COVID-19 Health System Overload Forecaster

Scomo : " Pollies & Health Ministers don't need to be told on how to apply sunscreen!"
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/politics/2020/11/28/scott-morrison-daggy...
https://www.facebook.com/7NEWSGoldCoast/videos/health-minister-greg-hunt...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-2456817/Video-Bizarre-momen...

Scomo : "Cops aren't gonna hand out Fines to Oz Leaders, just for refusing to wear Sunscreen."
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/i-am-not-going-to-waste-police-time-...
https://www.smh.com.au/national/barnaby-joyce-fined-for-not-wearing-a-ma...
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/premier-slapped-with-400-in-...

Scomo : "SLSA Patron & his nipperette will give you all a demo on how to apply Sunscreen.!"
https://www.ladbible.com/news/latest-scott-morrison-slammed-for-not-wear...
https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/coronavirus/gladys-berejiklian...

Govt instructs cops to stop & fine unmasked Pollies...they care least about unvaxed townsfolk.
World wide Vax Experts now claim Masks are bigger than the immaculate Baby Jesus Xmas Beatles.

Vax is essentially 1/2/3/4 dose Sunscreen applied each 12/11/10/9/8/7/6/5/4/3/2/1 month/week > daily!
Vax Queues are growing by the day/week/month 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10/11/12 book again next year!
Covid Test is now The Omicron 5 day Test Series with o/n Captain's queue jump + 2 day exempt iso'

Mass Vax = Record Covid > Oz / NSW / Qld / SA
Kicks in with Oz 2nd Dose + Waves + Boosters orchestrate exact same infectious Covid Chorus.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-02/charting-australias-covid-vaccine...
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/australia/

July 2020 "250,000 smash thru Qld Police State"
Dec 2021 "250,000 VIPs invited to hunt down hesitants in new Qld Game Park"

Emergency Mass Vax Plan > Phase 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9/10/11/12 Tomorrow or sooner ... All Hail Vax! Sir!

PS : NZ Boost their Bubble after 4 months of Record Covid ...Daggy Dad does wot Bully Jacinda says!

Supafreak wrote:

gsco wrote:

That doctor in the youtube video, on his google scholar page I count that he has 67 publications in 2021. That's more than 1 per wk. That's not humanly possible. It's not even humanly possible for someone to be even peripherally involved in 67 papers per year. There's something very wrong going on there.

At 250k cases per day, the Doherty Institute appears to have mistakenly added an extra 0 to Australia's population... The US's highest daily case number so far was about 300k.

Actually there seems to be a conflict of interest here. The Doherty Institute makes a significant amount of money from research grants, particularly for infectious disease modelling. So it seems not in their interest to publish research saying something along the lines of "covid isn't a problem, don't worry about it, we can put it behind us, you don't need to keep paying us millions of dollars per year in research grants to keep doing covid modelling and research..."

The whole system seems cooked.

@gsco , there’s plenty of information about the said doctor. https://profiles.ucsf.edu/vinayak.prasad. http://www.vinayakkprasad.com/news. Blindboy has outed him as just another you tube grifter.

Talk about prolific! He's a co-author on two papers published next year!

https://www.science.org/content/article/some-scientists-publish-more-70-...

gsco the 250 000 cases a day is unlikely. It is a worst case scenario. Modelling usually includes such scenarios for an obvious reason: sometimes they happen. In terms of the US peak, that was last winter, with the higher infection rate of omicron and its capacity for breakthrough infections I am pretty sure worst case scenarios for the US would exceed last year's infection rate. For the moment we just need to hope that there are no unpleasant surprises to come in terms of the seriousness of the disease omicron causes.

