Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Were the U.S. measures effective?
Date:	4/28/2020 9:06:15 AM (updated 4/28/2020 9:19:53 AM)

Recall that we implemented very stringent measures in the U.S. as a result of faulty models that indicated we would overwhelm our hospital system.  We now know how dreadfully wrong these models were but the question for today is whether the measures we took were the reason for the shape and duration of the bell curve.  One way to do this is to compare it to another country that did not implement the extreme measures and simply followed reasonable precautions.  One such example is Sweden.  Now before you get all wrapped up in the actual numbers, they do not matter.  What matters is when the deaths began, when they peaked and the general shape of the curve.  So see below for a side by side comparison of the U.S. and Sweden daily death bell curve.  From my analysis it is obvious that the shapes are very similar and that there is a strong correlation in deaths between extreme, economic crushing measures and more reasonable and realistic ones.  This clearly should not be the case if the measures are the reason for what happened.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Demographics.....
Date:	4/28/2020 11:21:40 AM

I say again.  You cannot compare the US with Sweden in any fashion.  Demographics are too skewed.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Demographics do not matter
Date:	4/28/2020 12:13:41 PM

And I repeat....demographics do not matter in this case.  A virus does not care about demographics.  What matter is behaviors that may promote the spread or dampen it.  Unless you can make the argument that Swedish people and all the immigrants that live there have some magical protection against the Wuhan virus, which is certainly not the case, then demographics are irrelevant.  And I get your reluctance because of the stupid comparisons that are often made vis-a-vis social spending in Scandanavian countries and here in the U.S.  But this comparison has nothing to do with demographics and has everything to do with behaviors.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Demographics do matter
Date:	4/28/2020 12:46:45 PM (updated 4/28/2020 12:59:28 PM)

Not to belabor the point, but I do not think one country can be compared with another, without taking into consideration the makeup of the countries.  Sweden is a very homogeneous society with similar social habits, income, education, etc.  The US is a conglomeration of people from different parts of the world, different social habits, income, education, etc.  In your graphs compare New York State with Idaho.....that’s like comparing Sweden with USA.  Social distancing, closing stores, etc. will have an effect on transmitting disease much more in New York than in Idaho......different world, different people.

Good example:  Compare Republican with Dimokraps....for social distancing, and all the other areas.  That will be a lot like Sweden (Rep) vs USA (dimokraps).

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Those are behaviors, not demographics
Date:	4/28/2020 1:13:24 PM

Demographics are statistics about things like race, age, income levels, number of children, etc. So I don't think you are making the right argument here.

However, if you are making an argument about how they behave versus here in the U.S. and how that makes any comparison invalid then make it as I am all ears.  All I know is that in Sweden they didn't close restaurants, bars or any other businesses.  They did not tell their citizens to shelter in place and so on.  Again, if there is some magic resistance to the Wuhan virus in the citizens of Sweden then tell me what it is.  Be specific as to what it is about the behavior of Swedish people that makes the comparison invalid.  I frankly don't think there is one. 

Or maybe you want me to compare Sweden to some state that behaves the way Swedes do? If so, tell me exactly what specific behavior is specific to the Swedish population that caused their bell curve to match the one in the U.S. without the extreme measures.  Respectfully, I think you've latched onto the demographic thing without really thinking it through with regard to this issue.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Those are behaviors, not demographics
Date:	4/28/2020 1:30:39 PM

Your subject line almost got you there.  Let’s try this one sentence:  Demographics influence the behavior of a society.  Agree?

