SA: “Here is what I wrote in another thread about this interview “
Here’s my synopsis:
Ben Goldacre calls him “a godlike figure in the field of research about research.” He more modestly introduces himself as a professor of medicine, epidemiology and population health, interested in “appraising evidence, in trying to understand data, strength of data, weaknesses of data, and trying to make sure we have the most useful information to make decisions that matter.”
[He begins …]
“Unfortunately much of the information that we have collected so far [….] is not reliable. We have increasing evidence that many of the key features that pertain to what this pandemic is about – how lethal is that virus, how many people it has infected or will infect, what is likely to be the eventual impact, and how effective are the different measures that we are applying – we have major gaps in practically all of those fronts.”
[He explains flaws in data collection methods and “sensationalism” in the media, then summarises ….]
“I think that there is a very high chance that we are exaggerating. As we discussed, many of the features of this pandemic are serious but I think that the estimates are exaggerated, and I think that there is really a risk of making some fundamental decisions about the structure of our society, of our people’s future that may not be appropriate.”
[He concludes ….]
“We need to learn. I think there is a risk that in this situation there may be other conflicts and other interests that get interspersed and they kind of take over the entire agenda. That should not become a political debate, that should not become a debate between people who may have different financial conflicts or other conflicts.”