@johknee , interesting link , thanks

Here’s an article on that doctor , he appears to have as many likes as dislikes. He certainly doesn’t seem like a grifter though , definitely likes to stir the pot . https://www.statnews.com/2017/09/15/vinay-prasad-profile/

Supafreak wrote:

Here’s an article on that doctor , he appears to have as many likes as dislikes. He certainly doesn’t seem like a grifter though , definitely likes to stir the pot . https://www.statnews.com/2017/09/15/vinay-prasad-profile/

Yeah, it seems that way. From memory, some of his papers are antagonistic. Not a bad thing!

blindboy wrote:

I am sticking by what I said supa, I cannot see anything in that video that suggests the data. was available on Dec 10. He implies that because the data collection ended on the 9th she must have been aware of it on the 10th which makes no sense. Data does not get processed and travel up organisational hierarchies instantaneously. It needs to be analysed carefully beforehand. No-one is going to approve it going up the line until they are sure they have checked it.

He then goes on, without evidence to state that she is lying. In order to prove that her would have to have evidence that she knew the contents of the report on the 10th. If he has that evidence it is not in his video. A reasonable accusation might be that others in the organisation were aware of the data and knew it was valid but failed to make her aware of it. But old mate in the video is just another pandemic profiteer making a buck by spreading bullshit. Sounds a bit familiar.

He showed evidence CDC had the data 9 Dec. Then on 10 Dec the CDC director liberally used "we" language (not "I") to dispel safety concerns based on the data available to...CDC ("We haven't seen anything yet"). I reckon its a bit generous suggesting she could not be expected to speak on behalf of the entire organisation (as the director no less) in that moment and similarly disingenuous to say the doc's subsequent complaint was unsupported by evidence.

But suppose you are correct and we give Ms Walensky the benefit of the doubt, was there an acknowledgement, apology or retraction by the CDC and/or ABC for the prior misrepresentation? That would surely go a long way to restore public faith in future claims.

Given the article is still up there it appears not: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/cdc-director-rochelle-walensky-concerns-my...

Never go full retard

The computers desperately needed their third booster shot!!!!!!!!!

“Until the 1990s many computer programs (especially those written in the early days of computers) were designed to abbreviate four-digit years as two digits in order to save memory space. These computers could recognize “98” as “1998” but would be unable to recognize “00” as “2000,” perhaps interpreting it to mean 1900. Many feared that when the clocks struck midnight on January 1, 2000, many affected computers would be using an incorrect date and thus fail to operate properly unless the computers’ software was repaired or replaced before that date.

It was feared that such a misreading would lead to software and hardware failures in computers used in such important areas as banking, utilities systems, government records, and so on, with the potential for widespread chaos on and following January 1, 2000. Mainframe computers, including those typically used to run insurance companies and banks, were thought to be subject to the most serious Y2K problems, but even newer systems that used networks of desktop computers were considered vulnerable.

The Y2K problem was not limited to computers running conventional software, however. Many devices containing computer chips, ranging from elevators to temperature-control systems in commercial buildings to medical equipment, were believed to be at risk, which necessitated the checking of these “embedded systems” for sensitivity to calendar dates.

In the United States, business and government technology teams worked feverishly with a goal of checking systems and fixing software before the end of December 1999. Although some industries were well on the way to solving the Y2K problem, most experts feared that the federal government and state and local governments were lagging behind. A Y2K preparedness survey commissioned in late 1998 by Cap Gemini America, a New York computer industry consulting firm, showed that among 13 economic sectors studied in the United States, government was the least ready for Y2K. (Rated highest for preparedness was the software industry.)

In an effort to encourage companies to share critical information about Y2K, U.S. Pres. Bill Clinton in October 1998 signed the Year 2000 Information and Readiness Disclosure Act. The law was designed to encourage American companies to share Y2K data by offering them limited liability protection for sharing information about Y2K products, methods, and best practices.

In western Europe the European Commission issued a report warning that efforts to solve Y2K in many European Union member countries were insufficient, particularly in terms of the cross-border cooperation needed to be ready by 2000. The British government announced that its armed forces would be prepared in time and would provide assistance to local police if utilities, transportation systems, or emergency services failed.

