In which @tylercowen goes full-on "hey I'm just asking questions" to insinuate that epidemiologists aren't as smart as economists, are ignorant of the limits of modeling, and maybe exaggerate outbreak severity for $$.
Thus revealing his own deep ignorance of their field.
Thus revealing his own deep ignorance of their field.
I too deal with many epidemiologists as a non-epi myself. Here's what I've seen of them:
- Most are pretty aware of the limits of their models
- Definitely not in it for the money
- Most are averse to exaggerating risk and if anything tend to under-play it
- Most are pretty aware of the limits of their models
- Definitely not in it for the money
- Most are averse to exaggerating risk and if anything tend to under-play it
Further:
- Very aware that reactions to modeled projections can alter their outcomes (that's kinda the point, in fact)
- Very aware that people's reactions to public health guidance are not linear (AKA yes, epis do realize that mask guidance can provide a false sense of safety)
- Very aware that reactions to modeled projections can alter their outcomes (that's kinda the point, in fact)
- Very aware that people's reactions to public health guidance are not linear (AKA yes, epis do realize that mask guidance can provide a false sense of safety)
So for other world-renowned academics wondering if epidemiology really counts as sound science: maybe talk to some epis about your questions before you cast aspersions (sorry - "ask questions") about their field on your widely-read blog.
