Back to the model. The model prediction is a bust as it forecasted 100,000 to 200,000 deaths with social distancing. Even if at the end of the day that is the amount of deaths that happens the model failed despite getting it right in the first place. Models having radically different predictions from run to run is not unusual. This is why one should never make policy based on models especially one model as Dr. Fauci appears to have done.
Models are useful tools if you know how to use them. Models have “biases”, simplistically some predict to high, some too low, some are better at short range forecasting, some at long range forecasting etc. The good scientific forecaster looks at all the models and takes into account their biases and reliabilities and combines it with their own expertise of how things work.
I don’t know how many pandemic forecasting models there are or how good they are.
Forecasting this disease has always been fraught. It is new and behaving atypically. Some people have mild presentations for 9 or 10 days then suddenly need a ventilator. Others have described multiple faux recoveries, others diarrhea and nothing else with this so called respiratory disease, others diarrhea before the fevers and shortness of breath. Then there are 50 percent of people who test positive with no symptoms. What is up with that? Sometimes I wonder if this more then one disease. This whole phenomenon is just weird. That is why people having victory dances over their coronavirus is overhyped predictions might be premature, or they may be more right then they know.
_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity
“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman