The study quality isn't impacted by age breakdown. As I said, you would expect the value to vary somewhat by population. For example London (IFR ~0.5%) is lower than England (~0.8%) probably due in part to the younger age
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
-
-
There are very few examples of IFR as low as 0.26%, which I've now said several times. At a certain point, it's hard not to assume that you're being disingenuous in your arguments
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I mean, comparability of those two samples aside, there's a very obvious reason why testing conducted in early April/ late March might have lower antibody levels than more recent testing. Again, this seems disingenuous
End of conversation
-
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.
