@EwenPearson2 @nickpheath @NWilson247 Mortality risk increases 12% per yr https://t.co/gGawV7M2XL
@yeahnaa333 @benzosarebad @GoodLawProject Not once place on the planet underwent a catastrophe as a result of the *ubiquitous* virus (the "lockdowns", on t'other hand are another matter). Plenty of info about the risks, which were negligible for vast major
@VexxedBeing @drmattuk @MaidmentRos It is patently BS because of the negligible impact the "pandemic" (ALONG WITH SUSPENDING ROUTINE HEALTHCARE, ETC FOR MONTHS ON END) had on the mortality rate. It was only ever the old and frail that were at any significa
@famulare_mike Yup, one of my fave 2020 papers was the first time I saw this pointed out - log-linear increase in death rates, just like all of life: https://t.co/BDbX49TyOT https://t.co/dhGWBz4WE7
@ben_cloyd @Anaes_Journal @NAPs_RCoA @adk300 Yup see the normal risk of ageing here. Each yr from 35 annual mortality risk increases about 10%. Each year adds exponential risk Difference in age was 2.32 yrs 1.1^2.32 =1.25=25% rise (Looks like it should
@ScottAMullin @macroliter Source: https://t.co/Jz2G37KBVr Key fig: https://t.co/MiMGwbjCWO
RT @d_spiegel: My BMJ paper on using the idea of ‘normal’/background/actuarial risk to communicate the huge range of risks from COVID-19 ex…
@d_spiegel @Francis_Hoar @TAH_Sci @bosicle17 @snj_1970 @Psycobunny @hitchslapping @patbhamilton @sunilbhop @casertron3000 @JobbingLeftieH @LucyGoBag Dave: any chance you could update your BMJ piece on understanding Covid risk in terms of normal background
@pjoreterffery @fkadaveheal @jackholmes0 @CharlesPPierce The point isn't risk assessment (which hey look at that it's basically zero if you aren't old). The point is the vaccine risks clearly aren't the same and where there is risk there must be choice. h
RT @roby_bhatt: @ikashnitsky When are these data from? I'd expect rates of death ~double for Delta vs D614G; but then, vaccines or immunity…
RT @roby_bhatt: @ikashnitsky When are these data from? I'd expect rates of death ~double for Delta vs D614G; but then, vaccines or immunity…
RT @roby_bhatt: @ikashnitsky When are these data from? I'd expect rates of death ~double for Delta vs D614G; but then, vaccines or immunity…
RT @roby_bhatt: @ikashnitsky When are these data from? I'd expect rates of death ~double for Delta vs D614G; but then, vaccines or immunity…
RT @roby_bhatt: @ikashnitsky When are these data from? I'd expect rates of death ~double for Delta vs D614G; but then, vaccines or immunity…
@ikashnitsky When are these data from? I'd expect rates of death ~double for Delta vs D614G; but then, vaccines or immunity from prior infection would greatly reduce risk of death from (re-)infection. First saw this relationship ~Sep 2020 & still find
@iaugust93 It would be a good thing if Spiegelhalter did an updated piece on understanding Covid risk in terms of normal risk. https://t.co/1BCCILNbGO
@GERCH24 Kαλησπέρα https://t.co/xdw6xM7VL0
RT @Chairaniset: @Fatoni0Rachman @LtdAkbar Kalo grafik di atas berasal dari analisis di link ini https://t.co/Obhp6SkdIa (ini dated septemb…
RT @Chairaniset: @Fatoni0Rachman @LtdAkbar Kalo grafik di atas berasal dari analisis di link ini https://t.co/Obhp6SkdIa (ini dated septemb…
RT @roby_bhatt: 3/6 A key feature of COVID has been relatively low severity in kids. I didn't expect that to change w variants - b/c I thin…
@Fatoni0Rachman @LtdAkbar Kalo grafik di atas berasal dari analisis di link ini https://t.co/Obhp6SkdIa (ini dated september 2020)
3/6 A key feature of COVID has been relatively low severity in kids. I didn't expect that to change w variants - b/c I think (unproven hunch only) that's more about us humans than the virus. (All-cause mortality has a strikingly similar age-dependence.) h
This is challenging to follow in a quick read, but proves there is substantual added risk imposed by Covid on society. The multiplier effect of spreading it to others makes vaxxing, masking and distancing even more important, and not a matter of "personal