Many other countries, notably Asian countries suffering at that time from an ongoing economic crisis as well as small or geographically isolated countries, were thought to be less well prepared. It was uncertain how this would affect the tightly integrated world economy and physical infrastructure. In mid-December 1998 the UN convened its first international conference on Y2K in an attempt to share information and crisis-management efforts and established the International Y2K Cooperation Center, based in Washington, D.C.

An estimated $300 billion was spent (almost half in the United States) to upgrade computers and application programs to be Y2K-compliant. As the first day of January 2000 dawned and it became apparent that computerized systems were intact, reports of relief filled the news media. These were followed by accusations that the likely incidence of failure had been greatly exaggerated from the beginning“

So have you had your booster yet Blowie?

rj the data included Dec 9, presumably until midnight. It came from all states. Do you really think it was collated analysed and ready to be presented to the director within.a few hours?

sypkan wrote:

can it really be that cooked?

some of the 'mistakes' from various institutions and interests throughout this pandemic seem so monumental in their stupidity, one cannot imagine a professional person or body possibly overlooking them...

seriously, sometimes it seems the gaslighting and parallel realities are so off the charts various interests are purposely sowing division

Yes I think it can be so cooked, I don't they're "mistakes" but rather conflicting interests, and I think there's very good reasons for the parallel realities, gaslighting and intentional sowing of division.

I would have thought it's all very obvious why this is happening, and it's not due to some conspiracy theory or agenda of control etc.

It's quite simply that we live in a market economy whose main drivers are competition and the profit motive. It's rational to act in one's own commercial and political self interest. These competing commercial and political agendas and interests are at odds with each other, with the good of society as a whole, and with the facts. Everyone is in competition with each other. Everyone creates their own facts, truth and realities in order to commercialise and politicise every event in our democratic liberal market economy for their own commercial and political self interest.

That's just life as we know it...

The result is exactly what we're seeing: a warfare-like mayhem of contradicting and conflicting information and actions, seemingly obvious and avoidable "mistakes" from players pushing their own conflicting interests and agendas, strong division and conflict within society and the economy in general, clearly conflicted incentive structures in large parts of society, massive public relations and marketing and advertising campaigns pushed through the media from commercial and political players presenting and trying to create completely parallel and alternative realities backed up with seemingly hard and reputable data and research in order to realise their agendas, etc...

The interests and welfare of society as a whole, and the actual realities and truths and facts, play no real part in the rational self-interested decision making of players in a democratic market economy.

Vic Local wrote:

And we’re back to blowin demanding a respected scientist be put in stocks for the horrendous crime of making basic, factual mathematic statements that blowin doesn’t like.
The tin foil hat might be cutting off his circulation.

Not quite true, mon vieux. Blowin was stating that it's disingenuous (euphemism) to make a prediction based on a confluence of unrealistic worst case scenarios (e.g. all overseas data points to the fact that Omicron is much less severe than Delta), and then broadcast that as a plausible scenario.

And a Happy Christmas to all.

blindboy wrote:

So have you had your booster yet Blowie?

Lol

Blowin wrote:

The computers desperately needed their third booster shot!!!!!!!!!

“Until the 1990s many computer programs (especially those written in the early days of computers) were designed to abbreviate four-digit years as two digits in order to save memory space. These computers could recognize “98” as “1998” but would be unable to recognize “00” as “2000,” perhaps interpreting it to mean 1900. Many feared that when the clocks struck midnight on January 1, 2000, many affected computers would be using an incorrect date and thus fail to operate properly unless the computers’ software was repaired or replaced before that date.

It was feared that such a misreading would lead to software and hardware failures in computers used in such important areas as banking, utilities systems, government records, and so on, with the potential for widespread chaos on and following January 1, 2000. Mainframe computers, including those typically used to run insurance companies and banks, were thought to be subject to the most serious Y2K problems, but even newer systems that used networks of desktop computers were considered vulnerable.

