An open letter to wejo

Math Professor wrote:You have absolutely no idea how to math. You are intentionally misleading people with your alarmist "statistics". You intentionally leave out that the denominator in all these "charts" you create. The denominator of total test cases or global population. You have no idea what random sampling of a representative population is and simply project misleading numbers. Get a life.

Actually, I am quite good at math. I have a PhD in the hard sciences, and spend quite a lot of my time working with math, thinking statistically. I've deliberately used a very rough approach, and also given very wide bound that reflect a rough approximation of the actual uncertainty. We shall see whether my bounds are too narrow. I gather you are suggesting that even my lower bound, projecting out to 60k fatalities, give or take, is too alarmist. I suggest in reply that you are fooling yourself and others.

But, the proof will be in the pudding, and we both (all) get to watch it unfold in real time (well, with a several day lag between someone being infected, being reported as a case and then maybe passing on.

Draymond wrote:

There are facts, there are opinions, and there are lies. LRC is allowing and promoting LIES and this WILL get people killed

Yikes. Bad Wiggins a murderer?

Par for the course wrote:

Wejo pressed to respond to a crisis. Wejo acknowledges the crisis and the unprecedented steps that are being taken around the world to keep folks safe.

...and then Wejo rattles off the same talking points he does when pressed about ANY type of moderation. "We DO moderate posts", "what you are specifically asking for is really hard to implement so we will just keep doing business as usual."

How about instead of nitpicking the calls to action, you lay out your own bold plan to combat misinformation? Would it be easier to acknowledge your responsibility (especially during this time), if you didn't even have a suggested course of action to nitpick and toss aside?

YES. Wejo's nitpicking of doing something productive is extremely ignorant in a time like this

interested reader wrote:

Actually, I am quite good at math. I have a PhD in the hard sciences, and spend quite a lot of my time working with math, thinking statistically.

Ha! With the intentionally misleading "charts" and "projections" you keep spewing, you are far more likely to have a PhD in liberal arts. You have no idea how to do statistics. What you show is beginner failure in comprehension of random sampling of a whole population.

And here's what's behind the shrugging off of responsibility at letsrun. It's intent, not ignorance:

"A third of the people may disagree - people like you - but you can't stop from coming back time after time and I get paid every time you do. "

Math Professor wrote:Ha! With the intentionally misleading "charts" and "projections" you keep spewing, you are far more likely to have a PhD in liberal arts. You have no idea how to do statistics. What you show is beginner failure in comprehension of random sampling of a whole population.

My PhD is in engineering, and I am paid (very well, in my mind) to give people advice that relies in a combination of data, judgement formed from education and experience, and analysis, which often involves considerable and complex statistical analysis. Clients make decisions involving considerable sums of money based on my advice. I am not an expert in epidemics, and I don't suppose the mathematics of epidemics is your area of study either (or you wouldn't be bleating about my casual analysis, rather you would be as concerned as me).

interested reader wrote:

Math Professor wrote:Ha! With the intentionally misleading "charts" and "projections" you keep spewing, you are far more likely to have a PhD in liberal arts. You have no idea how to do statistics. What you show is beginner failure in comprehension of random sampling of a whole population.

My PhD is in engineering, and I am paid (very well, in my mind) to give people advice that relies in a combination of data, judgement formed from education and experience, and analysis, which often involves considerable and complex statistical analysis. Clients make decisions involving considerable sums of money based on my advice. I am not an expert in epidemics, and I don't suppose the mathematics of epidemics is your area of study either (or you wouldn't be bleating about my casual analysis, rather you would be as concerned as me).

I wouldn't trust any of your "judgement" if your misleading statistics is any indication of the quality of your work. You make beginner mistakes in math and yet try to pose as an "engineer".

Draymond wrote:

There are facts, there are opinions, and there are lies. LRC is allowing and promoting LIES and this WILL get people killed

Please cite one instance where we are "promoting lies that will get people killed." One instance.

wejo@letsrun.com

I just went to a NY Times article. I clicked on comments. I clicked on NY Times recommends meaning their editor's are highlighting this post. The 2nd one I see is this, "The panic is doing a lot more damage to human lives than the disease... for those who are comfortably well off, the COVID is little more than an inconvenience, but for people living on the financial margins and just trying to get by week-to-week who lose their jobs, the economic effects of the panic (not the disease!) are going to be truly awful."

