4 ms·
counter points: Many doctors lack training in epidemiology. Many epidemiologists aren't actual doctors. Healthcare in general is horrible with generating accu
by DyslexicAtheist 7y ago
counter points:
Many doctors lack training in epidemiology. Many epidemiologists aren't actual doctors.
Healthcare in general is horrible with generating accurate raw data (JHU data comes often from scraping websites and the CDC itself has stopped publishing number of daily tests weeks ago). <-- this in fact is a technical problem not a medical one!
You don't have to be a Dr. med in order to see gaps and problems with statistics and a large part of the conjecturing actually comes from gaps and flaws in the sources and the way data is presented. A background in an isolated discipline (only med, only statistics, only Math, etc) is not enough to harness and make sense of complexity.
Finally research papers themselves are all pre-print and not peer-reviewed which is a trade-off in accuracy for speed.
We're all finding solutions as we go and the more eye-balls from different discipline this gets, the better the outcome!
- YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago>> Many doctors lack training in epidemiology. Many epidemiologists aren't actual doctors. Yes, and this is why doctors aren't being asked to do epidemiology and epidemiologists aren't being asked to care for patients. And (likely) sofware engineers are not asked to do either.
- kazagistar 7y agoI would suggest epidemiologists provide some set of problems all this useless but willing pile of software engineers could apply themselves to. For example, scraping data from mismatched data sources or implementing specific hypothetical models. Even if it's only marginally useful, it would give them something to do other then misinformation.