The Y2K problem was not limited to computers running conventional software, however. Many devices containing computer chips, ranging from elevators to temperature-control systems in commercial buildings to medical equipment, were believed to be at risk, which necessitated the checking of these “embedded systems” for sensitivity to calendar dates.

In the United States, business and government technology teams worked feverishly with a goal of checking systems and fixing software before the end of December 1999. Although some industries were well on the way to solving the Y2K problem, most experts feared that the federal government and state and local governments were lagging behind. A Y2K preparedness survey commissioned in late 1998 by Cap Gemini America, a New York computer industry consulting firm, showed that among 13 economic sectors studied in the United States, government was the least ready for Y2K. (Rated highest for preparedness was the software industry.)

In an effort to encourage companies to share critical information about Y2K, U.S. Pres. Bill Clinton in October 1998 signed the Year 2000 Information and Readiness Disclosure Act. The law was designed to encourage American companies to share Y2K data by offering them limited liability protection for sharing information about Y2K products, methods, and best practices.

In western Europe the European Commission issued a report warning that efforts to solve Y2K in many European Union member countries were insufficient, particularly in terms of the cross-border cooperation needed to be ready by 2000. The British government announced that its armed forces would be prepared in time and would provide assistance to local police if utilities, transportation systems, or emergency services failed.

Many other countries, notably Asian countries suffering at that time from an ongoing economic crisis as well as small or geographically isolated countries, were thought to be less well prepared. It was uncertain how this would affect the tightly integrated world economy and physical infrastructure. In mid-December 1998 the UN convened its first international conference on Y2K in an attempt to share information and crisis-management efforts and established the International Y2K Cooperation Center, based in Washington, D.C.

An estimated $300 billion was spent (almost half in the United States) to upgrade computers and application programs to be Y2K-compliant. As the first day of January 2000 dawned and it became apparent that computerized systems were intact, reports of relief filled the news media. These were followed by accusations that the likely incidence of failure had been greatly exaggerated from the beginning“

I was working for an IT company when y2k came…biggest waste of money and non event ever.
It was hilarious to watch the ceo and his upper mgmt minions panicking for weeks prior.

Blowin wrote:

blindboy wrote:

So have you had your booster yet Blowie?

Lol

Have you updated your computer for Y2K yet?

Island Bay wrote:

Vic Local wrote:

And we’re back to blowin demanding a respected scientist be put in stocks for the horrendous crime of making basic, factual mathematic statements that blowin doesn’t like.
The tin foil hat might be cutting off his circulation.

Not quite true, mon vieux. Blowin was stating that it's disingenuous (euphemism) to make a prediction based on a confluence of unrealistic worst case scenarios (e.g. all overseas data points to the fact that Omicron is much less severe than Delta), and then broadcast that as a plausible scenario.

blowin was banging on (and casting doubt) about R values. This is a really basic mathematic concept that should be beyond debate.

The funny thing with blowin is he demands absolute accuracy from medical experts. He can't handle the concept of best and worst case scenarios based on different modelling inputs that are dependent on political decision making. He wants perfect predictions to complex situations from the experts. But when his complete and utter BS gets exposed he just bats on as if his stumps aren't lying on the ground.
If blowin held himself the the same standards as he holds the medical experts, he would have apologised 2 years ago for his covid misinformation, stopped posting about covid entirely, and gone back to his garden variety racism and immigrant bashing.

Tangent much?

A pandemic of the under-dieted and under-exercised
https://www.spectator.com.au/2021/12/a-pandemic-of-the-under-dieted-and-...

gsco wrote:

At 250k cases per day, the Doherty Institute appears to have mistakenly added an extra 0 to Australia's population... The US's highest daily case number so far was about 300k.

