"If you were to ask me right now, what's most concerning of all the things that I've heard so far, it's the fact that they are reporting a sudden increase in cases in Manaus, Brazil," virus expert Jeremy Luban at the University of Massachusetts told NPR two weeks ago before the variant arrived in the United States. "Manaus already had 75% of people infected [in the spring of last year]."
Regarding point 3 -- it is, of course, speculation, but for millenia the most-effective method of weather forecasting was constancy: "Tomorrow will be just like today". It could be better, it could be worse, but if we don't know anything, assuming that it will be similar seems like a good bet.
Edit: On first read, I missed "on reinfection" for point 3. Agreed. One definitely hopes that on reinfection, cases will be more mild.
Yep, that quote is an opinion from one person. "Virus expert" or no, it is still speculation. The fact that said expert is confidently claiming that 75% number makes me doubt his opinion. We can't confidently estimate the proportion of people infected in the US or Europe. I don't know how you'd begin to claim such a thing in Brazil, where the access to testing and data reporting is quite poor.
for millenia the most-effective method of weather forecasting was constancy: "Tomorrow will be just like today"
I disagree that this like predicting the weather. The weather has consistent seasonal patterns that give you ~90% (brown number) of the story (ironically, this virus is also probably strongly seasonal, but I digress).
Here, we're engaged in speculation that some "new strain" might be worse than the existing strain. It's the opposite of using long-term trends to predict the future. It's a bit like claiming that every new typhoon is going to be the worst one ever, because it's different than the last typhoon in some way.
Comments
Regarding points 1 and 2, from the article:
"If you were to ask me right now, what's most concerning of all the things that I've heard so far, it's the fact that they are reporting a sudden increase in cases in Manaus, Brazil," virus expert Jeremy Luban at the University of Massachusetts told NPR two weeks ago before the variant arrived in the United States. "Manaus already had 75% of people infected [in the spring of last year]."
Regarding point 3 -- it is, of course, speculation, but for millenia the most-effective method of weather forecasting was constancy: "Tomorrow will be just like today". It could be better, it could be worse, but if we don't know anything, assuming that it will be similar seems like a good bet.
Edit: On first read, I missed "on reinfection" for point 3. Agreed. One definitely hopes that on reinfection, cases will be more mild.
Yep, that quote is an opinion from one person. "Virus expert" or no, it is still speculation. The fact that said expert is confidently claiming that 75% number makes me doubt his opinion. We can't confidently estimate the proportion of people infected in the US or Europe. I don't know how you'd begin to claim such a thing in Brazil, where the access to testing and data reporting is quite poor.
I disagree that this like predicting the weather. The weather has consistent seasonal patterns that give you ~90% (brown number) of the story (ironically, this virus is also probably strongly seasonal, but I digress).
Here, we're engaged in speculation that some "new strain" might be worse than the existing strain. It's the opposite of using long-term trends to predict the future. It's a bit like claiming that every new typhoon is going to be the worst one ever, because it's different than the last typhoon in some way.