Meet the former NYT reporter who is challenging the coronavirus narrative

[txradioguy]

As daily life across America is upended by the coronavirus crisis -- with mass business closures plunging the economy into freefall -- one former New York Times reporter is sounding the alarm about what he believes are flawed models dictating the aggressive strategy.

Alex Berenson has been analyzing the data on the crisis on a daily basis for weeks and has come to the conclusion that the strategy of shutting down entire sectors of the economy is based on modeling that doesn’t line up with the realities of the virus.

"The response we have taken has caused enormous societal devastation, I don't think that's too strong a word," he told Fox News in an interview Thursday.

Berenson is a former reporter who worked for the Times from 1999 to 2010 primarily covering the pharmaceutical industry.

<snip>

Now he’s turned to challenging the narratives on the response to the coronavirus. What Berenson is promoting isn’t coronavirus denialism, or conspiracy theories about plots to curb liberties. Instead what Berenson is claiming is simple: the models guiding the response were wrong and that it is becoming clearer by the day.

"In February I was worried about the virus. By mid-March I was more scared about the economy. But now I’m starting to get genuinely nervous," he tweeted this week. "This isn’t complicated. The models don’t work. The hospitals are empty. WHY ARE WE STILL TALKING ABOUT INDEFINITE LOCKDOWNS?"

Hospitals, of course, are not empty in places like hard-hit New York City, and tales are widespread of overburdened doctors and emergency rooms. Berenson acknowledged as much in the interview Thursday.

Concerns that this virus is significantly more contagious and deadly than any ordinary flu strain are what's driving the current government approach, in America and around the world. Perhaps due in part to more testing, America reports the highest number of cases in the world right now, with more than 430,000 cases and nearly 15,000 deaths. Symptoms vary widely, with some patients reporting only minor discomfort yet others dealing with crushing physical pain and struggling to breathe, forced to go on ventilators.

But Berenson is taking a broader look. He initially challenged the model put forward by the Imperial College in London, when one of the authors of the models appeared to significantly walk back projections that the U.K. would see 500,000 people killed by the disease to closer to 20,000 -- although the author later said that the 500,000 prediction was without social distancing measures, and 20,000 was with them in place. That model is being used to advise the U.K. government on its strategy for the virus.

“That was March 22 or 23, and ever since then I’ve been paying incredibly close attention to the modeling and trying to figure out whether it lines up with what we’re seeing in reality -- and the answer is it hasn’t lined up at all," he said.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ex-nyt-reporter-challenging-the-coronavirus-narrative

[Bigun]

As daily life across America is upended by the coronavirus crisis -- with mass business closures plunging the economy into freefall -- one former New York Times reporter is sounding the alarm about what he believes are flawed models dictating the aggressive strategy.

Alex Berenson has been analyzing the data on the crisis on a daily basis for weeks and has come to the conclusion that the strategy of shutting down entire sectors of the economy is based on modeling that doesn’t line up with the realities of the virus.

"The response we have taken has caused enormous societal devastation, I don't think that's too strong a word," he told Fox News in an interview Thursday.

Berenson is a former reporter who worked for the Times from 1999 to 2010 primarily covering the pharmaceutical industry.

<snip>

Now he’s turned to challenging the narratives on the response to the coronavirus. What Berenson is promoting isn’t coronavirus denialism, or conspiracy theories about plots to curb liberties. Instead what Berenson is claiming is simple: the models guiding the response were wrong and that it is becoming clearer by the day.

"In February I was worried about the virus. By mid-March I was more scared about the economy. But now I’m starting to get genuinely nervous," he tweeted this week. "This isn’t complicated. The models don’t work. The hospitals are empty. WHY ARE WE STILL TALKING ABOUT INDEFINITE LOCKDOWNS?"

Hospitals, of course, are not empty in places like hard-hit New York City, and tales are widespread of overburdened doctors and emergency rooms. Berenson acknowledged as much in the interview Thursday.

Concerns that this virus is significantly more contagious and deadly than any ordinary flu strain are what's driving the current government approach, in America and around the world. Perhaps due in part to more testing, America reports the highest number of cases in the world right now, with more than 430,000 cases and nearly 15,000 deaths. Symptoms vary widely, with some patients reporting only minor discomfort yet others dealing with crushing physical pain and struggling to breathe, forced to go on ventilators.

