3 ms·
> Decay seems to be very slow even in the jurisdictions with the strictest controls. (I do think the hardest hit jurisdictions may show something close to symme
by rallison 6y ago
> Decay seems to be very slow even in the jurisdictions with the strictest controls. (I do think the hardest hit jurisdictions may show something close to symmetry).
Agreed. Watching the graphs for Italy made this exceptionally clear. It's been a month since their peak in new infections, and they're just now hitting the 50% of peak level for new infections. And that's with a very strong stay-at-home order.
> IMHE has entered the re-opening fray, and is setting target dates based on when they think we'll be down to fewer than 1 infection per million. It seems that it's driving public policy, and it's kinda ridiculous.
Re IMHE, hopefully policymakers will listen to IHME themselves:
> We strongly believe decision-makers should draw on a variety of #COVID19 models.
https://twitter.com/IHME_UW/status/1255294109503406080 https://twitter.com/IHME_UW/status/1255294109503406080
- rallison 6y agoEdit: more Carl Bergstrom commentary on IHME: > (That's not to let IHME off the hook; once they started promoting the ability for their model to do anything else, they became responsible for its predictions at other stages of the pandemic.) https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1255350829382602754 https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1255350829382602754 Also, the model he references in the thread - https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1255343846445195266 https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1255343846445195266 - seems a lot more plausible for predicting the down-slope.