The problem is that initially, we stopped the clock BEFORE PEOPLE HAD THE OUTCOME WE ARE INTERESTED IN This meant that the difference - even though it was there! - was impossible to see in our data
-
-
...as well as people who were infected weeks ago. The crudest way to account for this is to take the deaths from some point in the future (say, x+7 days), but you can also estimate the impact in a much more sophisticated way
-
There's another variable: lag between conducting the antibody test and reporting/publishing them in a study. I'd imagine this takes about a week, perhaps more.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It seems to me all the talk about “much lower IFR than we thought” is coming from business interests trying to rationalize a reduced response to the pandemic.
-
What do you think of the actuarial type data of “excess deaths” as a crude surrogate for calculating IFR? Keeping in mind, that we must consider potentially increased (delayed?) MI/stroke/CA deaths as well as decreased MVA/suicide/air pollution deaths from lockdown
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.