An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
1–10 of 182 posts
Re: An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
#2>We project a true count of over 500,000 infections, including more than 5,000 severe cases, and a breakdown in provision of care (“overshoot”) in Nagoya, Osaka, and Tokyo, before the end of April.
The current count is ~21,000 with the number of confirmed daily cases declining for 6 days straight, from 741 to 338 yesterday. So... not only wrong on the numbers themselves, but also on the scale, trajectory and impact on society.
Japan's response seems commensurate with the problem, and this reads to me like an excessively verbose illustration of how one can spin even pre-registered falsifiable claims whichever way you want regardless of outcome. 'See? We were mostly right'.
Maybe that's too harsh.
Re: An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
#3Oh my. The Japanese government should feel ashamed to have hidden all of this from the public (edit: I mean the real data and the real gravity of the situation, of course). I, for one, fled the US to come to Japan for a few weeks because I mostly believed these numbers.
I hate this. I really hate that politicians (all over the world, in this specific case in Japan) can afford to treat us like this, and usually not face any significant consequence.
Re: An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
#4>We project a true count of over 500,000 infections, including more than 5,000 severe cases, and a breakdown in provision of care (“overshoot”) in Nagoya, Osaka, and Tokyo, before the end of April. The current count is ~21,000 with the number of confirmed daily cases declining for 6 days straight, from 741 to 338 yesterday. So... not only wrong on the numbers themselves, but also on the scale, trajectory and impact o…
Yeah, I'm withholding judgement till "the end of April", but given Japan's doubling time is roughly 10 days, you'd expect there to be ~2.5k severe cases right now. Given that Japan's official count is ~11k, is there reason to believe 1/4 of all official cases are "severe"?
Does anyone have up-to-date data on "excess deaths" in Japan for the past few months?
Re: An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
#5Oh my. The Japanese government should feel ashamed to have hidden all of this from the public (edit: I mean the real data and the real gravity of the situation, of course). I, for one, fled the US to come to Japan for a few weeks because I mostly believed these numbers. I hate this. I really hate that politicians (all over the world, in this specific case in Japan) can afford to treat us like this, and usually not fa…
>I, for one, fled the US to come to Japan for a few weeks because I mostly believed these numbers.
SARS-CoV-2 thanks you for your efforts to help it find new populations to replicate in.
Re: An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
#6I usually like patio11's writing style, but this is super verbose even by his standards and oddly evasive/defensive to boot. There's a number of important messages here, but they make up perhaps 10% of the content, and I still don't really fully understand the rationale behind the cloak and dagger "hash of report" business.
Re: An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
#7>We project a true count of over 500,000 infections, including more than 5,000 severe cases, and a breakdown in provision of care (“overshoot”) in Nagoya, Osaka, and Tokyo, before the end of April. The current count is ~21,000 with the number of confirmed daily cases declining for 6 days straight, from 741 to 338 yesterday. So... not only wrong on the numbers themselves, but also on the scale, trajectory and impact o…
Maybe I read that wrong, but wasn't the point that Japan wasn't acting appropriately, and that white paper, along with other research, forced (for lack of a better word) them to own up to the scale of what they were seeing?
Isn't the point that, while the particulars were proved false, the overall thrust of the article that Japan was stalling action which MAY lead to those numbers was true?
Did I miss the point of this entirely?
Re: An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
#8I found the post to be lengthy, lacking focus and specificity. More compelling case could be made in a fraction of its length. Hardly worth reading.
The tedious timeline, tweeting hashes as if that meant anything other than: "do you see how I was right all along".
The whole concept of tweeting a hash of a whitepaper as form of endorsing it is kind of absurd.
Re: An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
#9I found the post to be lengthy, lacking focus and specificity. More compelling case could be made in a fraction of its length. Hardly worth reading. The tedious timeline, tweeting hashes as if that meant anything other than: "do you see how I was right all along". The whole concept of tweeting a hash of a whitepaper as form of endorsing it is kind of absurd.
I don't think the set of people whose opinions patio11 cares about would forget about him tweeting that hash (especially given the emphasis he placed on it).
The hash concept depends on social norms, and it's a fairly strongly enforced in his corner of the internet.
Re: An update on a pre-registered result about the coronavirus
#10>We project a true count of over 500,000 infections, including more than 5,000 severe cases, and a breakdown in provision of care (“overshoot”) in Nagoya, Osaka, and Tokyo, before the end of April. The current count is ~21,000 with the number of confirmed daily cases declining for 6 days straight, from 741 to 338 yesterday. So... not only wrong on the numbers themselves, but also on the scale, trajectory and impact o…
Maybe I read that wrong, but wasn't the point that Japan wasn't acting appropriately, and that white paper, along with other research, forced (for lack of a better word) them to own up to the scale of what they were seeing? Isn't the point that, while the particulars were proved false, the overall thrust of the article that Japan was stalling action which MAY lead to those numbers was true? Did I miss the point of th…
Honestly, who has 1-1.5h to read this without skimming through most of the verbiage to tease out the point? I read the "pre-registered" part. It was wrong on a bunch of points, both numbers and impact. I strongly doubt a major world economy of 126 million people with many world-class epidemiologists and doctors and generally non-disastrous political leadership was 'forced' into anything by this.
The hubris of this guy is quite off-putting.