Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
The group largely supports the article's conclusion that COVID-19 IFR increases exponentially with age, citing specific figures such as 0.002% at age 10 and 15% at age 85, which reinforces the importance of age-specific public health measures. The tone varies from technical debates on study validity to policy recommendations, demonstrating high engagement and recognition of the study's impact on decision-making.
Most discussions emphasize the low infection fatality rates (IFR) for children and young adults, agreeing with the article's findings on age-related risks.
Posts demonstrate high interest by referencing detailed meta-analyses and discussing policy implications based on age-specific IFR data.
Numerous discussions engage deeply with the research methods, compare studies, and debate the implications for public health policies.
The conversations influence perspectives on vaccination strategies, especially for youth, and highlight the importance of age-targeted policies supported by scientific data.
Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenker (der "Corona-Ausschuss") Bundesregierung spielen. Zumindest so lange, wie er es ausgehalten hat.
#Reiskeksflagge https://t.co/xlCkXTrv3g https://t.co/Wewzylm3zo
Der Ausschuss und die Autorin waren die hier, die schon mal zusammen Bundesregierung für den Sturz der Regierung gespielt haben
@BBarucker @JungNaiv Es ging um die hiesige Altersstruktur. Die Letalität ist sehr altersspezifisch. 1,4% 65J, 4,6% 75J und 15% für 85J. https://t.co/jNLHPJg2n5
@Socialtrainers @DamienInTheDark @thevirgoleader https://t.co/11vlEKmzOc
8/E Fatality rates were predictably within that range the WHO gave in February 2020, despite what the pseudoskeptics claimed. https://t.co/PygdXkA5Z7 https://t.co/p47RreZIE6 https://t.co/J80O55RtLA https://t.co/Sx5NXQcLpJ https://t.co/gYLZTcv9jE https://t.co/dthBpHMtvQ https://t.co/8xTHeCWbE0
In this video, we analyze REGN-COV2, a cocktail of neutralizing antibodies aimed at combating Covid-19 in outpatients. The treatment demonstrated significant viral load reduction in patients. We explore its safety…
The research analyzed 113 studies to determine how COVID-19 death risk varies with age, finding that while children and young adults have very low fatality rates, the risk increases exponentially with age, reaching…
COVID 1 year into the pandemic. We examine myths and misconceptions you have likely heard. What do we now know about the virus, including death rates, herd immunity, hospitalization, and comparisons with the flu…
The research analyzed 113 studies to determine how COVID-19 death risk varies with age, finding that while children and young adults have very low fatality rates, the risk increases exponentially with age, reaching…
@SHomburg @USMortality Die Lösung ist ganz einfach: Afrikas Länder haben eine Ø WESENTLICH jüngere Bevölkerung und die Infektionssterblichkeit von Covid-19 ist hochgradig altersabhängig. https://t.co/HTBG1NwLNc https://t.co/VlbfbkXLEO
6/
@pjvanerp @mauricedehond @De_NieuweWereld En sterk afhankelijk van leeftijd en geografische locatie. https://t.co/Gd5iV1hngT https://t.co/H0swxleO54
@E99Hr305344 @pm2037 @teemulaajasalo Kyllä tiedettiin. Mutta Laajasaloa ei varmasti kiinnostanut lukea tutkimuksia ja tilastoja, vaan hän omaksui hysterian ja lääketieteellisen misinformaation iltapäivälehdistä, kuten suurin osa. Ja päätti osallistua hyvesignalointiin ja demonisointiin. https://t.co/mIhNwyitN0
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
@grok @Sundowner42069 @DelusionPosting On influenza IFR: "<0.1% in the USA" https://t.co/p47RreZaOy "<0·1%" https://t.co/W2pEtGm9vm "estimated to be 0.05%" https://t.co/1LNOvIF5oH "range of 0.04% to 0.08%" https://t.co/oTvJferJUz "0.039%" https://t.co/tj4J26lNj9 https://t.co/cvwA31vnJZ https://t.co/oia7smcNuA https://t.co/dHk96uuaO6
@Socialtrainers @DamienInTheDark @thevirgoleader https://t.co/11vlEKmzOc
