22/n The HIGHEST IFR estimate for influenza using this methodology, based on a 2014 systematic review, is 0.01% That's 18x lower than the lowest reasonable estimate of COVID-19 IFRhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3809029/ …
-
Show this thread
-
23/n More broadly, if we look at the total range, the IFR of COVID-19 calculated from seroprevalence data appears to be around 50-100x higher than the same number for influenza
1 reply 12 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
24/n This is actually a serious flaw with the paper - the author has chosen only to pursue corrections of the data that push the IFR lower. If we were to account for excess mortality attributable to COVID-19 - based on published research - the IFRs would all jump substantially
1 reply 2 retweets 34 likesShow this thread -
25/n Now, there are some excellent improvements to the paper For example, much of the language in the discussion/conclusion has been correctedpic.twitter.com/KkVboq3eDO
1 reply 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
26/n There are still odd, emotive phrases ("blind lockdown"), but the paper no longer describes COVID-19 as common and mild, which was clearly incorrect
1 reply 0 retweets 25 likesShow this thread -
27/n However, overall this paper still suffers from many of the issues I previously raised, and seems to still substantially underestimate the IFR of COVID-19
1 reply 2 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
28/n I should be clear that I am not speculating in any way about the reasoning behind these decisions. The fact that the paper underestimates IFR is a problem, but we can't really know why these decisions were made
2 replies 1 retweet 30 likesShow this thread -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JefinhoMenes
No worries! I did a systematic review/meta-analysis with a friend and found a rate of 0.64%, although with significant heterogeneity it's hard to know if this is the 'true' point estimate (it will likely vary by location)https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v3 …
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Tbh I thought the actual study itself was reasonable, but in this case the interpretation seemed very odd. The updated nationwide study on Medrxiv seems fine in general, unless there are other issues?
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 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.