took six weeks after the request of the software before Ferguson shared it. I believe that Microsoft was reviewing and improving the software until it was found to be too messy to work with.

                  Source: https://github.com/mrc-ide/covid-sim/issues/165


                  The tests in this project, being limited to broad, "smoke test"-style assertions, do not support an assurance that the equations are being executed faithfully in discrete units of logic, nor that they are integrated into the application in such a way that the accepted practices of epidemiology are being modeled in accordance with the standards of that profession.

                  Billions of lives have been disrupted worldwide on the basis that the study produced by the logic contained in this codebase is accurate, and since there are no tests to show that, the findings of this study (and any others based on this codebase) are not a sound basis for public policy at this time.

                  I want to be clear that this Issue is not meant to denigrate the authors of this code - we've all written code that isn't our best work and code that is untested. But when a codebase is used to craft scholarly publications that are in turn used to influence public policy, the authors of those publications (and ultimately policy) need to ensure that the science is verifiable in a public sense. The lack of tests makes that an impossibility. So closure of this Issue, by retraction of studies based on it, is meant as a critique of the publication and policy authors, not the contributors to this repo.

                  (Note: In addition to the 👍 emoji, it's probably sensible to "sign" as a comment with your username, as it becomes impossible to see the emoji-ers above a certain threshold).

                  © Copyright Original Source



                  The lack of quality of the software makes it sound like there was a technical/image problem connected with the modeling.

                  Note that complex software should have sufficient tests defined for various portions of the software. Even simple software can have errors or bugs due to many causes -- computation accuracy, unchecked boundary conditions, typos, logic errors, global variables, bad equations, etc. At minimal the software results should be compared against another method of processing the data.

                  This should be a headline in the news media. I wonder if the UK will continue to rely on his predictions.
                  Last edited by mikewhitney; 05-07-2020, 11:08 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
                    I wonder if the UK will continue to rely on his predictions.
                    Given they now have actual data from what actually happened in their country and others during the outbreak, his model is no longer particularly relevant.

                    You seem to think that sufficient slandering of him and his work that he did months ago, would somehow justify political policy changes in the present that you are advocating for. But in the present we have actual data about what has happened over those months, we're not using his model nor basing current policy on it.

                    If you want to make a case for changing current public policy, you'll need to do so based on current data. Not by slandering a random guy whose relevance ended months ago, and who's only current claim to fame is who he had sex with.
                    "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                    "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                    "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                      Given they now have actual data from what actually happened in their country and others during the outbreak, his model is no longer particularly relevant.

                      You seem to think that sufficient slandering of him and his work that he did months ago, would somehow justify political policy changes in the present that you are advocating for. But in the present we have actual data about what has happened over those months, we're not using his model nor basing current policy on it.

                      If you want to make a case for changing current public policy, you'll need to do so based on current data. Not by slandering a random guy whose relevance ended months ago, and who's only current claim to fame is who he had sex with.
                      Use your dictionary next time. You only use "slander" when the information is not based on factual information. However, if this is the last excuse you can find, you can still try to use it in lieu of facts.

                      His models were wrong. Public policy was based on it and the governors in the States are unwilling to back off their unjustified dictatorships built upon the fear caused by these models.

                      You say we should rely on the data now. I have made that case many times over. The data only shows in the States only shows a significant problem in a few states. The other states (and most countries) should be opened up again.

                      You will defend your ideas even if it stops your from working, eating, and living. Go ahead. Just don't make everyone else a sacrifice for your fears and faulty ideas.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                        Compared to other countries, the UK and US didn't do prompt or thorough shutdowns. Now we're seeing both countries, and Sweden, paying the price in their citizen's blood for their foolish actions with massive death rates compared to countries that locked down harder and earlier.

                        Regardless of whether some guy's model's predictions of the future were correct or not, we can now see from the past data now we have it, that strong and early lockdowns were the correct decision. Hindsight is 20/20 in 2020, and from our hindsight we can see this guy happened to be right in terms of public policy in recommending lockdown, even if some of his wilder predictions about numbers were wrong.

                        Pure speculation. Their current levels are still very close to what they were two weeks ago. There's zero reason to think their numbers might not climb more or that 2 weeks ago represents their peak.
                        It's too early to call who has done well and who has done poorly. Leaving aside the differences between countries (such things as demographics, health profiles, economic structure, resources, co-operation or population, and more..) we won't know the final outcomes for some considerable time.

