Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Event Forums > COVID-19 Forum

Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-09-2021, 01:53 PM   #3081
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers View Post
Did that growth rate continue? If it didnít, then that would change the projection.
Haha, obviously the growth rate didnít continue. Whatís the point of her projections when theyíre that far off though? Media clickbait I suppose.
Slava is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Slava For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2021, 01:58 PM   #3082
Wormius
Franchise Player
 
Wormius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Somewhere down the crazy river.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
Haha, obviously the growth rate didnít continue. Whatís the point of her projections when theyíre that far off though? Media clickbait I suppose.

Well, they did move most of the schools to online not long after that, vaccination rates increased, so obviously that have an impact on how the original projects play out.
Wormius is online now  
Old 05-09-2021, 02:06 PM   #3083
Jiri Hrdina
Franchise Player
 
Jiri Hrdina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
Haha, obviously the growth rate didnít continue. Whatís the point of her projections when theyíre that far off though? Media clickbait I suppose.
they are modeled scenarios based on inputs from that current period. So as soon as the things driving that input changes the model becomes less accurate.

It's a "what if" model not a "what will be" model.

In this case the "if" is - if the growth rate continues at current rates then....

We have to stop looking back at these projections to try and prove someone was right or wrong. That's not the purpose of them.
Jiri Hrdina is online now  
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2021, 02:06 PM   #3084
Scroopy Noopers
Pent-up
 
Scroopy Noopers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Plutanamo Bay.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
Haha, obviously the growth rate didnít continue. Whatís the point of her projections when theyíre that far off though? Media clickbait I suppose.
I feel like itís rude to just reply with a definition of a wordÖ but you should look into what a projection is.

How can you possibly justify any sort of restriction without a projection showing that no restrictions would be a serious problem?
Scroopy Noopers is online now  
Old 05-09-2021, 02:12 PM   #3085
opendoor
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
I donít think thatís a fair characterization though because I donít think anyoneís suggesting that re-opening (in February) wouldnít lead to an increase in cases. Of course it would; to me that was never a question. The question is whether we could have just pushed out 2-3 weeks and been all set. Thatís just wishful thinking. It was in November (when people said we could have had a quick 2 week lockdown and a normal Christmas), and it was again in February.
I mean, it's really just simple math. Alberta relaxed restrictions on February 8th. In the 3 weeks prior to that day cases had dropped 53%. So if that pace was kept until the end of February, that would have put Alberta at about 165 cases per day on March 1st. If they reopened then, there would likely be a slow drop after that, a plateau, and then an increase (that's how it played out anyway), so the rapid growth likely would have been held off until late March.

The end result if you drop the cases in half and move the reopening 3 weeks into the future is, Alberta would currently have about 650 cases per day right now. That would leave 1.5 more doubling periods before getting to crisis levels, which even at the most rapid growth rate seen in the first half of April, would allow for about a month more of manageable growth, by which point every adult who wants their 1st dose will have had it. So chances are they wouldn't have had to reintroduce heavy restrictions.
opendoor is offline  
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to opendoor For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2021, 02:26 PM   #3086
Ryan Coke
First Line Centre
 
Ryan Coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina View Post
they are modeled scenarios based on inputs from that current period. So as soon as the things driving that input changes the model becomes less accurate.

It's a "what if" model not a "what will be" model.

In this case the "if" is - if the growth rate continues at current rates then....

We have to stop looking back at these projections to try and prove someone was right or wrong. That's not the purpose of them.
But in context, Slava was responding to posts which essentially said ďthe forecasts said if X was done, Y would have occurredĒ. Which when he pointed out the limited value of forecasts as a prediction of the future, was met with comments stating ďitís only a forecast, there are lots of variables that can change itĒ.

All of that is true. Forecasts are useful, but limited due to a multitude of factors, including the forecasters assumptions. They arenít proof of anything, other than general guidance. They certainly canít be used to say, with certainty, pretty much anything.
Ryan Coke is offline  
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ryan Coke For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2021, 02:30 PM   #3087
Boreal
First Line Centre
 
Boreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
Haha, sheís all over the map though. Like by her projections we should be at what, 10,000 cases a day now? Itís not like sheís nailed this.
Hmmm... but it is like YouSeePee did the opposite of everything forecasted and we returned to an unprecedented mess.
Boreal is offline  
Old 05-09-2021, 02:35 PM   #3088
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
I donít think thatís a fair characterization though because I donít think anyoneís suggesting that re-opening (in February) wouldnít lead to an increase in cases. Of course it would; to me that was never a question. The question is whether we could have just pushed out 2-3 weeks and been all set. Thatís just wishful thinking. It was in November (when people said we could have had a quick 2 week lockdown and a normal Christmas), and it was again in February.
We needed 10% growth in order for the February open to work. The day we went to stage 2 that was put the window. Prior to that it was still fairly clear that based on the 20-30% growth rates we typically saw we needed to be around 100 cases at the end of February for no more lockdowns.

