Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
GidMK's profile
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Verified account
@GidMK

Tweets

Health NerdVerified account

@GidMK

Epidemiologist. Writer (Guardian, Observer etc). "Well known research trouble-maker". PhDing at @UoW Host of @senscipod Email gidmk.healthnerd@gmail.com he/him

Sydney, New South Wales
theguardian.com/profile/gideon…
Joined November 2015

Tweets

  • © 2021 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      5. How big of an underestimate is it? We can get a ballpark figure by looking at the relative age-specific CFR rates from the Wu and McGoogan JAMA study, weighting each by UN data about the demographic structure of Denmark.pic.twitter.com/EgAM1ylIv2

      2 replies 7 retweets 64 likes
      Show this thread
    2. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      6. When you go through this process, you find that the population IFR should be almost exactly twice the IFR in the 20-69 category. (I don't have data to extend down to age 17). This yields a population IFR estimate of something like 0.16% with approximate CI 0.12-0.31.

      5 replies 5 retweets 67 likes
      Show this thread
    3. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      7. This is very close to the data coming out of California, data that I have publicly criticized. This is puzzling. With 0.15% of New York City's population dead from COVID19, that seems to be a very hard lower bound on IFR. Realistically, 0.7-1.0% seems more likely for NYC.

      16 replies 11 retweets 108 likes
      Show this thread
    4. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      8. Other estimates of IFR also land in that range 0.5%-1%. While the authors of the Danish study discuss some limitations, I don't see obvious glaring flaws. Lag times to death may come into play. What, if anything, am I missing?

      40 replies 6 retweets 76 likes
      Show this thread
    5. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      Carl T. Bergstrom Retweeted Carl T. Bergstrom

      9. @kearnsneuro quickly picked up one thing. The age distribution of blood donor population is probably not representative of the age distribution in the population at large.https://twitter.com/i/status/1255759911570386944 …

      Carl T. Bergstrom added,

      Carl T. BergstromVerified account @CT_Bergstrom
      1. There's a relatively new study out of Denmark that estimates seroprevalence from nearly 10,000 blood donations by people age 17-69 to be 1.7% (CI: 0.9-2.3). https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.20075291v1.full.pdf … pic.twitter.com/X3eBqRwT1N
      Show this thread
      9 replies 7 retweets 112 likes
      Show this thread
    6. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      10. Why does this matter? If younger people are more likely to be infected *and* more likely to give blood, the procedure described in the paper would yield an underestimate of IFR. Still I'd be surprised if this gets us all the way up to the NYC numbers.pic.twitter.com/bGTAyuWG4A

      10 replies 8 retweets 81 likes
      Show this thread
    7. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      Carl T. Bergstrom Retweeted Ben Gardiner

      11. @BendyGardiner correctly points out that I made things much too complicated with my silly IFR scaling to the population as a whole, and in the process got an odd result. I think I know why, but first his objection:https://twitter.com/BendyGardiner/status/1255767241410428929 …

      Carl T. Bergstrom added,

      Ben Gardiner @BendyGardiner
      Replying to @CT_Bergstrom
      I think you’re wrong about the scaling - the study has 56 deaths in the 16-69 population (which is very low comparatively) from a total 443 deaths, and given all the remaining 387 deaths must come from the 70+ population population level IFR has to be more than twice as high
      2 replies 4 retweets 62 likes
      Show this thread
    8. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      12. We still need the demographic pyramid, but there's no need to use Chinese CFR estimates to make this correction. I see slightly different numbers than Ben reports, but let's work with these.pic.twitter.com/vfsaS56ybF

      3 replies 2 retweets 40 likes
      Show this thread
    9. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      13. Approximately 73% of the Danish population is aged 20-69 (again, I don't have the data for 17-69). IFR 20-69 = deaths 20-69 / cases 20-69. IFR pop = all deaths / all cases. Assume cases are uniform across age. The paper gives us total deaths as well as deaths 17-69.

      6 replies 2 retweets 33 likes
      Show this thread
    10. Carl T. Bergstrom‏Verified account @CT_Bergstrom 30 Apr 2020

      14. To get the population IFR, we take the IFR for 20-69 year olds and numerator by a factor of 370/53 and the denominator by 1/0.73. This gives us a 5.4-fold increase for a population IFR of 0.44%, CI (0.32-0.83%), closer in line with what I would have expected.

      10 replies 6 retweets 66 likes
      Show this thread
      Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 30 Apr 2020
      Replying to @CT_Bergstrom

      I'd guess if you then corrected for right censoring you'd end up with a rate very much in line with the usual estimates

      1:33 AM - 30 Apr 2020
      • 1 Like
      • Carl T. Bergstrom
      0 replies 0 retweets 1 like

      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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2021 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info