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Those are behaviors, not demographics
Date:	4/28/2020 2:19:10 PM

Some might and others might not.  Again, if you want to point to specific behaviors by the people of Sweden that caused their curve to match ours despite the disparity in restrictions I am all ears.  What specific demographic aspect of Sweden that makes them behave differently than your average American and makes them less susceptible to getting the virus and dying from it?  Just saying the two countries are demographically different is too broad a brush.  How do their demographics influence their different behavior that makes them less susceptible to the Wuhan virus?  Until you can provide me with some specific differences that can explain this then I remain unconvinced that the comparison is not valid.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Not really satisfying....interesting, not relevant
Date:	4/28/2020 3:48:53 PM

And yet none of these as far as I can tell have anything relevant to say about the fact that their approach was different and yet the curves are similar in shape.  Same question that I posed to Wix, exactly what of these statistics specifically impacts relevant behaviors?  I maintain that the similarity may indicate that the economic harm did little to influence what happened.  This issue is particularly important to me because should the Wuhan virus be different than SARS and reappear in the next flu season we may not have to crush the economy to deal with it.....or maybe we'll get lucky and someone will develop an effective vaccine in record time.  I am not counting on it, but it would be nice.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Not really satisfying....interesting, not relevant
Date:	4/28/2020 5:44:27 PM

Goof found some really good info on the comparison chart he posted....thanks Goof.  Look at the stats and you will see some areas with great differences between the societies.  Sweden has a predictable society while the USA is a mess from a societial standpoint.  It appears that I can't convince you that Sweden ain't America, so go stand in the South ATL ghetto at 1:00 AM, then see if you can go stand on a street corner in Stockholm at 1:00 AM.....if that won't convince you, nothing will.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Were the U.S. measures effective?
Date:	4/28/2020 7:31:45 PM

The models were not wrong - in the beginning, they were populated with worst case assumptions, but the models got much better as they were able to populate with actual data.  MM, you keep saying that the models were wrong - but models are only as good as the information you can put in - they show trends, and potential outcomes, given a set of data.  They are not infallible, but they can be a useful tool. 

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	Key word....Goof-KRAP
Date:	4/28/2020 9:37:58 PM

The key phrase here Goof is Mental Disorder.  You instantly identified the idiots as dimokraps.  End of BS story.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	SWEDEN VS USA and 19
Date:	4/28/2020 11:02:23 PM

Anders Tegnell, chief epidemiologist at Sweden’s Public Health Agency (USATODAY) What’s your take on the US strategy?

Tegnell: I don’t know it well enough but it still seems to me that the Americans let coronavirus go too far before any real strategy came into place. One of the real big problems in the beginning was the lack of testing. I’m also not really sure how well the U.S. health system can change as dramatically as we in Sweden have been able to, for example. We have almost double the intensive care capacity that we had a couple of weeks ago. Being centrally organized and steered (as part of a state-funded system) allows for greater flexibility in changing the health system. I’m not sure how well that can be done in the U.S. with all the private actors and insurance firms. It may make it more difficult to handle this kind of situation.

Here are 2 charts....first compares Sweden and other Nordic countries with similar demographics but different behavior towards 19. The other shows deaths per million population for Sweden and USA.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Not really satisfying....interesting, not relevant
Date:	4/29/2020 8:17:01 AM

Go stand on a streetcorner in Rinkeby at 1 am and tell me its any different than South Atlanta...except in South Atlanta you can get the police.....they won't go into Rinkeby.

But you are completely ignoring my point and my challenge.  I never said the two countries are the same demographically.  They are clearly not as all countries have unique demographics.  There are always many similarities and many differences.  None of that matters. 

What matters is behaviors that increase or decrease the risk of contracting virus.  And I have repeatedly asked you for examples of the behavior of Swedes that is so different from Americans that they are naturally not going to get the virus.  And you never answer that question.  I'm sorry to be so insistent on this but my question is rational and logical and if you can answer it I will happily admit that the correlation between the two curves is meaningless.  

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	You do not understand models
Date:	4/29/2020 8:35:31 AM

They were indeed wrong and anyone who thinks otherwise does not understand models.  We use simple and complex models in our business and the goal of all of them is to be predictive of the future.  The only purpose of a model is to provide a projection of what will happen in a week, month or year and decisions are made today based on what the model says will happen down the road.  That is their sole purpose.  When a model says X will happen and it doesn't, the model is wrong.  There is no other option....right or wrong.

