Very inconsistent with having reached it already, agreed.
-
-
Replying to @ChrisMasterjohn
While it's still potentially possible that the immunity threshold is very substantially lower than our traditional static model, I do think that there are enough examples now in places with 40-60% infections to say that it is at least very rarely the case
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
What examples would you offer that can’t be easily attributed to overshoot?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ChrisMasterjohn
What do you mean by easily attributed to overshoot?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Small communities with high population densities where ~60-80% were infected in a matter of weeks. If the threshold is reached rapidly, it can easily be 2xed or 3xed because those infected can still spread it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ChrisMasterjohn
Oh, then many examples yes. A number of places in South America have fairly reliable estimates of 40%+, there was a randomized targeted sample of vulnerable communities in the Ile-De-France with >50%, the Qatari serology estimates, cities in India (although some caveats there)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @ChrisMasterjohn
60-80% not so much, but I think we can very confidently say that the earlier modelling exercises that posited thresholds of 10-20% have largely turned out to be wrong. 40-60% is certainly still possible
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
I think in order to falsify 20%, what you would need is a rise from 20 to 50% that took at least 2 months. The reason being that any rapidity near the threshold easily leads to overshoot. So the slower the increase, the clearer the falsification. Do any of those fit the bill?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ChrisMasterjohn @GidMK
I also think it’s important to control for definitions of infections somehow. I’d want to see that multiplying the official cases by some factor and seroprevalence give similar results for example.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ChrisMasterjohn
Sure, the Qatari study is actually a good example that answers most of these questions. While I suspect the final estimate of 53% was a bit high in July, they do attempt to take these things into account with a pandemic that occurred over months https://europepmc.org/article/ppr/ppr189285 …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Even then, it doesn't quite fit the bill for herd immunity at this threshold because they've clearly had an R0 ~=1 for months now.
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.