The Imperial College expert reduced his estimated death rate by more than 10x compared to what he said it would be WITH social distancing measures like those implemented. This is because he got his entire numbers wrong from the very beginning. #coronavirus https://twitter.com/GarzaForce/status/1243258208140947457 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @barnes_law
You're quoting a WaPo write up which conflates mitigation with lockdown scenarios. The two aren't the same.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @RaheemKassam
It's in the same report you cited, just a few pages further in. They said lockdown had to continue until a vaccine was developed, because it would come back as soon as lockdown was ended. This was why they originally recommended herd immunity. Today was a radical reversal.
3 replies 2 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @barnes_law
I was the one who reported – before anyone else this side of the pond – about the herd immunity strategy, how it came about, and why it was horseshit and needed revising. Back then I took heat from followers for daring to "question the experts". But lots of us got it changed.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @RaheemKassam @barnes_law
Now I'm taking heat from the other side for being grateful they abandoned that B.S. scenario and strategy and got to a more realistic way of dealing with a spread that would have – without intervention – ended us with the higher numbers in the model.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
See http://BowGroup.org for details on our UK think tank's work and plan on this. all.
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.