RT @ChristosArgyrop: References for the 1.5 - 2.0 x risk https://t.co/Turfj06F8R https://t.co/qkdQlJxjDW Six months ago I predicted years…
RT @ChristosArgyrop: References for the 1.5 - 2.0 x risk https://t.co/Turfj06F8R https://t.co/qkdQlJxjDW Six months ago I predicted years…
@Mal_DuBois Young and healthy people are not at substantially elevated baseline risk from Covid anyway, and even those (elderly, etc) at higher risk don't face a massive absolute threat, compared to everyday baseline risk https://t.co/1BCCILNbGO
You do have a point about weight. Folks that have a very high BMI tend to correlate with more health issues. Causality is another issue, maybe some cases yes, other maybe not. Age is the big one. I think you'll like this paper ->https://t.co/jJVO0PAsJX
Maybe that is the correct number. https://t.co/jJVO0PAsJX https://t.co/yt8Ek3ZohH
Looks like I'm wrong. It's likely older. I believe this makes it clearer who benefits the most from vaccinations. https://t.co/jJVO0PAsJX https://t.co/bPJeGEzzwU
@VGCatano @wyshynski The risk Blackwood presents to his teammates is right in that 20-30 spot of this graph. Because risk from covid is extremely age-dependent. Those on the right side of the chart should be vaccinated. But his teammates should be fine. ht
@zeynep @jbloom_lab You didn't ask me, but I find the anosmia more convincing than the age structure of severity - I think the latter is just about novelty (ie, it's more about us humans than about the pathogen). All-cause mortality has a similar trend (ht
Exponential increase of death with age. https://t.co/jJVO0PAsJX
Maybe you should think about it more... https://t.co/jJVO0PAsJX
There is truth in WHO's statements. This disease much more deadly to older people than younger people. It is geometrically more fatal with age. Question: Why are we vaccinating healthy people under 30y? https://t.co/jJVO0PAsJX
Because this disease's risk of serious complications goes up geometrically with age and not all teachers are the same age! https://t.co/jJVO0PAsJX
@alison_turner @macharightnow @BallouxFrancois Thanks for reply, made me check! If p original probability of dying and q new indept probability then total p+q-pq ~ p+q if p,q << 1 eg 4 paragraphs before conclusion in below. https://t.co/QjPtzxxc
@IAmSamFin @d_spiegel nails it with this thread. https://t.co/W2W6DmARMS
RT @ph_lelouch: ちなみにこの内容からなんですが、もう少し年齢に差をつけたほうが良かったですね。計算が微妙になりました(汗) https://t.co/qklM7rJJel
ちなみにこの内容からなんですが、もう少し年齢に差をつけたほうが良かったですね。計算が微妙になりました(汗) https://t.co/qklM7rJJel
I have barely mentioned COVID-19 in this thread but @d_spiegel has clearly explained how the risk of dying from COVID-19 *if infected* is roughly similar to the risk of dying from all other causes during a given year. 8/9 https://t.co/mPDd7CJobz
@inicia_minerva Y hay varios https://t.co/MPvH8XBscP
@RWMaloneMD Compare with mortality risk for all reasons. As much as you are older the risk increases. If you die with 85 and PCR+ you will listed as covid-19 death. Which people die more frequently? https://t.co/Fwx5vCChoW https://t.co/R74E0yArol
The above 2 graphs fit together with this "the average annual risk of death doubles for each seven years of extra age" & COVID-19 risk & annual risk follow each other https://t.co/fqIPRgtsOe Vax of 80yo -> 50 year = 30 years 2x risk pr 7 years
RT @ChristosArgyrop: References for the 1.5 - 2.0 x risk https://t.co/Turfj06F8R https://t.co/qkdQlJxjDW Six months ago I predicted years…
RT @ChristosArgyrop: References for the 1.5 - 2.0 x risk https://t.co/Turfj06F8R https://t.co/qkdQlJxjDW Six months ago I predicted years…
RT @ChristosArgyrop: References for the 1.5 - 2.0 x risk https://t.co/Turfj06F8R https://t.co/qkdQlJxjDW Six months ago I predicted years…
RT @ChristosArgyrop: References for the 1.5 - 2.0 x risk https://t.co/Turfj06F8R https://t.co/qkdQlJxjDW Six months ago I predicted years…