RT @LucreSnooker: @christykarras @TArchiving @ProfEmilyOster according to this meta-analysis of COVID IFR, a 10yo has a ~0.001% chance of d…
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
@justin_hart "The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 is several-fold higher than that of seasonal influenza" https://t.co/Oaf28BpIyo "an order of magnitude smaller than the population IFR for COVID-19" https://t.co/oTvJferJUz https://t.co/1LNOvIFDef https://t.co/JbK7we1aQ9
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
@patfrank830 @Robert76907841 @Willard1951 @DarrenDrpage @NdabaningiMoyo @DaleGribble_666 @TWTThisIsNow @jpgcrowley @DoubleDumas @grok @priscian @JohnK1234abcd @ejwwest @4tis @rwerkh @Anvndarnamn5 @jemmm85517813 @MarcEHJones @TMGFlorida @COrepKdeGraaf @Daaanvdb @DenisDaly @JamesWest12 @AutumnMandrake @idummkopp @MusicFrom90 @kevhof52 @Proemed45 @Rebecca74083947 @25_cycle @Visitor51171015 @greenartdf @zebedeem @BennoList @LxxResearcher @waynejv1973 @VoteBlueUrban @BrknMan @RCownie @ICcrapdaily @ClimateRetorts @SGMTrailbuilder @CyfraithEcocide @JrmeBrwnCt @TheDisproof @grok Did SARS-CoV-2 have about the same fatality rate as seasonal influenza? "many times higher than seasonal influenza (<0·1%)" https://t.co/WUOvCnWqzM "an order of magnitude smaller than the population IFR for COVID-19" https://t.co/oTvJfeshK7 https://t.co/S1ofOUXOJJ
@patfrank830 Your goalpost move isn't going to work. The source debunks your lie that the fatality rate for seasonal influenza was that same as for SARS-CoV-2. "an order of magnitude smaller than the population IFR for COVID-19" https://t.co/oTvJferJUz
@patfrank830 Integrity really is a foreign concept to you, isn't it? https://t.co/4SBbr1iJQm https://t.co/oTvJfeJkM7 https://t.co/JxuBX2B9kw
@BBarucker @c_drosten @JungNaiv Evtl auch mal andere Studien berücksichtigen, das würde der Ausgewogenheit keinen Abbruch tun ;) https://t.co/OKeV8aELjV https://t.co/1WqVL7NLFA https://t.co/gMTOOMk6MP
@BBarucker @JungNaiv Es ging um die hiesige Altersstruktur. Die Letalität ist sehr altersspezifisch. 1,4% 65J, 4,6% 75J und 15% für 85J. https://t.co/jNLHPJg2n5
@mjtimber2 @LauraPowellEsq @Marco_Piani @nytimes @DrJBhattacharya It was ludicrous + less than influenza. "estimated to be 0.05%" https://t.co/81VntX74dn "0.04% to 0.08%" https://t.co/oTvJfeshK7 "usually well below 0.1%" https://t.co/Z0F1ncio2b https://t.co/UvoiybWVAn https://t.co/CW8mKmhEb8 https://t.co/gekHjGIFhS
@MartinKulldorff @nytimes @NIH @DrJBhattacharya @Bryce_Nickels @anish_koka @kevinnbass ≥0.4% without nursing home death. ≥0.5% with them. https://t.co/NlEN2nD9ie https://t.co/Gc9ugx6Kgr https://t.co/BOMQsBZZUA https://t.co/5uujdBbctl [https://t.co/WMxKyWsO4s] https://t.co/jKALpcmLOP https://t.co/6J4kIM9rz2 https://t.co/KvhQKE4Txx https://t.co/w4mBFms8cR https://t.co/AV5b4hs9Tz
@OnoNoKomachi1 @DrJMarine @nytimes There are estimates, typically below 0.1%. "estimated to be 0.05%" https://t.co/81VntX6wnP "0.04% to 0.08%" https://t.co/oTvJferJUz "usually well below 0.1%" https://t.co/Z0F1nchQcD https://t.co/UvoiybWnKP https://t.co/CW8mKmh6lA https://t.co/dc9kVOPTBP
@TheLastPersont2 @RachelReevesMP You sure about that? The case fatality rate for covid for people 25 and under was about 0.01% close to the height of the panic (https://t.co/sflZNVQulu). It's harder to find flu numbers but I'm seeing a range from half of that to ten times that for the same age group. These
@JeffCatalfino @VPrasadMDMPH https://t.co/Kmg9jq3fvQ Another one published at the end of 2020
@corona_realism
@throeng @softwarevlogger Поскольку вас явно забанили во всех средствах поиска, пожалуйста: https://t.co/VkoVF9Gxnp https://t.co/uONHDROLo4 https://t.co/SqhvQ68DYD
@flattop_north @greglew73 @MarloVanMarck @acoyne Try an actual well done study on IFR eh!? https://t.co/lSQ8w3hX1X
@MeowMuhCow @Thuringus Hier ist eine Metastudie. Das ist vermutlich am sichersten. https://t.co/umXf4UCgH4 Um ehrlich zu sein, liegt die Sterblichkeit zwischen 50-60 leicht unter 1% eher bei 0.8%. Das habe ich aus dem Kopf falsch erinnert.
