The .8 wasn't based on this specific example, so that's just a straw man. I think the lowest estimate from a well-done study currently is Slovenia, at 0.17%. The highest is from the excellent Spanish seroprevalence study is 1.15%, although the Danish sample is 0.5-1.7%
We know that they used a test with low specificity and sampled high-risk groups. Chances are it's biased, but we can't be certain until it's published 
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
That's not really what the Wuhan data shows (risk of community transmission =/= prevalence), and we have a fair bit of data behind the expectation that HC workers would be at increased risk. It's also not the only reason that I've given for the IFR to be a likely underestimate
- Show replies
-
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.