25/n For example, Geneva. The original authors calculated an IFR of 0.64%, but this is downgraded to 0.45% in the paperpic.twitter.com/lEEG7LPjez
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
36/n Also, another statement that is incorrect and has remained in each version - that disadvantaged populations/settings are uncommon exceptions in the global landscape This remains simply untruepic.twitter.com/8M8QjQ6ZWv
37/n Also, you can find my personal best estimate in the paper that @LeaMerone and I authored on IFR here. A reasonable guess for most areas seems to be 0.5-0.8%https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v4 …
38/n Another addition, this thread goes through some of the headaches with the paper that have remained through every version TL:DR - it's not systematic! https://twitter.com/AVG_Joseph96/status/1283236273558294528?s=20 …
Does the paper use official Covid-deaths or real excess mortality? Of course for most countries the latter is not available yet... As far as I know, only Belgium came real close with their count.
Great work. Thanks.
Covid at first appearance and without vaccine is more lethal (for a specific subdemographic) than flu after decades/centuries of exposure and with vaccination existing. That is true and proven yes, yet not very useful of a statement. For example even at no vaccine for covid /
Given how mortality distributed we might reasonably assume subsequent waves will be less lethal, for harvesting reasons. What we need to know is how many lives , with attached YLL, we could save with containment in future epidemies, and the more we delve into this the lower the /
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.