12. But that's not the worst part. We have literally over a century's history of mathematical modeling epidemic progression. Some look somewhat bell-like. Others don't. It depends on the circumstances, details of the virus, behavior of the population, interventions, etc.
-
Show this thread
-
13. [pause to take beta-blockers]
20 replies 71 retweets 2,886 likesShow this thread -
14. This is unsubstantiated bullshit. IF the bell-curve were a "law of nature", it shouldn't necessarily apply to the vast range of human responses that people take to stop epidemics. Yet this assertion is supported with data from places where interventions slowed things down.pic.twitter.com/ASrkdKzj6p
25 replies 147 retweets 2,067 likesShow this thread -
15. Wait, are already breaking the data down by country? We were cautioned against that as being misleading just a few paragraphs ago!
8 replies 74 retweets 1,907 likesShow this thread -
16. Ah, Farr's law. I don't know how the author could have more effectively discredited himself to the epidemiology community with any two other words. It's an old rule-of-thumb that suggests epidemics take a bell-curve shape. BUT....pic.twitter.com/QOWxeUzQmT
6 replies 94 retweets 1,570 likesShow this thread -
17. When I teach ID epidemiology OR data science, I tend to have my students read this 1990 paper as a cautionary tail against non-mechanistic modeling. http://documents.aidswiki.net/PHDDC/BREG.PDF It uses Farr's law to predict the size of the HIV epidemic.pic.twitter.com/3dKhSuiMQG
15 replies 191 retweets 2,026 likesShow this thread -
18. The authors conclude that the HIV epidemic will encompass roughly 200,000 cases before fading away in the mid 1990s. This graph is from the original paper. You can't make this shit up.pic.twitter.com/RogE3sISuC
23 replies 158 retweets 2,166 likesShow this thread -
19. Next up a very, very basic fallacy about the effect of flattening the curve. Almost *any* reasonable epidemiological model you use, from SIR to all sorts of fancy spatial PDE or agent-based approaches, will show that decreasing transmission rate decreases total epidemic size.pic.twitter.com/kWjGl2sVhZ
22 replies 141 retweets 1,740 likesShow this thread -
Carl T. Bergstrom Retweeted Carl T. Bergstrom
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 …Carl T. Bergstrom added,
5 replies 81 retweets 1,444 likesShow 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 1,434 likesShow this thread
Not the stated position, but can reasonably be inferred from the overall approach leading up to March.
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.