This swing from R0 of 5.6 to R_t of 0.8 is *extremely* good news. This proves that the social distancing / lockdown was effective. I don't really agree with the 25% NYC infection estimate, but this should not count for much, as it is more of a hunch than any kind of estimate.https://twitter.com/youyanggu/status/1263208201983365120 …
The main question with this is what they delays are: in reporting, in incubation, in progress in the disease, in how long it takes for it to be fatal. It could be that the people in Manhattan are quite strong physically -- I think you have to be to live there.
-
-
For example the homeless population that is getting SARS-CoV-2, they are unusually subsymptomatic. Likewise with the Icelandic population. There might be something with the immune system, something with how they live, something with genetics. Not sure at all.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
We take those factors into account in our model. If you're arguing that the fatality rate is lower in NYC, then the prevalence would actually be higher than 25%.
-
I'd be interested in the details. Specifically what I think is likely is that the course of disease is likely longer in the population that took public transit, while at the same time the proportion of super-spreaders and the rate of growth is much higher. Simultaneous effects
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.