undefined | Better HN

0 pointsnot_a_moth5y ago0 comments

Been following the guy from the Big Short, Michael Burry, who has been going deep in the data and models, and trying to raise awareness.

He tweeted today how Fauci and the mainstream media glossed over how the models already took into account the interventions:

https://twitter.com/michaeljburry/status/1248244146571116545

0 comments

mattkrause5y ago

I can't find anything concrete there, but "already took into account" is a bit weaselly.

There had to be tons of uncertainty in a) how well people comply with the guidelines and b) how effective that compliance is. It certainly doesn't seem crazy to me more data would lead to revised values for those factors.

They could be more effective than originally expected. It could also just narrow the prediction interval--I'd bet that a lot of the "millions dead" stuff is reporting the high end, rather than the most likely outcome.

not_a_mothOP5y ago

Yes, it seems it could either be "measures are more effective than thought" or "disease is not as severe as thought", or both.

Fwiw Michael Burry, someone who has earned the right to be listened to in the face of collective thinking, is strongly arguing for the "disease is not as severe as thought".

mattkrause5y ago

You might also be interested in this thread from Andy Slavitt, who ran CMS during the Obama administration.

https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/1248362891201392640

He makes the point that a) the new model has some optimistic assumptions, like no interstate travel and b) due to the exponential growth, a small uncertainty in R0 leads to wildly variable outcomes.

I guess I am uneasy with the "disease is not as severe" hypothesis because it's essentially unknowable. There's no objective measure of severity: it depends on knowing how to treat/prevent the disease and whether the necessary resources are available to do so.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

mattkrause5y ago

I can't find anything concrete there, but "already took into account" is a bit weaselly.

not_a_mothOP5y ago

Yes, it seems it could either be "measures are more effective than thought" or "disease is not as severe as thought", or both.

Fwiw Michael Burry, someone who has earned the right to be listened to in the face of collective thinking, is strongly arguing for the "disease is not as severe as thought".

mattkrause5y ago

You might also be interested in this thread from Andy Slavitt, who ran CMS during the Obama administration.

https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/1248362891201392640

He makes the point that a) the new model has some optimistic assumptions, like no interstate travel and b) due to the exponential growth, a small uncertainty in R0 leads to wildly variable outcomes.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse