So, I have had a proper read of this document, and I thought it might be worthwhile to actually go through and carefully analyze the document Let's do some peer-review on twitter 1/nhttps://twitter.com/MartinKulldorff/status/1337379606739841036 …
-
Show this thread
-
2/n The document is a brief essay by the three authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which I've screenshotted here for later reference, because it comes up in the essay:pic.twitter.com/7HnkVPdl4i
1 reply 10 retweets 103 likesShow this thread -
3/n The essay discusses what the authors call "focused protection", so I think it's worth noting at the outset that the GBD explicitly argues against closures/restrictions of any kind, so that we can build up herd immunitypic.twitter.com/85pTAb1qmV
1 reply 9 retweets 117 likesShow this thread -
4/n The essay itself is a bit problematic from the start. The authors poison the well with this straw man - it is simply not true that anyone anywhere is advocating for indefinite lockdownspic.twitter.com/AbCwN8Ir9X
8 replies 12 retweets 170 likesShow this thread -
5/n The essay then goes on to argue that focused protection is not a laissez-faire or herd immunity approach Again, let us read their own words from the GBDpic.twitter.com/axt4CHNJmg
1 reply 11 retweets 108 likesShow this thread -
6/n Next, we have some statements that are broadly true, and some very spurious statements mixed in. Age is certainly the biggest defining risk from COVID-19, but the statement about children is not quite true, and the "infection survival rate" statement is misleading at bestpic.twitter.com/pk8Hc0nQKi
1 reply 10 retweets 119 likesShow this thread -
7/n For children, the authors reference the CDC. Here is the table for influenza vs COVID-19 mortality for 2020 from the CDC THAT THEY REFERENCE For infants, COVID-19 is more deadly. For 1-4, less deadly, 5-14 about the same, and 15-24 MUCH worsepic.twitter.com/m7G7Cfa8EW
11 replies 30 retweets 176 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @GidMK
Why not select column to the left, the one excluding influenza?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
That is more likely excess fatality, I agree, but my point is that the reference in no way supports the statement as written even if we're generous
-
-
Replying to @GidMK
Left column excluding influenza does support the statement.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @interpolated
No it doesn't. You're comparing the pneumonia+COVID-19 (excl non-pneumonia) column to the influenza+COVID-19 OR pneumonia column, which doesn't make sense
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
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.