Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
Mon Oct 20, 2014, 05:46 PM Oct 2014

Nassim Taleb: Here's What People Don't Understand About Ebola [View all]

Since so many right now are talking about "panic" and, particularly, how so many people apparently "just don't understand ebola", I thought this was relevant:


http://www.businessinsider.com/nassim-taleb-heres-what-people-dont-understand-about-ebola-2014-10#ixzz3GdSErRhN

More specifically, Taleb explained to Business Insider that many people talking about the disease don't "have a grasp of the severity of the multiplicative process."

The argument that the US should be more worried about a disease like cancer — which has more stable rates of infection than Ebola does currently — is a logic that Taleb calls "the empiricism of the idiots."

The basic idea: The growth of Ebola infection is nonlinear, so the number of people catching it doubles every 20 days. Because of this, you have to act quickly at the source of infections, he says. "The closer you are to the source, the more effective you are at slowing it down ... it is much more rational to prevent it now than later."

***

"If you have to overreact about something, this is the place to overreact," he said.





27 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
But the people who shared the apartment with Duncan, the first Ebola victim, didn't catch the Louisiana1976 Oct 2014 #1
The point is we have to nip it in the bud early on, because the infected can increase exponentially nomorenomore08 Oct 2014 #2
This is true. And good news, absolutely. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #3
The only thing that has ever controlled outbreaks is the "jump on it" bit. Yo_Mama Oct 2014 #6
When Liberia had their first case in April, 2014, the CDC's response was very much the same as it pnwmom Oct 2014 #9
It's not reassuring. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #12
+1 nt laundry_queen Oct 2014 #15
So what? Two other people caught it from him. Until we know that the chain is completely broken, pnwmom Oct 2014 #8
I think odds are pretty good they managed to stop it at the 2 nurses. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #25
Most Americans read at a 5th grade level and do math at 3rd grade level. kestrel91316 Oct 2014 #4
Indeed. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #5
Along with the fact that in all of the U.S. States, the highest paid State Officials are... Hugin Oct 2014 #14
Bread and circuses. kestrel91316 Oct 2014 #16
Most people have no idea things like "the rule of 72" used to estimate doubling time HereSince1628 Oct 2014 #27
He is correct. bemildred Oct 2014 #7
#2) True- which is not to say "evolving to airborne transmission" is particularly likely. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #17
A messy subject, transmission of Ebola. bemildred Oct 2014 #18
Exactly.. sendero Oct 2014 #26
k&r nt bananas Oct 2014 #10
Did you know tha given E. coli's reproduction time it could reach a mass MattBaggins Oct 2014 #11
Ahhhh, just train it to ferment Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #13
I still continue to believe that we need to find that place between KMOD Oct 2014 #19
I agree with all that you've said, here. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #20
That is true of any disease with a R0 above 1. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #21
Sure. But combine that with a lethality rate of about 70%, and there's a problem. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #22
With proper procedure and protocals, you can easily drop the R0 below 1. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #23
I think it's doable, too. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #24
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Nassim Taleb: Here's What...