The chart above shows the Imperial estimates of viral reproduction rate for each state, with those under 1 in green and those above 1 in magenta
Daily Mail: Coronavirus is still spreading 'uncontrolled' in 24 US states and death toll will triple in next two months to 288,000, Imperial College London model claims
* Imperial College London statistical model claims to show transmission rates
* Claims that viral reproduction rate, or R0, is greater than 1 in 24 US states
* Predicts that death toll will triple in next two months, to 288,000
* Imperial College previously predicted 2.2 million US deaths in the epidemic
* But came under fire from experts for shoddy code and dubious methods
* Latest model is co-authored by disgraced Professor Neil Ferguson
* Ferguson disregarded lockdown rules he lobbied for to meet his married lover
A new statistical model from Imperial College London has claimed to show that coronavirus continues to spread 'uncontrolled' in 24 U.S. states, and predicts the U.S. death toll will triple in the next two months.
The study published on Thursday, which has not been peer reviewed, uses mobility data and case information to estimate the reproduction rate of the virus, or how many other people are infected by the average case.
A reproduction rate, or R0, of less than 1 indicates that the virus is in decline and will eventually die out. A rate higher than 1 means each case will infect more than one other person on average, and is considered 'uncontrolled'.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The report is here .... Report23:State-leveltrackingofCOVID-19intheUnitedStates (Imperial College London).
More News On Imperial College Of London's Latest Model Predicting The U.S. Death Toll Will Triple In The Next Two Months To 288,000
Study estimates 24 states still have uncontrolled coronavirus spread -- Washington Post
Potential US COVID-19 resurgence modelled as lockdowns ease -- Imperial College London
Nearly half of US states haven't contained their coronavirus outbreaks, a new study finds -- Business Insider
9 comments:
Retailing garbage.
The last Imperial College prediction was garbage. Using the scientific method we found out that why. The people at the Imperial college cannot form effective cross functional groups to write good code.
The code for the models is shit. It might be sugar coated shit, but if you consume their model, you are eating shit and liking it.
"Coding that led to lockdown was 'totally unreliable' and a 'buggy mess', say experts"
www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2020/05/16/coding-led-lockdown-totally-unreliable-buggy-mess-say-experts/
When did the Imperial College become respectable again?
All we need to do is wait for 2-3 months and come back to this article. WNU Editor; please tag for refresh in a few, we may find this accurate or way-off and can comment then. The CDC just changed it’s stance on surfaces and the sun can kill this, I suspect the later will happen and the bug dissipates a bit, to come back later in the fall and winter months.
You are correct Mike, but i would like to point out that the Imperial College fooled us once already. Of course you know the saying "Fool me once,..."
"The code. It isn’t the code Ferguson ran to produce his famous Report 9. What’s been released on GitHub is a heavily modified derivative of it, after having been upgraded for over a month by a team from Microsoft and others. This revised codebase is split into multiple files for legibility and written in C++, whereas the original program was “a single 15,000 line file that had been worked on for a decade” (this is considered extremely poor practice). A request for the original code was made 8 days ago but ignored, and it will probably take some kind of legal compulsion to make them release it. Clearly, Imperial are too embarrassed by the state of it ever to release it of their own free will, which is unacceptable given that it was paid for by the taxpayer and belongs to them."
Why did Fauci go with the model, if he did not review it?
Why can't Fauci delegate someone (a team) to review the model?
Why does Fauci have a job?
In the scientific method you give the formulas you used. You might even give sample calculations. You give the data.
So Ferguson et al will hide the data and the formulas they used? Source code stands in for formulas or calculations.
If they don;t give up the source code then they are hiding stuff. Also it should be given up since it was created with public monies and the public and their representatives have a right to know.
The Queen should go to the Imperial College to kick ass and take names. Better send the queen and not Charles. Charles is worthless. Barring that they should take the 'Imperial' out of the name "Imperial College".
GD Cock up!
OCRUMBOGATE.
Oh look, it is the know-nothing uni slug at 1:43
Another psychological twisto to replace 'ol three dots.
Look Jane. Look look. See see. See twisto type.
Good 'ol 1:43PM. Even the virus rejects him.
OBUNGLERGATE.
Obama is every bit as double dealing and duplicitous as Frankie Del Roosevelt.
"The work begins by describing Burnham's leading Machiavellian, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Before becoming president, FDR preached limited government. The 1932 Democratic Party's Platform demanded cuts in spending and a balanced budget. Burnham calls these words the "formal" meaning. They are deceptive. In reality FDR expanded the power of government. His words masked his true intentions."
Obama left a lot of landmines behind the in the bureaucracy.
I am expecting the next prediction will be 23 billion death, just for the beginning.....
Post a Comment