@BBarucker "nie gegeben hat" Sind Sie sich selbst nicht peinlich?https://t.co/nV4FLRF9rj https://t.co/cXf3KewjJY
@thereal_truther @RichardWWard1 @think_fungus @Marc_Veld @mirwijn @yeahnaa333 @KingZacharia13 @DaniBeckman @Sunny_Rae1 And if you're going to make an influenza comparison in terms of IFR: "seasonal influenza (<0.1%)" https://t.co/u2pARCkrDw "seasonal influenza was in the range of 0.04% to 0.08%"* https://t.co/oTvJferJUz https://t.co/hcALFdgUyQ [https://t.co/oEdcADnjKc] https://t.co/81GaNTufjH https://t.co/9lqyMcmly7
@GidMK @sham_mitchell5 Re: "You should perhaps read some of my published work analysing seroprevalence studies and IFR" Reading + understanding papers may be hard for the low-follower troll account. https://t.co/jFhgOT3MCA https://t.co/KvhQKE4lHZ https://t.co/lrLqZH8k5O https://t.co/P8rKUZxjKE https://t.co/eYaGYQpNfJ
@qousqous @JamesGWood_UNSW The chart on the left was from the table at the start of the thread, the one on the right was from my 2020 paper https://t.co/DWxBY6bJ65
@SMeschkank @Quo_vadis_BRD Lesen und verstehen https://t.co/IfKunctIz8
@vickdimin @poirazis @ChristodoulosD @elonmusk Oops https://t.co/hL5bGIryWB https://t.co/0FX4gDGREh
@gfodor @RichardHanania So say 1 in 10k of VRM, 3 deaths per million people vaccinated. If we arbitrarily choose the lowest IFR of 0.01% for unvaxxed (Dec 2020) in a similar age group that's 100 deaths per million infected. Have to be pretty reclusive to get <3% chance infxn. https://t.co/30AjKuuZQ7 https://t.co/8AA2I8poCm
@Oliviersanstom @fanclubflibubu @lonnibesancon https://t.co/4KMXLIHeVl https://t.co/uVuT7rJkNS
@kid_krappy @thereal_truther Mate. You're using a very very oudated and biased IFR study they INITIALLY used, they updated to this one below YEARS ago. https://t.co/lSQ8w3hX1X
@Gunblaze1969 @goodbyegirl1012 @jtmayes3 @ImAtSeaAgain Ermmmmmm no lol Here is the breakdown: .002% at age 10 0.01% - 25 0.4% - 55 1.4% - 65 4.6% - 75 15% - 85 25%+ - 90+ Nope, flu is about 0.03%, but varies. https://t.co/lSQ8w3hX1X https://t.co/953YjGFyrl
@CarDen1974 @Eliesie1 Lees dit even: https://t.co/RwCD1xSYT8 Komt het plaatje hieronder uit. Dat is de IFR per leeftijd na COVID infectie. Kijk dan even op de website van het CBS: https://t.co/gfvqMnpF6W (kans op overlijden in een jaar) https://t.co/UODHNK2VuX
@LozGrain51870 @rhomboid1MF premature? Average age of death: 82 Average expected age UK: 82. >84% had underlying comorbidities https://t.co/KLfGPGaHmx https://t.co/a5SCA77y2f
@fotw123 @MikaelNiku @Terrrieri Se wikipedian graafin(i) lähde oli tiedejournaali: European Journal of Epidemiology, 27/113:n tutkimuksen yhteenveto, tekijöinä Harvard ym tason tutkijoita. Olisinhan minä voinut sen suoraan laittaa: https://t.co/r8yMY5DbyD
@PokeyArcticCirc Das war für unseren deutschen Altersschnitt. https://t.co/g2hZ9Epb3a
@saItypIum @Terje4Liberty @abcnews Citation? Of course recent strains have lower IFR, initial strains were much higher than you’re claiming https://t.co/OWppxiIhwq
@PoeBrianL @goingtogetugly @WordsfromC @MikeFie03379124 @acoyne Yup. Cherry-picking Ioannidis' low, outlier IFR estimates. https://t.co/dthBpHLVGi https://t.co/p47RreZaOy https://t.co/61F2luoHns [https://t.co/DQfkIwItE4] https://t.co/n6BPRJa26K https://t.co/Sx5NXQcdAb https://t.co/gYLZTcuBu6 https://t.co/n4RVe5DL0q https://t.co/wVuPWz1Wau https://t.co/umFlGpN7dq
@joesanders33 @plagueprose @PoeBrianL You + reality aren't on speaking terms. https://t.co/ACKjHrJbw2 https://t.co/Sx5NXQcdAb https://t.co/EFltBSSnTC