Actually there seems to be a conflict of interest here. The Doherty Institute makes a significant amount of money from research grants, particularly for infectious disease modelling. So it seems not in their interest to publish research saying something along the lines of "covid isn't a problem, don't worry about it, we can put it behind us, you don't need to keep paying us millions of dollars per year in research grants to keep doing covid modelling and research..."

The whole system seems cooked.

How may times can they make these calls that turn out to be way off before people just stop believing them all together??

Who really believes these numbers?

Anyway good news on Omicron.

- South Africa wave looks to have peaked four days of falling case numbers.

-Largest wave in South Africa however very low death rate and very low hospitalisation rate and those in hospital, the average stay was only a fraction of the length of those with delta.

-Reason being, its now shown it doesn't affect the lungs in the same way other variants have.

Even if you want to think South Africa has faired well because of natural immunity and low age bracket, on a world scale places like Indonesia and India etc will be affected in the same way as also have large numbers of people with natural immunity and a low age bracket.

Although even in the UK things aren't looking too bad so far.

"How may times can they make these calls that turn out to be way off before people just stop believing them all together??

Who really believes these numbers?"

It's a worst case scenario numb-nuts which helps guide decision making. The modelling will also have a range of other scenarios such as wide spread masking wearing, fast tracked booster shots etc being included in the inputs.

What is it with you right wingers' complete and utter inability to understand scientific modelling?

Well where is the press on the modelling for most likely outcome???

Isn't that what we should be focused on????

And then say however in the worst case scenario that is extremely unlikely these are the figures.

BTW. I have no issue being called right wing, but i doubt all the others here calling out the BS modelling and scare tactics would view themselves as right wing, most of the others are traditional left (opposed to someone like yourself who is new school fake left)

Vic Local wrote:

"How may times can they make these calls that turn out to be way off before people just stop believing them all together??

Who really believes these numbers?"

It's a worst case scenario numb-nuts which helps guide decision making. The modelling will also have a range of other scenarios such as wide spread masking wearing, fast tracked booster shots etc being included in the inputs.

What is it with you right wingers' complete and utter inability to understand scientific modelling?

Wort case scenario that helps guide decision making. For fucks sake VicMoron you dont see the problem with this statement?

Not to mention the "worst case scenario" lets MSM run wild to create fear to jab jab jab.

For the simpletons, who apparently have no idea how modelling (or apparently anything much else) actually works, let's consider a counter factual in which the government did not commission a report including the worst case scenario but things turned out worse than the scenarios they did commission. The health consequences would be a system unprepared for the numbers and the political consequences, in an election year, would be damaging.
Once the existing report was published the worst case numbers made great click bait so they are about the only thing most people actually know about the report, I mean, the headlines are all you need to know seems to be the dominant approach these days. Detail, context, nuance and analysis are ignored in service to the opportunity for rabid anti-intellectual ravings.

“For the simpletons, who apparently have no idea how modelling (or apparently anything much else) actually works....” paging info

blindboy wrote:

Detail, context, nuance and analysis are ignored in service to the opportunity for rabid anti-intellectual ravings.

...or in the case of our leaders and media, detail, context, nuance and analysis are ignored in service to the opportunity for rabid fear mongering. Both sides of the debate are guilty.

In my view worst case scenarios have limited utility. Cost / benefit analysis and risk / benefit analysis with the focus firmly on probabilities are far better guides for good policy, with (hopefully) shared values in the background steering weightings.

If worst case scenarios sans probabilities took primacy in other areas we would not drive on highways or fly in planes. Zebra crossings would be outlawed and footbridges built everywhere at great expense. I liked blowin's analogy re Oz-wide cyclone warnings. Highly improbable but a dire worst case scenario nonetheless worthy of our urgent attention!

Whether we like to speak of it or not a human life has always had a dollar value and in recent times that price has soared...and amongst the most unexpected demographics. Which begs the question, did the value actually increase or is the savvy investor getting something else for their coin?

pretty sure government weren't releasing worst case scenarios back at the beginning of the pandemic because they didn't want to scare people...

but now...

