20. This is common sense, as well as first-chapter-of-the-epidemiology-textbook stuff.
It was also sadly predictable. See my note about severe #DKE19 strains, a day before @aginnt's medium post:https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1240803788035784704 …
-
Show this thread
-
21. This claim needs citation. I am unaware of CDC plans that involve allowing the majority of the country to be infected. Because the author may be cherry-picking here, I won't call it an outright lie. But it's not the position of the organization that we allow this to happen.pic.twitter.com/yiGKFLEvdR
21 replies 79 retweets 1,445 likesShow this thread -
22. Next the author claims that COVID19 will "burn off" in the summer, and quotes a paper from Beijing economists, posted to social science preprint server. Science is not a like a high school English essay, where you get to cherry-pick the quotes that support your point.pic.twitter.com/Z3TfUpllSp
45 replies 136 retweets 1,965 likesShow this thread -
23. There's a big literature on the seasonality of respiratory disease, and consensus is that we have little grounds for optimism regarding
#COVID19.@mlipsitch, an leading expert who advanced our understanding of flu seasonality, is admirably concise: https://ccdd.hsph.harvard.edu/will-covid-19-go-away-on-its-own-in-warmer-weather/ …pic.twitter.com/H7Hzh3tAbV
20 replies 320 retweets 2,094 likesShow this thread -
24. This is just misleading. Being tested is not the same as thinking you are positive. Did your doctor ever order a rapid flu test or strep culture or a chest x-ray for pneumonia? When you did, did you think YOU were positive? Same deal with COVID19, esp in places like S. Korea.pic.twitter.com/A96mihVfKq
14 replies 84 retweets 1,371 likesShow this thread -
25. This single piece of bait-and-switch should be more than enough to discredit the entire article.
@Aginnt claims that only 1% of cases are severe, and then shows a data graphic suggesting that 19% are severe or worse (critical). How on earth does he draw that conclusion?pic.twitter.com/ErGiLRazEs
45 replies 209 retweets 2,176 likesShow this thread -
26. He says "cases" in the headline, but "everyone who is tested" in the text. These are very different denominators, given the low positive rate he was just trumpeting about in the previous section. If a mistake rather than deliberate bullshit, it's amazingly sloppy.
12 replies 81 retweets 1,789 likesShow this thread -
27. Oh, and in the study that provided these numbers, "mild" cases included pneumonia short of hospitalization in a setting where hospitals are already overcrowded. Mild doesn't mean your ordinary cold.
13 replies 108 retweets 1,718 likesShow this thread -
28. Lastly on this point, I hate to go all MS-PAINT on you, but....pic.twitter.com/V9kGXdPdID
178 replies 631 retweets 4,980 likesShow this thread -
29. An aside: I realize that John Ioannides is trying to be clever and contrarian and has a hammer and damned if this pandemic doesn't look like a nail, but his latest STAT piece is just chumming the swimming beach for this particular kind of shark.pic.twitter.com/MB9T76hels
21 replies 86 retweets 1,375 likesShow this thread
Ioannidis disappointed me so much with that article.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @CT_Bergstrom
Yeah, he shattered the ridiculous herd consensus
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.