But Berenson is taking a broader look. He initially challenged the model put forward by the Imperial College in London, when one of the authors of the models appeared to significantly walk back projections that the U.K. would see 500,000 people killed by the disease to closer to 20,000 -- although the author later said that the 500,000 prediction was without social distancing measures, and 20,000 was with them in place. That model is being used to advise the U.K. government on its strategy for the virus.

“That was March 22 or 23, and ever since then I’ve been paying incredibly close attention to the modeling and trying to figure out whether it lines up with what we’re seeing in reality -- and the answer is it hasn’t lined up at all," he said.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ex-nyt-reporter-challenging-the-coronavirus-narrative

Follow him on twitter.  He's sharp!

[txradioguy]

Follow him on twitter.  He's sharp!

I am.  He's surprisingly good for a former NYT reporter.

[Applewood]

Well, I've been suspicious of both the test results and the cause of death for a number of patients.  How do we know that these test aren't producing false positives in some cases?  And how do we know that of those who have died there migght be a percentage of those who actually died from some underlying condition and not the virus?  How do we know that someone or some entity isn't inflating the numbers in both cases?

I don't normally subscribe to conspiracy theories, but I've grown suspicious of a lot of things the older I get.  The way this outbreak has been handled is one of them. 

[Smokin Joe]

Well, I've been suspicious of both the test results and the cause of death for a number of patients.  How do we know that these test aren't producing false positives in some cases?  And how do we know that of those who have died there migght be a percentage of those who actually died from some underlying condition and not the virus?  How do we know that someone or some entity isn't inflating the numbers in both cases?

I don't normally subscribe to conspiracy theories, but I've grown suspicious of a lot of things the older I get.  The way this outbreak has been handled is one of them.

I have been looking at the projections. At the IHME site, for North Dakota (as of the time of this posting) The 8th and 9th of April are projected to have 8 and 7 deaths respectively. (Total for the 8th and 9th projected to be 15 dead).

Well, the latest figures from the ND Health Deaprtment show 5 dead (total for outbreak), and only 14 in hospital.

Those estimated deaths did not happen. None of them. Hmmmm. In fact the flat line with the occasional bump (one death) that is the actual graph over time of deaths from COVID-19 in the State looks like it runs into the cliffs of Gibraltar when it meets the projected deaths, a number which has been projected as ridiculously high, but has (thankfully) failed to materialize.

Similarly, beds needed, ICU beds needed, and ventilators needed, were/are projected at 392, 65, and 55 respectively, as of this post (Note above, there are only 14 in hospital).
Projections of peak resources required inevitably postulate a shortage of ICU beds and ventilators, on April 22 through the 28th, requiring 672 beds (total) an increase of 658 patients Forty seven times the current hospitalized patients in 12 days, two and a half times the total number of people who have tested positive in the history of the outbreak here.

While nothing is impossible, with bars, schools, and restaurants closed, and social distancing, I think it is safe to say the projections are looking just a wee bit inflated.

[Bigun]

I have been looking at the projections. At the IHME site, for North Dakota (as of the time of this posting) The 8th and 9th of April are projected to have 8 and 7 deaths respectively. (Total for the 8th and 9th projected to be 15 dead).

Well, the latest figures from the ND Health Deaprtment show 5 dead (total for outbreak), and only 14 in hospital.

Those estimated deaths did not happen. None of them. Hmmmm. In fact the flat line with the occasional bump (one death) that is the actual graph over time of deaths from COVID-19 in the State looks like it runs into the cliffs of Gibraltar when it meets the projected deaths, a number which has been projected as ridiculously high, but has (thankfully) failed to materialize.

Similarly, beds needed, ICU beds needed, and ventilators needed, were/are projected at 392, 65, and 55 respectively, as of this post (Note above, there are only 14 in hospital).
Projections of peak resources required inevitably postulate a shortage of ICU beds and ventilators, on April 22 through the 28th, requiring 672 beds (total) an increase of 658 patients Forty seven times the current hospitalized patients in 12 days, two and a half times the total number of people who have tested positive in the history of the outbreak here.

While nothing is impossible, with bars, schools, and restaurants closed, and social distancing, I think it is safe to say the projections are looking just a wee bit inflated.

GIGO!!!

[Fishrrman]

tex wrote:
"He's surprisingly good for a former NYT reporter."

Maybe that's why he IS a "former" NYT reporter...