. . . But “never . . . as tense and nervous as during that interview” that launched a thousand lockdowns, said the Swedish man Johan Giesecke. He “modified quite a few of the straightforward statements [from his report], but still seems to think that the lethality is somewhere at just under one percent, while I think it is actually much lower, perhaps as low as 0.1%.”
And the model he used, and models in general?
I think it’s not very good, and the thing that they miss a little is that any models for infectious diseases —they’re very popular, many people do them — they’re good for teaching, they seldom tell you the truth because — I make a small parenthesis — which model could have assumed that the outbreak would start in northern Italy, in Europe, Difficult to model that one.
And any such model — it looks complicated, there are strange mathematical formulae, and integral signs and stuff, but it rests on the assumptions. And the assumptions in that article will be heavily criticized for — I won’t go through that, it would take the rest of your day if I went through them all.
The paper was never published scientifically; it’s not peer-reviewed, which a scientific paper should be; it’s just an internal departmental report from Imperial [College]. And it’s fascinating; I don’t think any other scientific endeavor has made such an impression on the world as that rather debatable paper.
If it was right to shut down when the Brit said so, it’s right to pay attention to the top man in Sweden, who’s skeptical.
via The Daily Wire