tommyznr wrote:
cptqueeg wrote:
When you start publishing for public consumption about over 2 million people dying, you better be a little closer than off by 2.1 million lives.
That estimate was from London. I'm sure the 2.2M was what they felt would happen w Trump in charge after he said cv19 was going to disappear by April. In reality that estimate opened people's eyes to the potential disaster had we continued sitting on our hands.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svrxYLvJYto
Instead many mayors and governors stepped in and slowed the spread.
QUOTING FUNCTION MESSED UP...........
You think they fudged the numbers because Trump is in charge? Please!
The mayors and governors are exactly who should have stepped in to provide local control base on their local information. If a state does not take responsibility then the feds should step in. I am not sure why so many think it should be different.
My statement was tongue in cheek, although Trump did manage to essentially hinder the start of the Federal response to the spread of cv19. And I find it ironic after doing virtually nothing to protect the country for 6 weeks he now claims "total authority."
The 2.2 million deaths predicted by that model was somebodies best guess based on what little was known then about cv19. The curve has been flattened since some states, cities, and counties took action that did have a very positive effect on reducing the spread and deaths. 20-20 hindsight is always so much easier than making a prediction on a pandemic don't you think?
