Wonder why the UK sereology data and number of deaths gives an IFR figure four to five times higher than the world median?Inferred from?
So the WHO are wrong? Paper has been peer-reviewed also.Wonder why the UK sereology data and number of deaths gives an IFR figure four to five times higher than the world median?
Alvez, in the title it says inferred...Seroprevalence data, it's on the paper boss.. and that doesn't even take into account t cells
Who said the WHO is wrong? You can't accept this means of analysis, then ignore it because it doesn't fit your mindset. The WHO presented a paper in October saying that this is the way to calculate IFR and concluded the IFR from these studies is 0.5 to 1%. The UK is at the higher end.So the WHO are wrong? Paper has been peer-reviewed also.
I am not saying its wrong I am saying it's inferred rather than fact AlvezYes in the title it says 'inferred from seroprevalence data'.. I'm not sure what you're getting at?
Definition of inferred:-
deduce or conclude (something) from evidence and reasoning rather than from explicit statements.
It's a peer reviewed, accepted paper and you're trying to say its wrong?
I am not saying its wrong I am saying it's inferred rather than fact Alvez
Neither do lockdowns nows. Its too late. A lockdown now would be intolerable. A quick circuit breaker one would just delay the rises, and a longer one would destroy an economy that already has to cope with the destruction of a no deal brexit next yearTest and Trace doesn't work when the virus is now endemic. It's too slow a process.
A circuit breaker is a lockdown.Neither do lockdowns nows. Its too late. A lockdown now would be intolerable. A quick circuit breaker one would just delay the rises, and a longer one would destroy an economy that already has to cope with the destruction of a no deal brexit next year
I know, thats why I said it was....A circuit breaker is a lockdown.
Alvez, where did you find the study? Keen to have a read.
Edit - found it.
Alvez I am doing no such thing, I don't know if it's right or wrong, I don't know if your experts are bigger than my experts, I don't know whether an airborne corona virus can be contained with a lockdown in fact I don't know much at all.Please point me to the word 'fact' being used on this little group of messages between you and I.
You're not saying it's wrong you're implying it is because it doesn't fit with your view. I hope you can at least admit it to yourself.
At this point you're picking holes in the language of peer reviewed journals by one of the world's top epidemiologists at Stanford. Nice.
Wonder why the UK sereology data and number of deaths gives an IFR figure four to five times higher than the world median?
Alvez I am doing no such thing, I don't know if it's right or wrong, I don't know if your experts are bigger than my experts, I don't know whether an airborne corona virus can be contained with a lockdown in fact I don't know much at all.
However, I would rather follow a strategy that, if the foundations are wrong, it doesn't kill quarter of a million brits.
I have said this over and over to you. It is nothing to do with fitting with my view. I am not nearly arrogant enough to assume I am right. I am not an epidemiologist, I am a technical architect. You have picked one set of expert viewpoints, I have picked another. I hope you are right, I don't think so and it is not because I am entrenched it is because my own background reading suggests something different.
But you have total belief in a paper that was highly discredited and had to be changed and based, in some cases, on just 500 localised sereology tests and methods of counting that will be done in a similar way to the UK?I'd say it's likely we're overcounting.