Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
GidMK's profile
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Verified account
@GidMK

Tweets

Health NerdVerified account

@GidMK

Epidemiologist. Writer (Guardian, Observer etc). "Well known research trouble-maker". PhDing at @UoW Host of @senscipod Email gidmk.healthnerd@gmail.com he/him

Sydney, New South Wales
theguardian.com/profile/gideon…
Joined November 2015

Tweets

  • © 2021 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    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

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Feb 22
      Replying to @JonStanich

      That accords with current best evidence, including two systematic reviews on the topic yes. Between 15-20% is the current best estimate

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    2. Jon Stanich‏ @JonStanich Feb 22
      Replying to @GidMK

      Got it, thanks. This implies there is ~3X more infections than tested cases. I would have expected that to be higher, at least 5X.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    3. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Feb 22
      Replying to @JonStanich

      The ratio changes over time. At the start of the pandemic, it was almost certainly 10x or higher. Currently, it is probably closer to 2.5x or lower. Testing changes have a huge impact

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    4. Jon Stanich‏ @JonStanich Feb 22
      Replying to @GidMK

      Last question is about the timeframe. CDC says "CDC estimates that from February–December 2020." There were ~350K deaths at the end of Dec. Hence 350K/83M gives ~0.4% IFR. Is that correct?pic.twitter.com/YisHEeDcoT

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    5. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Feb 22
      Replying to @JonStanich

      Case reporting is immediate - death reporting is lagged. At best, you'd have to use the death data from the end of January, but it's hard to say exactly because the 83 million estimate presumably includes infections that happened up until the very end of Dec

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    6. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Feb 22
      Replying to @GidMK @JonStanich

      Given that infection->death is a 2-3 week timeline, and death->reported death is another 2-4 week timeline, the actual IFR would be calculated on deaths that happened some time between end Jan and now. So likely somewhere between 0.5-0.6% depending on how you calculate

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    7. Jon Stanich‏ @JonStanich Feb 22
      Replying to @GidMK

      Right, since this is total infections from February–December 2020, you would have to normalize to account for Jan/Feb. On Dec 30 there were 20M cases, now 35% higher. So if infections are just 20% higher, this gets closer to 0.4% IFR.pic.twitter.com/7oFGvU7Zvu

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Feb 22
      Replying to @JonStanich

      I have no idea what you mean. The entire point is that confirmed case data does not give us a good guide on true infection numbers, but we do need to include a lag because deaths don't happen the day after infection and are not reported for some time after that

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    9. Jon Stanich‏ @JonStanich Feb 22
      Replying to @GidMK

      What I mean is that the 83M total infections is February–December 2020, but you are using total deaths up to Feb 22. Even with lag, you are adding deaths in Jan, but not infections. From Dec 30 to Jan 30 there is 35% more cases so infections is higher than 83M. 25% higher?

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Feb 22
      Replying to @JonStanich

      This is the challenge. It is plausible that you could use the deaths number for mid-late Jan to calculate IFR, because infections up until 31/12 would be recorded as deaths at the earliest on 15-22/01

      2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
      Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Feb 22
      Replying to @GidMK @JonStanich

      But given the reporting lag, people who got sick on 31/12 would mostly not appear in the official figures until the start of Feb, and you wouldn't see most of them in the deaths data until about now

      8:31 PM - 22 Feb 2021
      • 1 Like
      • Thatcher Ulrich
      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        1. New conversation
        2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Feb 22
          Replying to @GidMK @JonStanich

          So if we use the data from mid-Jan, we would get an IFR of 0.5% (410k deaths), but the true value lies somewhere between 0.5-0.6% as I said

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        3. Jon Stanich‏ @JonStanich Feb 22
          Replying to @GidMK

          Why do you not account for additional infections from Dec 30 to Jan 15? Cases went up 15% in that time, so total infections must have gone up also.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. Show replies

      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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2021 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info