This is a RECOMMENDED comment by the NY Times. Is there blood on their hands?

Post like that on our forum we are not highlighting. We have an open forum, we allow opinions to be expressed. We do not agree with many of these opinions and let people argue against them. But the opinion above in the NY Times the Times feels is worth highlighting.

***

Erik our web guy his wife works in ICU in Iowa. I'm living arguably in the 2nd epicenter of this in the US (NY suburbs).

The nation is on shutdown. By allowing discussion of this we are not promoting lies that will get people killed.

As I have said you can email me, call me, etc. If people post opinions that others thing are uninformed they can be called out on here. That is the nature of a forum.

Agreed. Excellent post and one with skin in the game.

I too manage a large group of providers in a large hospital and in a large city. I've kept about 30-40% of my team home on days they are scheduled to work in anticipation of future need. We have banned all visitors and cancelled most elective surgeries too. Our units don't have COVID patients yet but our colleagues do and we have a couple "rule outs". We've had a couple providers who are positive and out. None critically ill yet. I have a couple people out who are symptomatic and awaiting test results, which are taking anywhere from 1-4 days. Things are quite tense as we anticipate what's coming.

Allow me to add to the chorus: F*CK the skeptics and the "it's fine" crowd. F*CK the whataboutism. F*CK you if you think you can use numbers to predict the future. These people lie and they should be thoroughly chastised. 100% agree with social pressure.

interested reader wrote:

educated runner wrote:Idiot Rojo downplayed it on last week's podcast....

Observant readers will have noticed that the appeal was addressed to wejo, who must have had a better share of oxygen in the womb. :-)

I'd have to go back and listen to the podcast but last week is like ages ago in discussion of this. When we recorded the podcast last week the NCAA tournament was still being held WITH fans. The NBA had not suspended play.

A week ago the Ivy league said it's basketball tournament couldn't go on but that spring sports could go on. That was a very inconsistent message. I wrote the Yale Athletic Department and criticized them for the decision as it wasn't logical. I said if they knew something that we didn't then ALL sporting events should be cancelled not just one basketball tournament and they should speak up.

If people post opinions that others thing are uninformed they can be called out on here. That is the nature of a forum.

The nature of a university is to educate, and yet:

"Cornell University is closely monitoring the ongoing coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. The health, safety and well-being of our community is our top priority, and we are working closely with local and state public health officials. Cornell has decided to take a series of proactive measures to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, including the move to virtual instruction for the Ithaca campus, effective April 6. We will continue to update the community, and this resources website, as new information emerges"

Thanks for this.

Wejo as a leader needs to write something to guide these young runners in the right direction. There is a lot of wrong ideas out there, you can read them on a lot of letsrun posts.

Just to say this is a forum and we can't read every comment is pretty lame.

+1000

Lame, ignorant, ineffectual, impotent

I am doing everything I can personally to prevent this spread. Social distancing, washing hands frequently, covering coughs and sneezes, staying at home other than work. I don't think the severity of issue is being overblown by most, but don't think that everyone on the Left is benevolent, because they are not. Some are spreading misinformation from both sides of the aisle. The same liberal trolls are hitting thread after thread. Its sickening. And no, I don't like the conservatives type trolls either.

When this crisis started in January, or least the beginning of it here in the US, Trump immediately shut down travel with China. What ensued was a swift and huge attack from the Left and its media screaming racist. At that point the media made it political as they have the similar over and over again. Hence, many on the Right don't believe them. As time has passed and scientific evidence comes in(even though inconsistent at times), most, if not all, of my friends on the Right are taking heed and complying. Millions in the US won't die because WE are doing what we need to do. BOTH sides need to quit the rhetoric.

Wejo, your moderation, is better than most sites I visit.

Ultramarkus wrote:

Thanks for this.

Wejo as a leader needs to write something to guide these young runners in the right direction. There is a lot of wrong ideas out there, you can read them on a lot of letsrun posts.

Just to say this is a forum and we can't read every comment is pretty lame.

