4 ms·

Wow, Tomas Pueyo is a self proclaimed „growth hacker“ with no experience in epidemiology. I would prefer to have people weigh in on the issue that actually have

Wow, Tomas Pueyo is a self proclaimed „growth hacker“ with no experience in epidemiology. I would prefer to have people weigh in on the issue that actually have more than two weeks experience in this. Everyone can have good ideas but giving people like Pueyo a platform for their self marketing must be an insult for all real experts that work on these issues.

guitarbill 7y ago
With statements like "the markets are up", and the hyperbole of "so we're saying 'we want to kill 200,000 people'" and "killing everybody", which even the anchor has to reign him in on, Mr Pueyo seems like such a douchebag. he comes of as incredibly unlikeable (at least to me). especially compared to Mr Edmunds, who goes through how herd immunity is a good end-game in a measured and calm manner. to which he seems to offer no counterpoint. they even both agree on lowering the peak, just not on how to do that/when to do it. edit: it seems reasonable to me to suggest not impose quarantine measures too early, to not drag those measures on for longer than necessary - that just makes it more likely people will disobey it. indeed, because a vaccine is so far off, herd immunity seems like the only plan for now.
- mirekrusin 7y ago
  Funny thing about this is that they don't disagree on herd immunity. They argue over optimal rate and tradeoffs (where/when measures slider should be moved). In this rare case Pueyo credentials don't matter much as he pretty much echoes open letter from scientific community coming from Italy. What is not mentioned is that buying a bit of time also increases a chance for many people to get treatment that is yet to be discovered/approved.
  - guitarbill 7y ago
    absolutely, although it's a balancing act. there's also a mental health component to isolation/quarantine, and how do you measure that? it's a tough and complex call in any case, and i'm glad i don't have to make the call.
idoh 7y ago
It's so crazy seeing him pop up like this. I used to work with Tomas on viral facebook apps like Astrology and Birthday Cards. Obviously working on viral apps is not the same as epidemiology and growth hacking. He was quite a character to work with, and I'm not sure how to put this .. on the one hand his doc seems more or less correct and it's good that he was able to present things in a way that drove action, but on the other hand like you allude to one shouldn't necessarily believe things about epidemiology just because he's saying it.
someperson 7y ago
On Facebook I saw Paul Buchheit sharing Tomas Pueyo's medium post. I was stunned that PB would share models created by someone who clearly has so little knowledge of epidemiology. I was unable to comment and call Paul out on this, due to Paul Buchheit's privacy settings allowing only his Facebook friends to comment, not any arbitrary Facebook followers. It's very frustrating to not have an outlet to comment on and critique what is clear misinformation.

guitarbill 7y ago

With statements like "the markets are up", and the hyperbole of "so we're saying 'we want to kill 200,000 people'" and "killing everybody", which even the anchor has to reign him in on, Mr Pueyo seems like such a douchebag. he comes of as incredibly unlikeable (at least to me). especially compared to Mr Edmunds, who goes through how herd immunity is a good end-game in a measured and calm manner. to which he seems to offer no counterpoint. they even both agree on lowering the peak, just not on how to do that/when to do it. edit: it seems reasonable to me to suggest not impose quarantine measures too early, to not drag those measures on for longer than necessary - that just makes it more likely people will disobey it. indeed, because a vaccine is so far off, herd immunity seems like the only plan for now.

mirekrusin 7y ago
Funny thing about this is that they don't disagree on herd immunity. They argue over optimal rate and tradeoffs (where/when measures slider should be moved). In this rare case Pueyo credentials don't matter much as he pretty much echoes open letter from scientific community coming from Italy. What is not mentioned is that buying a bit of time also increases a chance for many people to get treatment that is yet to be discovered/approved.
- guitarbill 7y ago
  absolutely, although it's a balancing act. there's also a mental health component to isolation/quarantine, and how do you measure that? it's a tough and complex call in any case, and i'm glad i don't have to make the call.

idoh 7y ago

It's so crazy seeing him pop up like this. I used to work with Tomas on viral facebook apps like Astrology and Birthday Cards. Obviously working on viral apps is not the same as epidemiology and growth hacking. He was quite a character to work with, and I'm not sure how to put this .. on the one hand his doc seems more or less correct and it's good that he was able to present things in a way that drove action, but on the other hand like you allude to one shouldn't necessarily believe things about epidemiology just because he's saying it.

someperson 7y ago

On Facebook I saw Paul Buchheit sharing Tomas Pueyo's medium post. I was stunned that PB would share models created by someone who clearly has so little knowledge of epidemiology. I was unable to comment and call Paul out on this, due to Paul Buchheit's privacy settings allowing only his Facebook friends to comment, not any arbitrary Facebook followers. It's very frustrating to not have an outlet to comment on and critique what is clear misinformation.