Oh man, I remember this one. There was a study from a single clinic in one ward in Tokyo that did not correct for specificity. If you assumed that the uncorrected serology estimate of this one clinic was representative of the entire city of Tokyo, you got an IFR of 0.02%https://twitter.com/AtomsksSanakan/status/1423043538103803904 …
-
-
Interestingly, a recent third-party evaluation of the serological test used indicates that it has a specificity of 98 (94-100)%, which means it's possible all positives in the sample were false positives and the true prevalence was 0% (increasing the IFR substantially)
Show this thread -
They used the Kurabo rapid antibody test, which was evaluated here:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7959261/ …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Semi related datum. 0.17% of the population in Uruguay died from/with COVID, but most of the deaths were after the massive vaccination campaign was in place and many elderly had been vaccinated, likely reducing the IFR by a big amount in that period.
-
BTW. till December 2020, when admittedly still few deaths had happened in the country (although in the loss-of-control stage already), an official report estimated that only 6.5% of deaths were "with COVID"https://www.gub.uy/ministerio-salud-publica/comunicacion/noticias/informe-epidemiologico-sobre-mortalidad-covid-19-del-31-diciembre-2020 …
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.