Can any of you alarmists even create any proper statistics? Everything I've seen from you panic types is so flawed its like none of you ever took statistics in math class. Everything we have seen shows the vast majority of people either show no symptoms after being infected or very mild symptoms. Only those with some other pre-existing disease that already made them sick have more complicated symptoms. Can you at least acknowledge that the coronavirus is not dangerous for the vast majority of people? If you can't even acknowledge that, what are you even doing here?

interested reader wrote:

Math Professor wrote:Ha! With the intentionally misleading "charts" and "projections" you keep spewing, you are far more likely to have a PhD in liberal arts. You have no idea how to do statistics. What you show is beginner failure in comprehension of random sampling of a whole population.

My PhD is in engineering, and I am paid (very well, in my mind) to give people advice that relies in a combination of data, judgement formed from education and experience, and analysis, which often involves considerable and complex statistical analysis. Clients make decisions involving considerable sums of money based on my advice. I am not an expert in epidemics, and I don't suppose the mathematics of epidemics is your area of study either (or you wouldn't be bleating about my casual analysis, rather you would be as concerned as me).

There are epidemiology experts doing real analysis which you can find on the web.

We don't need your "causal analysis".

All you people using this epidemic to virtue signal are both useless and disgusting.

uninterested reader wrote:

interested reader wrote:

My PhD is in engineering, and I am paid (very well, in my mind) to give people advice that relies in a combination of data, judgement formed from education and experience, and analysis, which often involves considerable and complex statistical analysis. Clients make decisions involving considerable sums of money based on my advice. I am not an expert in epidemics, and I don't suppose the mathematics of epidemics is your area of study either (or you wouldn't be bleating about my casual analysis, rather you would be as concerned as me).

There are epidemiology experts doing real analysis which you can find on the web.

We don't need your "causal analysis".

All you people using this epidemic to virtue signal are both useless and disgusting.

oh, you mean like you? Right that's what I thought

Webbasedreading wrote:

wejo wrote:

"Let's ignore the will be harmful to public health part for now."

How can any responsible person maintain this stance at a time like this?

I was making an argument. The posters comment had two parts 1) "commentary that diminishes the importance of this crisis" and 2) "is harmful to the public health."

I was pointing out that defining 1) is not easy in its own right.

People are going to disagree all over the place what type of commentary diminishes the importance of this. Can people not debate what they think the death rates are going to be? Or that they think certain steps of the lockdown ie preventing outdoor exercise in Spain might be detrimental to health. For example, the CDC recommends exercise for people and I have seen many informed people recommending people get outside and exericse with proper social distancing.

Some might argue that saying people should go outside and exercise solo diminishes the importance of this as we need to be on 100% indoor lockdown. Let's say actually we all agreed on that or whatever the point was say Bad Wiggins point that only a few thousand would get infected by this.

Then you would have to look at the 2nd part of the argument that this is automatically harmful to the public health if someone expresses this view. That is why I said ""Let's ignore the will be harmful to public health part for now."

The counter argument can easily be made that is not the case. The views that you disagree with on here can be called out. That is the bonus of an open forum. We may get to a better place with people pointing out the errors of others views rather than just letting them stand on their own. On the NY Times comments section if someone points a view you think is detrimental to the public health, you can't really argue with it directly. Here you can.

Society generally gets to a better place with discussion in my view.

Webbasedreading wrote:

Misinformation and crazy theories that lead to dangerous behavior is most likely what many are concerned about:

https://www.mediaite.com/news/crowded-florida-beach-with-spring-breakers-amidst-coronavirus-pandemic-draws-online-scorn/

Yesterday, I spoke with a woman who wanted to do a serious "what if" analysis of our situation. I explained what I knew and how my opinion had changed from "it's just a flu" to "this is a life changing big deal." This will be the biggest life-changing event since WWII.

Last night, I got a text from her saying she just had to get away from it all so she and three other moms were going to Destin with their 4 teenage sons!

I almost cried. Fortunately, she changed her mind after a couple of texts, but it brings up a really important point. Some people need to hear something several times in several different ways before it emotionally sinks in.

Fauci said it... but poorly... yesterday. You can't make decisions on what you're seeing today. You have to make decisions today based on where we're going to be in a week. That's the lag time for incubation and identification of this disease. Doing that is NOT panicking, it's prudent. Unfortunately, this message isn't being delivered clearly and frequently to get through to the masses.