                        Judging a countries success requires not just an evaluation of number of deaths now, but an assessment of how at risk the country's population was, what cost was paid (economic damage by lockdown, etc), and the total number of casualties AFTER the pandemic is over. And that's ignoring things like the difficulty in comparing statistics across countries with differing methods and data collection.


                        Country A: Strict lockdown, 0.05% deaths, 1-5 new cases a day, economy -15%

                        Country B: Loose lockdown, .5% deaths, 20-40 new cases a day, economy -5%

                        Which country is doing better?


                        The answer depends entirely on what happens way down the track.

                        IF there is no vaccine or treatment, then countries that manage a move into herd immunity with minimal damage to their economies (Country B, perhaps) and minimal casualties have succeeded. Conversely, countries (like A, perhaps) that lockdown hard and damage their economies badly in the process may be the losers, as they will eventually have to move to herd immunity anyway.

                        IOW - a hard lockdown buys time, and may reduce overall final casualties, but the risk is that if a solution is not available in the time the country can sustain a lockdown, then it is a high cost to pay for not much result.
                        ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
                          Use your dictionary next time. You only use "slander" when the information is not based on factual information.
                          So all of your posts are slander?

                          the governors in the States are unwilling to back off their unjustified dictatorships built upon the fear caused by these models.
                          Trump and many Republican governors appear to be very, very keen to back off any closures. The only thing stopping them doing that is the huge amounts of data, not models, from around the world about just how many people die when you do that.

                          You will defend your ideas even if it stops your from working, eating, and living... Just don't make everyone else a sacrifice for your fears and faulty ideas.
                          Um... my country's successful response is making headlines around the world as pretty close to the world's #1 Covid success story. Like most in my country, I have been working from home throughout. Unemployment here went up by less than one percentage point (compare to ~10 in the US). Having eliminated the virus, the government here is now moving to loosen the lockdown and reopen borders with other countries who have likewise successfully eliminated the virus.

                          So actually my "faulty" ideas worked great in practice. Yours however...
                          "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                          "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                          "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
                            It's too early to call who has done well and who has done poorly...

                            Country A: Strict lockdown, 0.05% deaths, 1-5 new cases a day, economy -15%

                            Country B: Loose lockdown, .5% deaths, 20-40 new cases a day, economy -5%
                            I loosely agree with this and your post...

                            However, some countries have wrecked their economies AND had massive death tolls. That's the worst of both worlds. I would say the US is in that category, for example, and suggest that pretty much regardless of your metrics, the US stands out in this as being the worst-handled. We can validly already point to those who have achieved the worst of A and B while achieving the benefits of neither, as the 'failures'

                            The opposite to that is countries that have clearly picked a side (A, or B) and achieved it effectively and efficiently. Examples of that would be New Zealand for A and Sweden for B. I would say we could call these the 'successes', with the caveat that we won't know that for absolutely certain until it's all over.
                            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                              I loosely agree with this and your post...

                              However, some countries have wrecked their economies AND had massive death tolls. That's the worst of both worlds. I would say the US is in that category, for example, and suggest that pretty much regardless of your metrics, the US stands out in this as being the worst-handled. We can validly already point to those who have achieved the worst of A and B while achieving the benefits of neither, as the 'failures'

                              The opposite to that is countries that have clearly picked a side (A, or B) and achieved it effectively and efficiently. Examples of that would be New Zealand for A and Sweden for B. I would say we could call these the 'successes', with the caveat that we won't know that for absolutely certain until it's all over.
                              Yeah, pretty much. The caveat is also that no two countries are alike in this situation, so it's kind of pointless to compare them. I agree with your last sentence, which is why I think the who screaming match over 'you guys have messed this up' is futile and counter-productive. We don't really have any idea who has done the right thing and who hasn't.

                              Personally I'm dubious about elements of New Zealand's approach long-term, but I could be (hopefully) proved wrong. And what NZ can do, being geographically so isolated isn't an option for countries with long land borders and people moving back and forth easily (think much of Asia and Africa).
                              ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                              6 responses
                              45 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                              42 responses
                              231 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                              24 responses
                              104 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Ronson
                              by Ronson
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                              32 responses
                              176 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                              73 responses
                              293 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X