"Well where is the press on the modelling for most likely outcome???

Isn't that what we should be focused on????

And then say however in the worst case scenario that is extremely unlikely these are the figures."

absolutely there should be a plausability percentage released with any worst case scenario modelling, any modelling really...

and yes, media should be focussed on more realistic scenarios

indo-dreaming wrote:

Anyway good news on Omicron.

- South Africa wave looks to have peaked four days of falling case numbers.

-Largest wave in South Africa however very low death rate and very low hospitalisation rate and those in hospital, the average stay was only a fraction of the length of those with delta.

-Reason being, its now shown it doesn't affect the lungs in the same way other variants have.

Even if you want to think South Africa has faired well because of natural immunity and low age bracket, on a world scale places like Indonesia and India etc will be affected in the same way as also have large numbers of people with natural immunity and a low age bracket.

Although even in the UK things aren't looking too bad so far.

Things do appear to be looking up. Omicron although more infectious has less hospitalisations.
Mora data needed to get a more accurate picture.

Is this the first glimpse of covid starting to burn itself out? time will tell.

"In my view worst case scenarios have limited utility. Cost / benefit analysis and risk / benefit analysis with the focus firmly on probabilities are far better guides for good policy, with (hopefully) shared values in the background steering weightings."

many a smart smart cookie, from many political persuasions have made this very point...

why - for the first time ever it seems - is there no cost / benefit, risk / benefit analysis being applied to corona virus responses?

The hive mind of the stock markets that digest masses of news to form opinions seem to have decided omicron and future scenarios are not so bad. For now at least. ...

".......rabid fear mongerering" So last year rj when at least it served the purpose of scaring the hesitant into making better decisions. It is all open up and be damned from our leaders these days. As for both sides being guilty, I think you will find that one side has consistently proposed measures consistent with the evidence while the other has ranted and raved about their freedumbs and attempted to undermine the vaccination program and other health measures. If there is guilt on both sides, 99% of it is with the anti-vaxxers.

"why - for the first time ever it seems - is there no cost / benefit, risk / benefit analysis being applied to corona virus responses?"

Isn't that just what NSW (in particular) have done by moreorless "letting it rip" Syppo?

If high vaccination levels and reduced virulence of Omicron wash through the state with low hospitalisations and people choosing their own level of risk exposure, we could be in a pretty good place come Autumn.

No?

No risk analysis? Then what was the Doherty report? Keep up mate!

Is this Doherty Report publicly available? I can't seem to find it online. Keen to read their modelling and assumptions, and how they arrived at the 200k or 250k figure (it seems to have changed to $200k now..).

freeride76 wrote:

"why - for the first time ever it seems - is there no cost / benefit, risk / benefit analysis being applied to corona virus responses?"

Isn't that just what NSW (in particular) have done by moreorless "letting it rip" Syppo?

If high vaccination levels and reduced virulence of Omicron wash through the state with low hospitalisations and people choosing their own level of risk exposure, we could be in a pretty good place come Autumn.

No?

well the learned minds were referring to the last two years of over reaction, and endless money printing to fund a fear monger's once in a lifetime wishlist...

I'd actually say NSW has over applied a much needed correction in tact

or maybe moreso a pigheaded reluctance to change the new tact...

if things had been more balanced (and the debate commensurately less rabid) now would be the time to apply some minor restrictions until what appears to be omni-con actually plays out...

everyone is now so beholden to their predetermined positions all rationality has gone out the wundow

it's not like they have outlawed masks.

In my expeditions out yesterday, I reckon 60-70% still wearing them indoors.

Norman Swan on ABC seems to have been providing a more measured commentary on the risks of Omicron.
Had an interview with the South African epidemiologist yesterday/day before.

freeride76 wrote:

it's not like they have outlawed masks.

In my expeditions out yesterday, I reckon 60-70% still wearing them indoors.

