Well ... the base rate, anyway. I'm thinking--though open to correction--that the ratio of bad cases to bad cases should approximate the R0 even if we're missing a bunch of asymptomatic infections.https://twitter.com/lymanstoneky/status/1240292323860205568 …
-
-
I think the argument is: R0=4, all noticed - 1, 4, 16 etc R0=12, 1/3rd noticed -> 1/3, 12/36, 144/432 etc, etc. We don't know for certain how many cases we have, but we know spread rate, because observed cases go up at a certain rate on a consistent ratio.
-
Now as you point out, there's a ceiling and the more asymptomatic (as opposed to false positives) we have, the better things get at that ceiling. But the R0 numbers are solid.
- Show replies
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.