Models are mathematical algorithms that include a variety of input parameters used to populate the model so it can provide a predictive result.  Some input parameters are based on historical data and other input parameters are not based on data, they are based on assumptions because no data exists.

The question is why was the model wrong.  There are many possible explanations or combinations of explanations.  First, the model may not be properly designed to meet the predictive needs.  Second, the data used to construct the model was flawed in some way (i.e., the early data doesn't represent future data for some reason). Third, the assumptions made when data doesn't exist were wrong.  In the case of climate models they have been wrong because of all three reasons.  In the case of the Wuhan virus models I really don't know what went wrong.  But what I do know from our use of models is that as new data becomes available you do what is called recalibration.  That means you modify the input parameters using either new data or different assumptions and then you run it and the prediction is compared to actual results as they come in.  Rinse and repeat.  So what you see is that as time goes on the model becomes more accurate in predicting the future.  But that really defeats the puprose in the short term, right?  A model that consistently fails to predict the future and has to be constantly recalibrated is basically worthless in informing decision makers.

Sorry for the scientific lecture but it if you don't use models every day like we do you will not have the background to understand how they are supposed to work.  So the fact is the models were wrong because they failed to even remotely accurately predict the future.  

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Interesting comment, but obviously wrong
Date:	4/29/2020 8:45:41 AM

I find it interesting that this guy criticizes the response in the U.S. and yet our deaths per 1 million population is less than theirs. Not significantly less but still less.  Sweden as of this morning has 244 deaths per 1 million and the U.S. is at 179.  Now maybe the death rate difference, which isn't huge, is due to some other factor rather than the quality of our healthcare system compared to theirs.  But one would think if theirs was so exceptional and ours so defective they would be crushing us in reducing deaths. 

So his criticism of our healthcare system seems to ring hollow doesn't it?  

Name:	lakngulf -	Reply
Subject:	You do not understand models
Date:	4/29/2020 8:45:53 AM

I think the early data was a significant reliance on Italy experience.  Any reliance on China cases was ready skewed.  Italy experience was so different.....higher percent elderly,  close ties with China manufacturing,  did not shut down travel from China.  I have even heard that Chinese workers are flown in daily, so new germs daily.

Dr Birx mentioned Italy much and often early on.

Dr Fauci has never liked models, only used them to his advantage, then criticized when wrong.  He still wanted more shut down!

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	All probably true
Date:	4/29/2020 9:08:40 AM

I really don't know that much about these models other than they were wildly wrong and kept having to be recalibrated to match the data as it became available.  But there is no doubt, the extreme economy crushing measures we and many other countries took were based on the projections in the College of London model results early on.  They were wrong, orders of magnitude wrong.

As for Facui, I have lost all confidence in him and Birx. They have been wrong so often and their sole motivation is to not get blamed for even one Wuhan virus death.  They frankly could care less about all the other ramifications of their advice.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	You do not understand models
Date:	4/29/2020 12:34:14 PM

I understand models perfectly fine.  They are only as good as the data that goes into them.  In the begining, there wasn't enough high quality data.  Now there is so they are more accurate.  I think your ongoing insistence that the models were wrong is the weakest part of your arguments.  Accusing me of not understanding models, because it doesn't support your theory is ludicrious.  

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Birx and Fauci
Date:	4/29/2020 12:41:21 PM

Birx ad Fauci are walking a tightrope between what Trump wishes were true, and what the science says.  Frankly, MM, you don't seem to have confidence in anyone that doesn't agree with your perspective.  Both are well respected in international medical community, so while they may not get it right every time, they are still doing a service to this country.  You have no idea what kind of pressure and what kinds of data are being suppressed by Trump - not saying that he is, but it's likely.  

Now that Georgia has thrown it's doors wide open, we'll get to see, first hand, exactly how right or wrong they are in real time.  By July, we'll know a lot. 