This isnít Monday Morning QBing. Itís what people were saying at the time.
GGG is offline  
Old 05-09-2021, 02:35 PM   #3089
Ryan Coke
First Line Centre
 
Ryan Coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Exp:
Default

If there is one thing I would hope people have learned, in particular epidemiological forecasters, is that human behaviour is a massive input to the case count changes, it is not a purely mathematical problem.

If there were no changes to government restrictions, we would still see increases and decreases in case counts purely driven by people’s behaviours. The humans will be more careful when cases counts are getting quite high, and people will naturally reduce their caution when case counts indicate reduced risk. Human behaviours also blunt public restrictions, based on levels of compliance or not. It is not as simple as “level 1 restrictions result in this R value”.

I haven’t seen any models that account for that.

Last edited by Ryan Coke; 05-09-2021 at 02:47 PM.
Ryan Coke is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ryan Coke For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2021, 03:16 PM   #3090
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

I must be insane. I mean here’s this conversation in a nutshell:

CP: we could have no cases and a normal summer if we spent two weeks locked down.

Me: I’m skeptical that would work.

CP: well you shouldn’t be and here’s an expert

Me: she’s been way wrong before

CP: post her past wrong predictions

Me: she says 10,000 cases a day

CP: well maybe the projections are wrong, but there are reasons for that.
Slava is offline  
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Slava For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2021, 03:50 PM   #3091
Scroopy Noopers
Pent-up
 
Scroopy Noopers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Plutanamo Bay.
Exp:
Default

How can a projection be ‘wrong’ when the inputs change over time? I just don’t understand the complaint at all.
Scroopy Noopers is online now  
Old 05-09-2021, 03:51 PM   #3092
Scroopy Noopers
Pent-up
 
Scroopy Noopers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Plutanamo Bay.
Exp:
Default

[QUOTE=Ryan Coke;7853996
I havenít seen any models that account for that.[/QUOTE]

Because that would have to be some sort or Ďpredictioní. That isnít quantifiable.
Scroopy Noopers is online now  
Old 05-09-2021, 04:23 PM   #3093
Tron_fdc
Has My Daddy Syndrome
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Watching Hot Dog Hans
Exp:
Default

Pretty easy to explain Slava. Had we done nothing, her worst case projection would have been true. We would be in the 10 000 cases/day had controls not been implemented.

Controls were implemented, case growth slowed. Models were then adjusted for different inputs.

We are 14-21 days away from dramatic, permanent drops in infections. Had we held the 2nd lockdown another 2 weeks in Feb, we would not be needing the third, because we would be (right now) 2 weeks behind where we are, assuming a certain degree of compliance from albertans.

There were a number of people here (CP) that called this situation months ago, based on napkin math and excel spreadsheets. I find it hard to believe Kenney didn’t have better info than say GGG or opendoor, and he just chose to ignore it. He shut down too late and opened to early and that’s on him.
Tron_fdc is offline  
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Tron_fdc For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2021, 05:39 PM   #3094
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tron_fdc View Post
Had we held the 2nd lockdown another 2 weeks in Feb, we would not be needing the third, because we would be (right now) 2 weeks behind where we are, assuming a certain degree of compliance from albertans

There were a number of people here (CP) that called this situation months ago, based on napkin math and excel spreadsheets. I find it hard to believe Kenney didnít have better info than say GGG or opendoor, and he just chose to ignore it. He shut down too late and opened to early and thatís on him.
But when they started ending the 2nd lockdown they were already starting to lose control of the populace. Restaurants were re-opening, protests, etc. Re-opening was a choice Albertans made, the government would have had a hard time stopping it.

They should have added the 3rd set of restrictions sooner though, imo.
bizaro86 is offline  
Old 05-09-2021, 05:51 PM   #3095
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
But when they started ending the 2nd lockdown they were already starting to lose control of the populace. Restaurants were re-opening, protests, etc. Re-opening was a choice Albertans made, the government would have had a hard time stopping it.

They should have added the 3rd set of restrictions sooner though, imo.
They could have brought the enforcement level up to get to the end of feb. You only get to use that once though. Now since total weeks of lock down doesnít change when you do them the affect of doing them late is just additional death and hospital impact.

