3 ms·

Bill Gates on the Imperial Study... "Fortunately it appears the parameters used in that model were too negative. The experience in China is the most critical d

Bill Gates on the Imperial Study... "Fortunately it appears the parameters used in that model were too negative. The experience in China is the most critical data we have. They did their “shut down” and were able to reduce the number of cases. They are testing widely so they see rebounds immediately and so far there have not been a lot. They avoided widespread infection. The Imperial model does not match this experience. Models are only as good as the assumptions put into them. People are working on models that match what we are seeing more closely and they will become a key tool. A group called Institute for Disease Modeling that I fund is one of the groups working with others on this."

ejstronge 7y ago
In a way, it sounds like Gates is saying that a widespread societal lockdown is a wise move, which is what any reader of the Imperial study would conclude. Unfortunately, it seems that such a move was not politically palatable until the study's release.
- ccktlmazeltov 7y ago
  The other thing is that panic is bad, panic leads to much much worse outcomes. I've read the report, and I have access to non-disclosed orders, one of the major point is: do not spread too much information for risk of panics. So we're all discussing this, and if you've read the report you already know more than most people, and we know that the truth is in the middle. But what we should really think about as clever individuals is that whatever is going to happen this year, and however long the lockdowns are going to be: it has to happen in order.
  - jacob019 7y ago
    Why do people keep saying that panic is bad? Sometimes panic is the appropriate action and is necessary to motivate us to take extreme life saving action.
    - ccktlmazeltov 7y ago
      We are going to see the US expand the mandatory lockdown to the whole country soon. I don't think panic is going to help much.
      - wahern 7y ago
        The federal government doesn't have the authority to lockdown the whole country, only the national and state borders. To lockdown the whole country all 50 states would need to individually issue orders, which is unlikely. I suspect the governors of some rural states are likely to issue weaker social distancing orders, minimizing the economic impact but still benefiting from national economic relief legislation the same as states more severely effected.
        int_19h 7y ago
        The federal government might just get such authority from Congress, if things keep going the way they are. There would certainly be a lawsuit claiming that it's unconstitutional. It might even win... eventually. You know, back when SCOTUS is in proper session, and it's all kinda moot.
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - root_axis 7y ago
        You implore people not to encourage panic in one breath then make the absurd suggestion that the US is going to impose "mandatory lockdown to the whole country soon".
    - carapace 7y ago
      "When in trouble, or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout."
    - MaulingMonkey 7y ago
      It's partly in the very definition of the word. > panic: sudden uncontrollable fear or anxiety, often causing wildly unthinking behavior. When fear runs wild and uncontrolled, it can paralyze us into inaction, or worse yet, motivate us unthinkingly towards action that may end more lives than even inaction would. Or to put it another way - panic is a great way to waste a bunch of perfectly good fear. Fear should be properly harnessed, controlled, and guided through proper thinking and wisdom - then we can maximize our chances of it motivating us to take those extreme, life saving actions you alude to. Stress - as caused by fear - can shorten your lifespan and reduce it's quality as well. When possible, one should guide ones fears towards reasonable risks you can do something about - where the costs might be worth it - and away from the irrational or unactionable - where they are not.
Karunamon 7y ago
At the risk of beating a dead horse, are the numbers coming out of China trustworthy? We know for a fact there were some early suppression of the outbreak, so it wouldn't be too much to speculate that they're under-reporting new cases and/or over-reporting recoveries. Even if so, there's the problem that totalitarian, high-control societies like China have tools to deal with these kinds of problems that other societies do not.. to put it lightly.
- kart23 7y ago
  The fact that we know there was suppression means they aren't very good at it.
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  The generally seem to be, especially corroberated by other experience: - HK, SG, KR, and JP have similar trends. - No "patriotic virus" -- infecting Chinese only after leaving China. - Limited spread / impacts outside Hubei. - Lifting quarantine. Testing numbers are all but certainly low, but given shitshows elsewhere (IT, US, PH, DE, ES, likely IN and others), due to logistics and limitations. Comprehensive population antibody testing should be interesting.
- tanilama 7y ago
  Cases in Hubei is likely under reported, but this is probably more attributed to early test kit shortages and the fact to ramp up test requires time, etc. We have see the same thing in Italy and other European countries as well, the capacity is limited and testing itself is biased not aiming for coverage. But what China's data can tell, is that there is a strategy out there to contain the virus, if implemented. And it takes about 2 months of total lockdown. It is probably the most effective containment in human history, but with a cost. So the exact number of China's data isn't going to be meaningful to others, but the actions taken have implications and we should follow.
hnburnsy 7y ago
Link... 31 questions and answers about COVID-19 https://www.gatesnotes.com/Health/A-coronavirus-AMA https://www.gatesnotes.com/Health/A-coronavirus-AMA

ejstronge 7y ago

In a way, it sounds like Gates is saying that a widespread societal lockdown is a wise move, which is what any reader of the Imperial study would conclude. Unfortunately, it seems that such a move was not politically palatable until the study's release.

