First, there are a bunch of methodologic issues and two different threads do nice job sorting them out
One by @AssumeNormality
https://twitter.com/AssumeNormality/status/1303427792693059587?s=20 …
Second by @RexDouglass
https://twitter.com/RexDouglass/status/1303379252742479872 …
But there's another reason beyond these to be skeptical
2/6
-
-
Show this thread
-
It doesn't pass the sniff test Yes it was a crazy large rally Yes there was a ton of irresponsible behavior (no mask, no distancing, lots of bars in evening) I would not be surprised if it set of big outbreaks -- hundreds of cases, may be thousands But 250K?? 3/7
Show this thread -
One way to is to look at where the ralliers came from -- 10% from the Dakotas, 90% from elsewhere. So let's look at the Dakotas -- actually, here, the story is pretty good. It appears that in the days following the end of the rally, large spikes in cases in the Dakotas. 4/7
Show this thread -
So that checks out Across Dakotas, likely additional 1K to 2K cases total since rally Not huge -- but in Dakotas (small populations), you see it What about other 90% of Ralliers? Where are they from? Authors identify them coming from big counties in AZ, CO, CA, NV, etc 5/7
Show this thread -
But when you look at those counties, no big (or even small) uptick in cases in days/weeks following Sturgis Not in Maricopa, SD, LA, Denver or Las Vegas If none of the big counties saw a spike, 250K additional cases seems implausible. 6/7
Show this thread -
If Sturgis really was 20% of all cases in US since rally, we should see counties where people went back to light up. They don't These counties rising pre-rally and flatten post rally (mostly). Synthetic counties may be not good controls But here's the lesson 7/8
Show this thread -
If Sturgis is responsible for 20% of cases in the past month, we should be able to see it in the raw data. Because that's a massive effect. Massive. But we don't If I'm missing it or am wrong, would love to know how 8/9
Show this thread -
Final thoughts: 1. Sturgis rally was wholly irresponsible. 500K folks gathered with little respect for COVID 2. LIkely super spreader event, causing thousands of cases, some deaths 3. But think unlikely to be responsible for 260k cases (20% of all US cases)in short order Fin
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yeah, I read this study too, and had the same reaction. I am not an epidemiologist, but I studied economics, and do statistics for my work, and know that extrapolations like this tend to fail on the last multiplication. Unless there's a known superspreader...
-
ten days of parties with 450,000 people. I am an epidemiologist and I 100% guarantee multiple super-spreader events given what we know about this virus.
- 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.