One thing that is interesting is that is the last 3 days have seen the 7-day rolling average of new cases drop each day which hasnít happened in a long time so canceling high schools and going to patios only might have been enough because this next round of restrictions hasnít taken affect yet.
GGG is offline  
Old 05-09-2021, 06:20 PM   #3096
EldrickOnIce
Franchise Player
 
EldrickOnIce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Chicago
Exp:
Default

Modeling should involve worst through best case scenarios.
Worst case always gets the press. Texas was predicted to have up to 17500 cases per day (at high) and constant 10k per day after removing mask mandate.
This was worst case. It was the one that got all the press.
I'm sure the modeling is fine, and also useless.
EldrickOnIce is offline  
Old 05-09-2021, 06:27 PM   #3097
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG View Post
They could have brought the enforcement level up to get to the end of feb. You only get to use that once though. Now since total weeks of lock down doesn’t change when you do them the affect of doing them late is just additional death and hospital impact.

One thing that is interesting is that is the last 3 days have seen the 7-day rolling average of new cases drop each day which hasn’t happened in a long time so canceling high schools and going to patios only might have been enough because this next round of restrictions hasn’t taken affect yet.
I think high schools and patios was probably enough to bend the curve when combined with vaccines. The problem is when you wait that long you don't have much margin for error. I think they should have done a short one earlier, since now we'll end up staying closed for longer as case rates will remain high.

Going hard with enforcement in Feb would have been very risky, imo. If vaccine delivery hadn't come through then you're out of options if you end up needing a third shutdown. It wasn't a foregone conclusion in February that we'd have enough supply to vaccinate everyone by the end of june

Last edited by bizaro86; 05-09-2021 at 06:32 PM.
bizaro86 is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to bizaro86 For This Useful Post:
GGG
Old 05-09-2021, 06:50 PM   #3098
mikephoen
First Line Centre
 
mikephoen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava View Post
I must be insane. I mean hereís this conversation in a nutshell:

CP: we could have no cases and a normal summer if we spent two weeks locked down.

Me: Iím skeptical that would work.

CP: well you shouldnít be and hereís an expert

Me: sheís been way wrong before

CP: post her past wrong predictions

Me: she says 10,000 cases a day

CP: well maybe the projections are wrong, but there are reasons for that.
Youíre not insane, just bad at math.
__________________
www.CardShopTolaria.com
mikephoen is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to mikephoen For This Useful Post:
Old 05-09-2021, 07:03 PM   #3099
Tron_fdc
Has My Daddy Syndrome
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Watching Hot Dog Hans
Exp:
Default

I’m fairly confident that there was enough supply projected to be coming on line that you could reasonably assume that it wouldnt be an issue by June/July. It has more or less followed delivery projections, if not exceeded them. Also, had we locked down an extra 2 weeks in Feb we would have an extra 2 weeks to work with right now to start looking at implementing restrictions if we needed to du to supply lags.

Turns out vaccines came faster. So instead of looking like the province that did it right, we look like the North American hot spot/abject failure we are. And that’s on Kenney.
Tron_fdc is offline  
Old 05-09-2021, 07:23 PM   #3100
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tron_fdc View Post
Pretty easy to explain Slava. Had we done nothing, her worst case projection would have been true. We would be in the 10 000 cases/day had controls not been implemented.

Controls were implemented, case growth slowed. Models were then adjusted for different inputs.

We are 14-21 days away from dramatic, permanent drops in infections. Had we held the 2nd lockdown another 2 weeks in Feb, we would not be needing the third, because we would be (right now) 2 weeks behind where we are, assuming a certain degree of compliance from albertans.

There were a number of people here (CP) that called this situation months ago, based on napkin math and excel spreadsheets. I find it hard to believe Kenney didnít have better info than say GGG or opendoor, and he just chose to ignore it. He shut down too late and opened to early and thatís on him.
Itís foolish though. Weíre not doing nothing and havenít taken that approach at anytime in the past year. Itís ridiculous to look and say ďhereís what happens if we do nothingĒ when weíre already doing things. To want to base public policy on that kind of projection is not an approach Iíd support.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mikephoen View Post
Youíre not insane, just bad at math.
Oh really? Did we hit 10k a day and I misread the numbers? I mean sure, you can criticize that you donít like my views here, but that comment is just nonsense.
Slava is offline  
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Slava For This Useful Post:
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:26 PM.

Calgary Flames
2021-22




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021