Lord of Geeks
The immunologist was very much having a dig at Imperial College, who have been trying to say that, because there were not 500,000 deaths, their model was a success.That worked well then, didnt it?
The minister had said that if we come through this crisis with 20,000 deaths or less, that would be an acceptable result! My jaw dropped. That’s not right! It can’t be right.
After some moments the “bolt out the blue” had finally sunk in, so I returned my thoughts to the bulletin and sure enough, shortly afterwards, Professor Powis repeated that 20,000 deaths would be an acceptable result! “Never!” I screamed at the telly!
C’mon folks, who are these people who can treat human life so cheaply! Are they from a different planet? This is not right! One life lost due to Covid-19 is bad enough, but 20,000?
These people cannot properly represent what normal folks want. They don’t seem to value life as any normal person would. I’m utterly appalled that life can be regarded as so meaningless.
A Business Secretary who only seems to deal with figures and money, that’s hardly surprising, but a Chief Medical Officer who has a duty to save lives? This is unforgivable."
SIMILAR to most people recently, I’ve been watching the news daily bulletin at 5pm. Saturday was no different – or was it?www.thenational.scot
Not, our model was wrong and there were not going to be 500,000 deaths.
This is the view of one French scientist, but I have seen many other similar criticisms:
When the novel coronavirus began to circulate globally at the beginning of March, scientists turned to statistical models to predict the severity of the pandemic. The news was stark.