1 - NYC We already had the basic data, but the testing implies 22.7% infected from tests between 19/04-28/04. Taking the 28/04 date to crudely account for right-censoring, this gives an IFR: 17682/1906573 = ~0.92%
-
Show this thread
-
Study is here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.25.20113050v1 … IFR for the whole state is a bit lower - using the same date cutoff, it is ~0.84% with 14% infected
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
2 - Brazil An impressive effort from Brazil, nationwide seroprevalence sampling. The authors report a corrected IFR of 1% https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.30.20117531v1 …pic.twitter.com/bcT4vTzRv7
1 reply 1 retweet 12 likesShow this thread -
What's particularly interesting about the Brazilian study is that the IFR range is given, with places reporting between 0% and 2.4%
3 replies 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
3 - London While the testing hasn't been published formally, the estimates appear to be that 17% of the city had antibodies mid-May So, cumulative incidence of ~1.5million people by 13thhttps://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30247-2/fulltext#coronavirus-linkback-header …
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
Now, extracting an IFR from these figures is a bit of a headache, because England only publishes specific information on COVID-19 deaths in hospitals, but the deaths appear to be 5,644 on this date from that source
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
Given that ~75% of London COVID-19 deaths occur in hospitals, that means ~7,500 deaths and ~1.5mil cases, so an IFR of ~0.5% for London
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likesShow this thread -
We can also look at the whole UK IFR from this data ~5% of the country infected gives ~3,332,500 infections 24,000 deaths in-hospital gives ~32,000 deaths Therefore overall IFR is 32k/3.3mil = 0.96% IFR
3 replies 3 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
(Apologies, above tweet should say IFR for the whole of ENGLAND, not the UK. This data is from the ONS testing in England, and the death reports from England as well)
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @GidMK
Aidan Retweeted John Burn-Murdoch
What death figure to use though?https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1267826525245542401 …
Aidan added,
John Burn-MurdochVerified account @jburnmurdochNEW: we’ve updated our excess mortality tracker, the best measure for international comparisons of Covid death tolls UK had 62,000 more deaths than usual through to May 22, the highest rate of excess deaths in the world Free to read: https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441 … pic.twitter.com/uh6a7kx1FCShow this thread1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I'm using official reported deaths. Currently, there are too many excess mortality estimates to be sure of one. I do suspect that the eventual IFR will be higher, however
-
-
Replying to @GidMK
Yep. Interesting nonetheless. Also of interest is places like the US with large COVID related fatalities but a lesser excess death total compared to the UK. Clearly many people in US dying needlessly due to relatively preventable causes.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. 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.