@joesanders33 @PoeBrianL @plagueprose I already explained to you why it's impossible: it requires more people to be infected than actually exist, long before reinfections were common. Go do some reading: https://t.co/RCmVoe6OoW https://t.co/dthBpHMtvQ https://t.co/Sx5NXQcLpJ https://t.co/p47RreZIE6 https://t.co/dOQvOCHW0f
@InfiniteCyclus @FactsAreGood @JusDayDa @jsm2334 @PienaarJm @stkirsch @TnAlistair @RetsefL Another look & far better than the Ioannidis nonsense. https://t.co/a0WCB9CJM6
@JonSnow50616798 @sjs856 @Awithonelison @TonyGaul @captainspheal 2. That is *outdated* CDC estimates from a highly biased study, which is why you CHOSE to share an OLD screenshot. Try the NEW one that has been utlised for some time now. https://t.co/lSQ8w3hX1X
@AlexanderOwen89 @GidMK @Nullsci1 ...table. The CDC table is for symptomatic illnesses that meet the criteria for an influenza-like illness (ILI). So what you need to convert that is not the asymptomatic rate, but the non-ILI (i.e. subclinical) rate. page S35: https://t.co/oTvJferJUz https://t.co/bgr4pNrZZI https://t.co/YgnvpOzk0P
RT @AtomsksSanakan: 10/B That WHO IFR range is not an over-estimate, based on many other studies. That's likely part of why Bhattacharya…
@lemire @lioncheetahfox @ylecun @elonmusk You're stubbornly uneducated about this, i'll stop wasting my time. Go do something productive with your time, this is pathetic https://t.co/tMmRu9feNj
@KnoblochJens @RZitelmann Esoterikffritzen wie du, waren aber noch nie gut daran, zu verstehen, was Korrelation und Kausalität ist. Sonst wäre die zahl der ungeimpften Covid Toten auch nicht so dramatisch hoch (siehe Sachsen) https://t.co/HvCdPRtz7r Danke dass du Menschen ihr Leben absprichst. https://t.co/SWuA9W0ue0
@kirbyboot @AshleyLeahy Australia is not listed on that chart you imbecile. It’s also highly likely distorted by underreporting of cases during the early stages of Covid. Try this paper for pre vaccine IFR in Australia: https://t.co/S5pwiYjE8l They assess it at 1.5%
@ElefantImRaum2 @MoldenUniverse @DasErste @LambyStephan *lol - der IFR Screenshot ist aus einem Review von Okt.2020 (!) das unter Mitwirkung des #HealthNerd (Skeptiker™-NGO) Gideon Meyerowitz‑Katz entstanden ist. 1a belastbar die singuläre Quelle (: https://t.co/SXeXSN9SYs
@43blah @AJKayWriter Because he has been pushing highly biased BS studies the whole pandemic, and his ideology has been clear the whole time, as well as he doesn't like it when his ego gets hurt. Sure thing, the most robust IFR study we have: https://t.co/lSQ8w3hX1X
@GeoffyPJohnston @DickZoutman @WhigStandard Sure, no pb. It's from the systematic review we had in late 2020 already (thank god since then we got the vaccine): https://t.co/mDh1NcbfMr No need to get so offended. We're talking about a very basic mistake, that's been circulating in academic departments recently, that's all
https://t.co/OeZkqzu8mb. COVID IFR for children was extremely low and lockdowns proved to be unnecessary
@jasonwoody @Meowzer88 @lazlowoodbine42 @stkirsch @thereal_truther 0.01 % at age 25. You ask: What is the payoff for the risk? Nearly every pleasure in life has a risk. Certainly travel dies. Is this concept foreign to you? https://t.co/iEA8LKGIIG
@1900HO @hendrikstreeck Haben Sie denn mittlerweile das paper von Meyerowitz-Katz https://t.co/G4XpA9Zxfm. gelesen? https://t.co/jqWeftM4hj Sehen Sie einen Widerspruch zwischen dieser Studie und der genannten Annahme?