ccktlmazeltov 7y ago
The other thing is that panic is bad, panic leads to much much worse outcomes. I've read the report, and I have access to non-disclosed orders, one of the major point is: do not spread too much information for risk of panics. So we're all discussing this, and if you've read the report you already know more than most people, and we know that the truth is in the middle. But what we should really think about as clever individuals is that whatever is going to happen this year, and however long the lockdowns are going to be: it has to happen in order.
- jacob019 7y ago
  Why do people keep saying that panic is bad? Sometimes panic is the appropriate action and is necessary to motivate us to take extreme life saving action.
  - ccktlmazeltov 7y ago
    We are going to see the US expand the mandatory lockdown to the whole country soon. I don't think panic is going to help much.
    - wahern 7y ago
      The federal government doesn't have the authority to lockdown the whole country, only the national and state borders. To lockdown the whole country all 50 states would need to individually issue orders, which is unlikely. I suspect the governors of some rural states are likely to issue weaker social distancing orders, minimizing the economic impact but still benefiting from national economic relief legislation the same as states more severely effected.
      - int_19h 7y ago
        The federal government might just get such authority from Congress, if things keep going the way they are. There would certainly be a lawsuit claiming that it's unconstitutional. It might even win... eventually. You know, back when SCOTUS is in proper session, and it's all kinda moot.
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - root_axis 7y ago
      You implore people not to encourage panic in one breath then make the absurd suggestion that the US is going to impose "mandatory lockdown to the whole country soon".
  - carapace 7y ago
    "When in trouble, or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout."
  - MaulingMonkey 7y ago
    It's partly in the very definition of the word. > panic: sudden uncontrollable fear or anxiety, often causing wildly unthinking behavior. When fear runs wild and uncontrolled, it can paralyze us into inaction, or worse yet, motivate us unthinkingly towards action that may end more lives than even inaction would. Or to put it another way - panic is a great way to waste a bunch of perfectly good fear. Fear should be properly harnessed, controlled, and guided through proper thinking and wisdom - then we can maximize our chances of it motivating us to take those extreme, life saving actions you alude to. Stress - as caused by fear - can shorten your lifespan and reduce it's quality as well. When possible, one should guide ones fears towards reasonable risks you can do something about - where the costs might be worth it - and away from the irrational or unactionable - where they are not.

Karunamon 7y ago

At the risk of beating a dead horse, are the numbers coming out of China trustworthy? We know for a fact there were some early suppression of the outbreak, so it wouldn't be too much to speculate that they're under-reporting new cases and/or over-reporting recoveries. Even if so, there's the problem that totalitarian, high-control societies like China have tools to deal with these kinds of problems that other societies do not.. to put it lightly.

kart23 7y ago
The fact that we know there was suppression means they aren't very good at it.
dredmorbius 7y ago
The generally seem to be, especially corroberated by other experience: - HK, SG, KR, and JP have similar trends. - No "patriotic virus" -- infecting Chinese only after leaving China. - Limited spread / impacts outside Hubei. - Lifting quarantine. Testing numbers are all but certainly low, but given shitshows elsewhere (IT, US, PH, DE, ES, likely IN and others), due to logistics and limitations. Comprehensive population antibody testing should be interesting.
tanilama 7y ago
Cases in Hubei is likely under reported, but this is probably more attributed to early test kit shortages and the fact to ramp up test requires time, etc. We have see the same thing in Italy and other European countries as well, the capacity is limited and testing itself is biased not aiming for coverage. But what China's data can tell, is that there is a strategy out there to contain the virus, if implemented. And it takes about 2 months of total lockdown. It is probably the most effective containment in human history, but with a cost. So the exact number of China's data isn't going to be meaningful to others, but the actions taken have implications and we should follow.

hnburnsy 7y ago

Link... 31 questions and answers about COVID-19 https://www.gatesnotes.com/Health/A-coronavirus-AMA https://www.gatesnotes.com/Health/A-coronavirus-AMA