I only got 1 point from this resolution, having a final prediction at 99%. Seems a bit low.
I could not find any confirmation that these cows were actually infected with bovine bluetongue, but assuming these culling events count for the purpose of this question, we have a lower bound of 850+1610.
I wish Metaculus had a better system for assigning probabilities in discrete non-binary questions. I can imagine some (low-probability) proliferation scenarios where nuclear weapons disseminate to many countries, but currently I have not enough bins to represent that without "losing" a lot of probability mass to non-integer values.
@ugandamaximum One possibility that comes to mind is that they model a portion of the population becoming less willing to vaccinate if booster doses become recommended, as such recommendation would somehow imply a lesser effectivity per dose and more hassle to become “fully vaccinated”.
Currently, the fully vaccinated percentage for the age group 12-15 is of 48.6%. It seems like there was some big update recently.
The lower end (1 detonation) should be closed, right?
The question is restricted to the approval of products for human consumption, right?
@RyanBeck I think so. At the end of the document it says that it terminates Seventh Amended Number Seventy-Two (2021) and Order of Public Health Emergency Nine, which includes the point I.A.2, whose subpoints b and g state the 6-foot distance restriction.
Results We found no evidence that vitamin D levels causally affect the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection [...] nor did we find evidence that vitamin D levels causally affect COVID-19 severity
What happens if the recommendation only mentions that people of 12 years or older should get a booster dose? My interpretation is that this would count as a positive resolution if vaccines for children under 12 are not yet approved, but it would not count otherwise. Am I correct?
Edit: Also, what happens if the recommendation specifically excludes a certain group? (for example, because they find that extra doses could be harmful for that particular group).
— edited by Sergio
I do not know what happened, but it seems like there was an update of a few percent points today (or maybe yesterday?). Currently, the fully vaccinated percentage for the age group 18-24 is of 52.2%.
@fianxu I liked the previous formulation better. I found the conditional framing natural, and useful to more freely and honestly assign probabilities depending on different scenarios where the offensive use of a nuclear weapon happened. Currently, I am having trouble assigning my true probability estimate to the case n=1, and the case of n=0 takes up too much of the all the available probability mass. Maybe the formulation of this question could be reverted, and a binary question opened on whether any offensive detonation will occur by 2050.