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 
And as a lower bound, as I've mentioned, it's probably a bit of an underestimate. So while 0.26% might not be entirely impossible, there's no doubt (especially given the population demographics) that it's an outlier
-
-
(Oh, sorry, forgot to mention that two of those examples - CEBM and CDC - are "expert opinion" and have been widely questioned. CEBM has also now increased their estimate three times as new evidence emerges)
- Show replies
New 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.