-
-
Show this thread
-
Correction: this is about the 2nd study, so it is not another new confirmatory data point. (My bad for this; didn't realize identifying information matched on first glance.)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This would be an extraordinarily good thing if true, no? At a ~14 million prefecture population number that’s 840,000 infected with 212 dead, or a 0.025% mortality rate - actually less bad than the flu. Something must be wrong here, and flawed study death as noted is best bet.
-
Flawed study design as someone noted below* bad iPad autocorrect lol
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Hard to be certain with these tests that some combination of sampling and false positives aren’t driving results (Unless there are multiple geos done with the same methods).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I hope in that abstract they meant potential crossreactivity rather than “potent” crossreactivity with prior coronaviruses. Eternal problem with preprints.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Disappointing study design. I would guess there’s no way that 27% of Tokyo consists of healthcare workers (55/202)? Looks like the selection process was flawed.
Thanks. 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.