Even the term “dry tinder” is reprehensible. Seems like something @ScottWAtlas would say.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
We did a short paper on this recently at
@COVID19actuaryhttps://twitter.com/COVID19actuary/status/1331642283243036678 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Am I correct to assume that this 'dry tinder' theory relies on a 'mild flu season'? I assume that flu infects only a small portion of the population even during a severe flu season. So the portion of elderly that die from covid that would have died from the flu is small.
-
Only around 10% get infected each season depending on severity. 90% of this 'dry tinder' would remain untouched by flu anyway. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/keyfacts.htm#:~:text=Both%20methods%20had%20similar%20findings,%25%2C%20depending%20on%20the%20season ….pic.twitter.com/Drea7srbDl
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think it's safe to say, without even reading it, that any epidemiological paper from an economic think tank is going to be chock-full of nonsense. I remember reading one this summer that gave about 30 reasons Sweden had a higher death rate than other Nordic countries.
-
It was like they just threw any idea they could think of against the wall to see if it would stick, without analyzing any of them in depth. I'm sure their target audience ate it all up. I wish I could find that "study" again. Can't remember which economic think tank wrote it.
End of conversation
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.