@tarahaelle @MissNicoletta @RadioFreeTom @EZRider5752 @Annedees87 @JuliaRaifman @mehdirhasan Consider, instead, that all of these predictions have turned out to be wrong, and to not even acknowledge the uncertainty that it MIGHT not be ending.
https://twitter.com/wsbgnl/sta...

“TaaHael@ MissNicoletta”ReaFieReToM EZRIDEL572@ AlneDeS8@ JuliaRaifman @ MedidirasaN认为，相反，所有这些预测都是错误的，甚至不承认它可能不会结束的不确定性。
https://twitter.com/wsbgnl/sta...

@tarahaelle @MissNicoletta @RadioFreeTom @EZRider5752 @Annedees87 @JuliaRaifman @mehdirhasan That's because, continually, the prediction from the CDC and others with large platforms has always been that the pandemic is ending, this is the last wave, and there won't be another one. So rather than building adaptations, it's time to "open up" or take the "exit ramp".

@tarahaelle@MissNicoletta@RadioFreeTom@EZRider5752@Annedees87@JuliaRaifman@mehdirhasan这是因为，CDC和其他拥有大型平台的机构一直在预测，大流行即将结束，这是最后一波，不会再有第一波。因此，与其构建适应性，不如“开放”或“退出坡道”。

@ratraceco @DrCSWilliam That would be a different situation, essentially a hypothetical (and not stated that way in the article), but it certainly hasn't ended yet.

@ratraceco@DrCSWilliam这将是一种不同的情况，本质上是一种假设（在文章中没有这样说），但它肯定还没有结束。

@ratraceco @DrCSWilliam Does not explain why or how stimulating an immune response with a vaccine is worse than stimulating an immune response with a virus, since under current conditions that is the likely alternative, not nothing.

@ratraceco@DrCSWilliam没有解释为什么或如何用疫苗刺激免疫反应比用病毒刺激免疫反应更糟糕，因为在目前的条件下，这可能是替代方案，而不是什么都没有。

@MelpomeneMel @danaparish @DrCSWilliam That was very preliminary in animals who I was told don't even get severely ill from this virus. Probably should be waiting on this.

@MelpomeneMel@danaparish@DrCSWilliam这对我被告知不会因这种病毒而严重生病的动物来说是非常初步的。也许你应该等着。

@MyLittleJackal @Noahpinion The poll sucks but reality is that Americans are probably tilting toward isolationist. Perhaps a lot.

@MyLittleJackal@Noahpinion这项民意调查很糟糕，但现实是，美国人可能正在向孤立主义者倾斜。也许很多。

@RidleyDM @BrennanUncle @RadioFreeTom @mehdirhasan Can't tell you what is acceptable or practical but pretending vaccines are effective in mitigating high transmission environments other than as one layer of multiple is just failing to face reality. Seemed at one point like it could have worked, but facts evolved.

@RidleyDM@Brennanuble@RadioFreeTom@mehdirhasan无法告诉你什么是可接受的或实用的，但假装疫苗在缓解高传播环境方面是有效的，而不是因为一层多重疫苗无法面对现实。在某一点上，这似乎是可行的，但事实发生了变化。

@EricTopol @OurWorldInData This looks similar
https://twitter.com/LauraMiers...

@EricTopol@OurWorldInData这看起来很相似
https://twitter.com/LauraMiers...

@freedom_lancer_ @CryptoGeorgist @AlvaroSilva1906 You could browse starting here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
These historic incidents are brought up plenty in retrospectives and historic documentaries.
They're not 'news' really.

@freedom_lancer_u@CryptoGeorgist@AlvaroSilva1906你可以从这里开始浏览
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
这些历史事件在回顾和历史纪录片中大量出现。
它们真的不是“新闻”。

@Chris95486822 @tarahaelle @RogerBlumberg @RadioFreeTom This explains some of the reasons those graphs are useless and misleading
https://twitter.com/zorinaq/st...

@Chris95486822@tarahaelle@RogerBlumberg@RadioFreeTom这就解释了这些图表无用且具有误导性的一些原因
https://twitter.com/zorinaq/st...

@wsbgnl Also assuming the shaded area is 95% confidence interval (not sure but I think so), they're badly miscalibrated. Okay to miss that occasionally (5% of the time is expected), but repeatedly and consistently indicated a problem.

@wsbgnl还假设阴影区域为95%的置信区间（不确定，但我认为是这样），它们严重校准错误。偶尔（预计有5%的时间）会错过，但反复且持续地表示存在问题。

@wsbgnl I'm not sure I'm interpreting the graphs correctly but it looks to me like every single forecast was low. Which suggests a persistent problem where everyone thinks they are forecasting the end of the pandemic and models are constrained to that rather than broader uncertainty.

@wsbgnl我不确定我对图表的解释是否正确，但在我看来，每一个预测都很低。这表明了一个持续存在的问题，即每个人都认为他们在预测大流行的结束，模型仅限于此，而不是更广泛的不确定性。

@tarahaelle Because motivated reasoning.

@塔拉海勒因为有动机的推理。

@juli_bg_bs Approaching? Lowest level in NY pre-delta was about 1.7/100k and now 28/100k. I guess directionally approaching but not really close.

@juli_bg__接近了吗？纽约前三角洲的最低水位约为1.7/100k，现在为28/100k。我猜是方向性的接近，但不是真正的接近。

@jaydotchan @paulg THAT depends a lot more on price.

@这在很大程度上取决于价格。

@DailyJLee @CDCDirector Who was it who recently wrote about debating the design of a fire hose at the scene of an active fire? It was a good analogy.

@DailyJLee@CDC主管是谁最近写了一篇关于在火灾现场辩论消防水带设计的文章？这是一个很好的类比。

@AndrewNoymer Sunk cost is accurate however 1M is close to the current run rate, even a bit low. So it's not all that misleading with respect to current and potentially future deaths.
Conceptually, your framing is better, of course.

@AndrewNoymer沉没成本是准确的，但1M接近当前运行率，甚至有点低。因此，就目前和未来可能的死亡而言，这并不完全是一种误导。
当然，从概念上讲，你的框架更好。

@mhdksafa Billionaires don't "create jobs". They contribute capital to endeavors that include jobs. That is all.
Is there a shortage of capital in the world? Look around.

@mhdksafa亿万富翁不会“创造就业机会”。他们为包括就业在内的事业贡献资本。仅此而已。
世界上是否存在资本短缺？看看周围。

@PaulSorrentino3 @gregggonsalves @K_G_Andersen Gregg has been speaking out. Most of the others, not so much.

@PaulSorrentino3@gregggonsalves@K_G_Andersen Gregg一直在公开表态。其他大多数人，不是那么多。

@wsbgnl Search headline history for "stopped elective procedures" during December-January. That's rarely if ever costless.

@wsbgnl在12月至1月期间搜索“已停止的选择性手术”的标题历史记录。这几乎是无成本的。