@guyschultz Kids don't buy life insurance usually. I am not aware of any data showint that that masks reduces the risk of death if one catches covid while wearing them (though some interesting data about this exist for SARS1). Ref for actuarial risk http
RT @ChristosArgyrop: References for the 1.5 - 2.0 x risk https://t.co/Turfj06F8R https://t.co/qkdQlJxjDW Six months ago I predicted years…
RT @ChristosArgyrop: References for the 1.5 - 2.0 x risk https://t.co/Turfj06F8R https://t.co/qkdQlJxjDW Six months ago I predicted years…
References for the 1.5 - 2.0 x risk https://t.co/Turfj06F8R https://t.co/qkdQlJxjDW Six months ago I predicted years of life lost to COVID19 https://t.co/zY9cGLDzpG Considering the % of the US population who have gotten it, seems the calc was spot on htt
@DrHOUSE_Cov2 Reference https://t.co/Turfj06F8R
Yeah, Covid is either all about survive or die, right? There is absolutely no in between, despite the 2 million estimated to have long covid and the risk of organ damage among the unvaccinated is also being warned against. Get the fuck outta here, clown.
@TheZemoDance @georgeeeee___ @Londoner_2019 @fact_covid You won’t understand the words but the pretty graphs might help you.The chances of an unvaccinated under 30 dying from Covid doesn’t even make the top 10.Dying from an accident in the home is more lik
RT @CHeDS_ie: When the age gradient is so strong in terms of serious outcomes, we need to be careful in a partially susceptible / vaccinate…
When the age gradient is so strong in terms of serious outcomes, we need to be careful in a partially susceptible / vaccinated population. Ultimately infection acquired immunity will have a strong impact, but now is a dangerous phase.
gentle reminder
@paulstarick @andrew_hough @theTiser Listen to the world. If you 70 year old and you catch COVID over the next 4 months you have the same risk of dying as an 80 year old who does NOT have COVID. https://t.co/I1KPHhHznb Fear or stupidity has always been the
RT @MerisaCenanovic: "In summary, (...) those aged over 55 experiencing around five weeks’ extra risk, while younger people were exposed to…
RT @MerisaCenanovic: "In summary, (...) those aged over 55 experiencing around five weeks’ extra risk, while younger people were exposed to…
RT @MerisaCenanovic: "In summary, (...) those aged over 55 experiencing around five weeks’ extra risk, while younger people were exposed to…
RT @MerisaCenanovic: "In summary, (...) those aged over 55 experiencing around five weeks’ extra risk, while younger people were exposed to…
RT @MerisaCenanovic: "In summary, (...) those aged over 55 experiencing around five weeks’ extra risk, while younger people were exposed to…
昨年の9月と古い論文ですけど示唆に富みます。調べ物をしていて見つけました。アカデミアに職をもつこういう統計学者が日本に出てこないのは何ででしょうかね? 死亡率と新型コロナの致命率を比較しそのリスクを捉えてみたものです。 https://t.co/v3WU2tDi9B
"In summary, (...) those aged over 55 experiencing around five weeks’ extra risk, while younger people were exposed to steadily smaller amounts: for schoolchildren it corresponded to just two additional days." https://t.co/aoCrQvDG3r #riskassessment #COVID
It was calculated in the last year when there were no vaccines that, if infected by covid, the risk of dying from it is similar to "a year’s worth of extra risk of dying" https://t.co/pdlYOazoL5. With vaccines, the risk will only be about 0.05*365≈18 days'
@MLevitt_NP2013 Old but does this one match? https://t.co/pvrj4duZNV
RT @Carmensangui: Quizá el único estudio, revisado por los pares, que detectó un aumento de contagios después de retornar a clases, fue en…
RT @Carmensangui: Quizá el único estudio, revisado por los pares, que detectó un aumento de contagios después de retornar a clases, fue en…
RT @Carmensangui: Quizá el único estudio, revisado por los pares, que detectó un aumento de contagios después de retornar a clases, fue en…
RT @Carmensangui: Quizá el único estudio, revisado por los pares, que detectó un aumento de contagios después de retornar a clases, fue en…
