This is clear up confusion from last night (and add some post publication peer review) to this paper in @lancetmicrobe https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30053-7/fulltext … 1/n
Also, in early April the govt revised death numbers upwards in Wuhan/ Hubei substantially, so using the late March numbers could be misleading
-
-
People keep forgetting that by March there really wasn't much going on in Wuhan. And yes there was that big leap in mid april. Anyway gotta go write a letter to the journal pointing it all out!
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Using the revised number of deaths for Wuhan to 3869, 11 Million people, 4.4% sero+ gives 0.8% deaths
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
the added numbers are missing counts from the early phase - January and early Feb. Using the late March numbers+1290 & the 500k estimate gives us around 0.76%. Not much changed from end of March until now.https://twitter.com/chenchenzh/status/1268634503599325184 …
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.
enjoy!