Norman Swan on ABC seems to have been providing a more measured commentary on the risks of Omicron.
Had an interview with the South African epidemiologist yesterday/day before.

well that's good to hear some common sense pervailing, on a couple of fronts

Some interesting stuff on worst case scenario modelling - straight from the horse's mouth (SAGE - UK):

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/my-twitter-conversation-with-the-cha...

And before you go "Spectator bad, bla bla bla..." just read what Graham Medley from SAGE actually said.

blindboy wrote:

For the simpletons, who apparently have no idea how modelling (or apparently anything much else) actually works, let's consider a counter factual in which the government did not commission a report including the worst case scenario but things turned out worse than the scenarios they did commission. The health consequences would be a system unprepared for the numbers and the political consequences, in an election year, would be damaging.
Once the existing report was published the worst case numbers made great click bait so they are about the only thing most people actually know about the report, I mean, the headlines are all you need to know seems to be the dominant approach these days. Detail, context, nuance and analysis are ignored in service to the opportunity for rabid anti-intellectual ravings.

Love it how you look down on others as simpletons because we criticise media reports on the modeling that is completely unrealistic and basically scare mongering garbage.

Maybe there is modeling that shows a realistic likely case scenario, but articles in main stream media I've seen havent shown it and when ive seen them talk about it on TV they haven't said this is the most likely case scenario.

And now even Scomo has had to come out and basically say don't panic the modeling is unrealistic.

"We model what we are asked to model." Those are his exact words. If you don't like the modelling you need to go to those who commissioned it with the scenarios they requested. Probably the UK government. No conspiracy, just a dickhead journalist looking for click bait.

rj-davey wrote:

blindboy wrote:

Detail, context, nuance and analysis are ignored in service to the opportunity for rabid anti-intellectual ravings.

...or in the case of our leaders and media, detail, context, nuance and analysis are ignored in service to the opportunity for rabid fear mongering. Both sides of the debate are guilty.

In my view worst case scenarios have limited utility. Cost / benefit analysis and risk / benefit analysis with the focus firmly on probabilities are far better guides for good policy, with (hopefully) shared values in the background steering weightings.

If worst case scenarios sans probabilities took primacy in other areas we would not drive on highways or fly in planes. Zebra crossings would be outlawed and footbridges built everywhere at great expense. I liked blowin's analogy re Oz-wide cyclone warnings. Highly improbable but a dire worst case scenario nonetheless worthy of our urgent attention!

Whether we like to speak of it or not a human life has always had a dollar value and in recent times that price has soared...and amongst the most unexpected demographics. Which begs the question, did the value actually increase or is the savvy investor getting something else for their coin?

Good post.

Just as with the eventual recognition of China as a strategic competitor, the political motion towards “ living with covid” has come about due to Clotty Morrison’s disordered personality. The overdue liberation of our society has nothing to do with Clotty’s respect for personal freedoms and everything to do with his requirements to obey his overlords who demand the reboot of the Mass immigration Ponzi scheme ASAP.

The liberty of Australians is a collateral victory of his need to provide unimpeded access for millions of imported and extremely skilled food delivery technicians.

In this enterprise Clotty has found a worthy, and equally desperate , NSW state premier to back his plan.

This does not mean the covid situation has been taken off the boil as their is far too much political capital and profits to be gleamed by keeping the populace in a constant state of irrational fear.

Like any government commissioned report or polling, the ciovid modelling is premised upon the idea that the results needed by the government dictates the outcome.

The population knows all too well that the predetermined outcomes of modelling are all too easy to achieve and provide the necessary PR campaign needed to implement the government’s agenda.

Modelling is literally an equation such as X + Y =Z. The trick to creating the desired modelling outcome is to pervert X and Y to the desired degree.

In the latest modelling, the consultants have revealed that their X is based on the utterly baseless and fraudulent claim that the severity of Omicold illness is equal the the severity of the Delta strain.

