- Hello, Jeff
- I have been keeping track of the SARS day-to-day statistics
since they were first published in the WHO.org website. These data are
the day-to-day increases in SARS cases, deaths, etc. reported from many
nations. I have done several things with these numbers, e.g., making forecasts,
etc. Another thing that I have been doing is what I call a "Lie Index"
or a "Reporting Validity Index" (however you would like to define
those terms). Prior to May 1, I was observing substantial variance the
day-to-day "Reporting Validity Index" as one would expect...
number of reported cases, deaths, etc., should be a function of the real
world and you would expect substantial variance. Beginning on May 1, however,
there was a complete end to the day-to-day variance in the "Reporting
Validity Index" and the index went flat.
- What the data, i.e., the across-time reporting validity
index, are telling me is that, beginning on May 1, 2003, there was, apparently,
some decision made to not let the chips fall where they might in terms
of accurate reporting of day-to-day SARS cases. There can be no other explanation
for the sudden end to variance in day-to-day reporting. So, while I will
continue to track the numbers, I want to caution you and your readers/listeners
that, since May 1, 2003, there may have been a "rat in the woodpile"
in the daily WHO-reported SARS numbers. It is important that you and your
readers know that I do not yet know that the reliability index has, for
a FACT, established that the WHO SARS numbers are being cooked but I strongly
suspect they are being cooked. I will continue to monitor the numbers on
a day-to-day basis for the foreseeable future and maintain this reliability
index as just one of several indices of the SARS outbreak.
- Please see the attached Lie Index/Reporting Validity
Index so you can see for yourself the sudden and inexplicable end of day-to-day
variation in the Lie Index beginning exactly on May 1, 2003. I would expect
the truth to show a lot of variance, up and down on the graph... and a
lie to show very little, if any, variance on the graph. Calculation of
the index is based on a running comparison ratio. If your readers/listeners
have any evidence of what may have occurred on May 1, 2003, to cause the
lie index to indicate "Reliability problems/Fraud/Lie" in the
numbers, I would be interested in knowing their thoughts.
- Thanks, Jeff.
- Bob Lee
- From JK
- I noticed what Dr. Lee has indicated around the same
time he did. Although I am not a researcher I've come to a conclusion just
from watching the daily news the World Bank and the IMF are now telling
WHO how to report SARS. As the saying goes, "Money talks, bullshit
- Money has become more important than people, and that
is a sad commentary for the human race at this time of paradigm shift.
Rather than following the percepts of Adam Smith, the goal of today's capitalist
is to see who has the most toys before they die, and in this equation people
are considered "toys", and their deaths are "collateral"
damage in the grand scheme of things.
- From Patricia Doyle, PhD
- I first want to commend Dr. Bob Lee for his work on SARS
and other emerging diseases. I, too, watch the numbers and wonder about
the SARS (suspected cases) that are dropped from the SARS numbers due to
the fact that they are not identified as SARS cases. I wonder if these
suspected cases are being followed and if they fit into the "new"
"SARSLIKE Illness" category.
- As we discussed, there appears to be spreading, either
a variant of SARS or another disease that mimics SARS.
- I cannot help but wonder if we take the "suspected"
but non SARS numbers and add them together, will they surpass SARS?
- Patricia Doyle
- Patricia A. Doyle, PhD
- Please visit my "Emerging Diseases" message
- Zhan le Devlesa tai sastimasa
- Go with God and in Good Health