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	You do not understand models
Date:	4/29/2020 12:55:32 PM

Your response actually proves my point.  It's not just the data.  It's how the model is constructed mathematically.  And it is all the assumptions that go into the models because of the absence of data for every model variable. You really don't understand models if you think that all that matters is the data.  Data is historical by its every nature.  If you have to repair a model with new data because the predictive output doesn't match what actually happened then the model is useless.

As for saying the models are wrong is a weak argument, that is a logical fallacy.  Saying something that is objectively true is not argument...it is fact.  Hound, the models were wrong.  You have the right to your own opinion but not to the facts.  And wrong is a fact.  If they were right we would have already had over 1 million people dead from the virus.  We haven't even hit 60K and are on the downward side of the curve.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Birx and Fauci
Date:	4/29/2020 1:55:04 PM (updated 4/29/2020 1:57:11 PM)

Two thoughts.  First, I had a lot of confidence in both of them initially but have lost some of that given how often they have changed their opinions and advice.  No face masks, use face masks, 2 million dead, 250,000 dead, 60,000 dead and on and on. So it doesn't ahve anything to do with not trusting anyone that doesn't agree with me.  It's about whether they are right or wrong in their prognostications.  And there are quite a number of prominent, eminently qualified health experts that have disagreed with them.  When you combine their errors and alternative views that better fit reality then I am going to lose confidence.  It has nothing to do with whether I agree with them or not.

And just to clarify since it appears you get your information from the media, Georgia has not opened their doors wide open.  The state has taken some steps to relax the restrictions and businesses that do reopen will be required to follow CDC guidelines on social distancing, etc.  If they can't do that then they will likely not reopen.  No one is forcing them to.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Georgia
Date:	4/29/2020 6:26:28 PM

And how many weeks do you think businesses will be following the guidance, and who is checking to make sure they do?  Let's face it, it is a pain in the a$$ to have to santitize everything all day long.  In the beginning, I noticed that grocery stores that I shopped in, were santizing the belts between customers.  I havent seen that in weeks.  People are basically lazy.  

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	You do not understand models
Date:	4/29/2020 6:32:06 PM

Yes, I agree they were wrong in the beginning.  But as time has gone on, they have become more accurate.  But we heard NY Coumo swearing he would need 60,000 ventilators and he was wrong.  

I don't understand why you don't seem to undertand that things change over time and with more experience.  We have a virus that we haven't seen before.  They had no idea what it would do.  Now they think they do.  Will it change again?  Likely.  

It's not the be all and end all.  It's just one tool in trying to figure out what to expect.  But it is not the only tool.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Georgia
Date:	4/30/2020 8:23:17 AM

Well I have way more faith in the average American than you do.  I would assume that if this is something that concerns you and an establishment isn't following the guidelines you will go elsewhere.  I have to say I find your generalization of average Americans as lazy more than a little offensive and elitist.  And I also believe that many businesses are very concerned about litigation and will be prudent and follow the guidelines as we are doing.  If they don't and people are concerned the markets will punish them.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Sigh......
Date:	4/30/2020 8:31:05 AM (updated 4/30/2020 9:44:39 AM)

Here's the reason and I can't believe I have to explain this to you.  They essentially shut down the economy and caused over 30 million people to lose their jobs based on these faulty models!!!  I know you aren't one of them and neither am I.  But I am deeply concerned for these people because I have compassion.  I am also deeply concerned about the trillions in new debt.  I am deeply concerned about the economic toll on our health care system that was essentially shut down in anticipation of millions of virus sufferers that never happened.  All because they believed the stupid, failed, wrong models.

And yes, over time the models get more accurate as I already pointed out.  But that really doesn't help things does it?  The damage of believing these models were accurate has already been done hasn't it?  You have once again demonstrated you do not understand models and that their sole and exclusive use is to attempt to predict what will happen in the future so the right decisions can be made today. 

They failed and we are paying the price and will continue to pay the price for decades to come.  I actually care about that.