There is no data to support this assumption and millions of real world cases to dismiss it as laughably and malevolently pessimistic.

The global death tally of omicron stands at too few deceased people to field a footy team in the afterlife, yet the ruse goes on ! The modelling is thrown to the public. It may be dismantled by some outside of the mainstream media and governmental establishment cadre but this is of no real consequence . The headlines will declare mass death, overwhelmed hospitals and societal ruination and this will achieve tangible political momentum amongst the morons , the retards and those who have swallowed so much of the poisonous covid Kool Aid that the screaming fear mongering is needed just to get them out of bed each day, such is the depletion of their adrenaline glands after two years of entirely unsubstantiated PANIC.

So Clotty and Dom get their wage suppressing coolies, the government firms its throttling grip on the throats of the scared herd, the media sells MOAR units and the Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex* gets its demands met.

* The US Military Industrial Complex has made BANK for the last 50 years off the back of US government mandated demands on its vassal states for expensive and endless war. The MIC sent Australians to die and kill innocents in Vietnam and Iraq amongst many victim nations. Now it is the era of the Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex to be sent abroad to plunder in the name of US neoliberalism. Madated injections will be imposed amongst the outer rim provinces under the US banner. Even your toddler must receive three shots of the toxic substance as their immune systems are too apparently weak to survive with just two jabs ( despite no toddlers succumbing to covid in two years ) .

The PIC is the modern world’s Dutch East India company and it has royal decree to exclusive rights to plunder and exploit.. Nothing can stand in its way. No dissent will be tolerated. Provincial politicians will be corrupted. Nothing can stand in the way except the realisation amongst the people that they are being taken for a ride.

gsco wrote:

Is this Doherty Report publicly available? I can't seem to find it online. Keen to read their modelling and assumptions, and how they arrived at the 200k or 250k figure (it seems to have changed to $200k now..).

Please link it if you find it

I give up, bb.

No wait, I'll give it one more go: In my day job - when not challenging Slater for the title of Most Conceited Old Surfer - I'm a weather forecaster. I issue warnings and watches on weather events that could have severe impacts on our country, livestock and population.

When an event starts shaping up, we may issue a statement via the media person to the effect that "something is brewing in the Coral Sea..." for instance. Then, if it looks more likely in the outlook period (day 3 to 6), it will be flagged on the Severe Weather Outlook as a LOW, MOD or HIGH risk. Then we'd issue a Watch 48 hours out, and finally a Warning. E.g. 150mm of rain in the 21 hours from xx to yy.

All our Warnings are verified, and we have to have very low number of False Alarms, a very low number of Missed Events, meaning we have to get it right more than 90% of the time.

Working like that guarantees a high level of scientific integrity, and assures that you don't just cry "wolf!". In other words, your best forecast/output is EXACTLY what you think the most likely outcome will be, not the "safest" or most expedient.

A scientific advisory group simply putting out what someone wants to hear is NOT SCIENCE. It is mercenary.

If you don't get that, I don't know what to say.

"Modelling is literally an equation such as X + Y =Z. " No blowin that's simple arithmetic.
Oh FFS, can this clown get any more pathetic? A man who's maths skills pretty much ends at lower primary school level.
I'm tipping scientists have slightly more complex multivariate mathematical modelling on covid.
blowin is just being a typical conservative, When faced with a complex issue he can't comprehend, he 1. dumbs it down to a highly unrealistic position and 2. Abuses anyone who is smarter than him.

They were asked to model certain scenarios, not make a forecast of the most probable outcome. It wasn't a weather report, it was presumably, a document to assist decision makers understand the possible consequences of their decisions......so yep a dickhead journalist looking for clickbait.

Omicron is a Pfizer marketing campaign.

Boosters!!!!!!!!!!

Island bay, with all respect, Short term weather forecasting doesn't have any human variables. That's what this modelling is all about.

Not the point. The point is to present good forecasting/modelling, not what someone tells you to do.