Controversial opinion: those that say its not possible to shield the vulnerable, also won't be able to prove if there is a difference (or lack of it) between the trajectory of the virus at Madrid and Stockholm. Who do you think has let it rip?
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @federicolois
So, I've read through very carefully and tried out the lovely web app, and I think that the model is fairly obviously incorrect (current Belgium and Sweden numbers show this) and it's probably because of flawed assumptions
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @federicolois
In particular, the model is incredibly sensitive to the infectious period - in the paper you've got 2 days which seems extremely low. Best evidence suggests 6-9 days, if you input that the model becomes fairly incoherentpic.twitter.com/6GMQNFL2hw
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @federicolois
Similarly, the proportion asymptomatic is probably around a 3x overestimate based on best evidencehttps://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003346 …
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @federicolois
The other issue is that you can't easily compare across seroepidemiological samples in terms of the ratio in age groups as you have done, because some of them used probabilistic sampling and some did not (i.e. the ratio differences could be explained by sampling)
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Sorry, wont be able to look at this today. Travelling by car (no airplanes) 900km to help father-in-law (92) and uncle-in-law (78) diff. households because of severe clinical depression (they dont eat anymore). Who would have thought effect of depriving vulnerable from family?
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
I'm sorry to hear that, all the best
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.