RT @Carmensangui: Quizá el único estudio, revisado por los pares, que detectó un aumento de contagios después de retornar a clases, fue en…
Quizá el único estudio, revisado por los pares, que detectó un aumento de contagios después de retornar a clases, fue en Israel. Sin embargo, una investigación posterior señaló que se debía a otros eventos sociales que se produjeron simultáneamente (6/11)
@johnnymorls @arkmedic @Jaye1222 That's nothing new and been known for over a year. It doesn't mean that COVID deaths were people about to die anyway. https://t.co/ECwugLYtxO
@efb_1 @ElleMandell @contrarian4data @thancockMD @Illegalshift66 @boutros555 @SciencePharmer @DraganOrlich @JHowardBrainMD @fitterhappierAJ @ZiikZiiii Not a proper actuarial or survival analysis (what is the value of comparing the death rate of an age grou
RT @bmj_latest: Accumulating data on deaths from #COVID19 show an association with age that closely matches the “normal” risk we all face.…
@luchetti_silvia @CoramoraE @elmundoes El periódico hace referencia a una revista: BMJ. Allí se lee que puede dar lugar a una interpretación errónea que no aumenta el riesgo de muerte... Y se pueden leer más cosas, como que el no se cuenta con el riesgo de
@ScottMcHale @VPrasadMDMPH Here read this. Process what he’s saying. And then get really upset at the US media. https://t.co/UTdKKxuwCB
One of the countries that have struggled the most is Peru. They already had an excess deaths of 119% within the last 1 year - more than doubling their annual deaths "The IFR was estimated...be roughly equivalent to the age specific annual mortality" 11/x
@handzhiev @hri1OO Интересна статия - в UK (преди пика на смъртност през Декември/Февруари) IFR (infection fatality ratio) e е оценен на 1.3%. А какъв е IFR (или VFR - vaccination fatality ratio 🤣) за АЗ (и двете са еднократни events)? https://t.co/YRbJsNm
@hri1OO @handzhiev Глупаво сравнение (или по скоро тролско). Ето една добра статийка обясняваща добре какъв е истинският риск от смърт при COVID: https://t.co/YRbJsNmPoG
RT @KeithMansfield: Given all UK vulnerable under 30s have already been vaccinated at least once, today's Oxford/#AstraZeneca announcement…
Given all UK vulnerable under 30s have already been vaccinated at least once, today's Oxford/#AstraZeneca announcement only applies to U30s without underlying health conditions. That cohort's risk from Covid anyway is well below 1 per 100k. Useful paper: h
“covid-19 risk was about the same as the annual risk (and hence that catching the virus roughly doubles the risk of dying this year). It is generally fine to say that covid-19 would roughly double the risk of dying. .)” https://t.co/O1yaj3TW6G https://t.co
Use of “normal” risk to improve understanding of dangers of covid-19 https://t.co/O1yaj3TW6G https://t.co/hxtErtZ5wq
RT @Mike_aka_Logiqx: The COVID-19 fatality rate is very age dependent and studies show that it closely matches the usual annual mortality r…
The COVID-19 fatality rate is very age dependent and studies show that it closely matches the usual annual mortality rates by age. This is nicely described in the publication by @d_spiegel. It is worth knowing this when reviewing age distributions. 2/6 ht
RT @IlTemporeggiat1: @gmastrob @SignorErnesto La tua interpretazione è quella corretta. https://t.co/qWBbLYUywb https://t.co/j6vIbe3TMM
@gmastrob @SignorErnesto La tua interpretazione è quella corretta. https://t.co/qWBbLYUywb https://t.co/j6vIbe3TMM
@vernonmintern @AndyhHolt It's not the right question given what we now about the relative risk for different age groups. So vaccinate the old and vulnerable first and foremost. https://t.co/n98ZDFHxqw https://t.co/M5M0ij1vWM
@EyeballsDave @jdstafford11 @ChrisMGra @EssexPR Using infection fatality rate by age superimposed onto normal background risk. Full explanation here: https://t.co/N2uZOtxOv1 In fig 2 the lines intersect at age 50, which is likely related to how they came u