@tripleGGGx @cappsie @nyob7714 @BeckyJohnson222 @groin_hammer @Major__Karen @BurgerLab12 @markmcdougall13 @ghoppe @andylumm @MaureenStroud @KeepEarthCool2 @Chris_F_Carson @Sleptwsocrates @BurdenTheo @ChrisJohnsonMD @PatriotsDanny @Gish19382 @moy_barry @ADevotedYogi @barryjohnreid21 @TwoCoconutHusks @pawley_robert @mcfunny @JustPlaying2Win @Bebert701 @OceanAteMyPhone @LWSmith15 @johnnyutah66623 @JCDeardeuff @JSAHolmes @temple_surly @wjack76995 @SwaledaleMutton @TierraHenson @Craig12940777 @Crippsy1969 @nancy41603 @lochard24 @RTheatheist @BioVisionary @Bill20538001 @livefre85257272 @Truth_in_Number @UnclebuckJ @Kathmarval @BrowningNeelyn @KayVonPaul @Alex_on_A14 @NeputeWellness Your uncited meme’s data doesn’t appear to be supported by meta-analysis (the ages don’t match AND the data doesn’t seem plausible based on a meta-analysis). It’s almost as if you got it off social media and lack th
@rusty0216 @doc_gero @KelleyKga @PeterHotez we had this info from outset. healthy normal-range bmi kids had ~zero chance of ill effects c19 --this is 2020 data that may have inc. kid deaths WITH c19 vs from C19 est at .003% https://t.co/zofi46yxdE more spot on: 2022 data .0003% 0 to 19 yrs. https://t.co/fJMxHJmZXX
@runnin5 @debruehe @DlCK_OWNER @benshapiro @joerogan "our metaregression predicts a population IFR of 0.22% that is practically indistinguishable from the observed outcome of 0.2%" https://t.co/lWrn5ukfjO
@StabellBenn Du var heldigvis ikke alene selv om det har følt sådan. Det skræmmende var politikeres, mediers og visse forskeres uvilje mod at følje data og hang til panikreaktioner. Både BMJ og andre var mere nuancerede, F.eks denne fra 2020: https://t.co/EdJEPT8REV https://t.co/gSfRppp5fG
@CentristAllWay ...and here's actual literature, which also isn't affected by a vaccination period: https://t.co/lSQ8w3hX1X
@besserwissi @BObachterin @Karl_Lauterbach Diese Metastudie von 113 Studien kommt auf völlig andere Infectiom Fatality Rates als Ihre einzelne Studie. https://t.co/UmPthTnJNg
@IBonnx "Healthy" is a subjective assessment, but the population IFR at different ages is very well described https://t.co/EDWqeXP7BS
@science63424214 @AKKB80 @nik_kolb @Friedemann1 Oder hier.. https://t.co/f5nxcl9NqJ https://t.co/yAnAu8JR4q
@Neoavatara @GidMK @DrJBhattacharya Clear that prevalence was lower in the elderly in various wealthy places (ex: NYC), consistent with predictions of Neil Ferguson's Imperial College modeling group in March 2020. https://t.co/ppayIWCA5L https://t.co/gYLZTcuBu6 [https://t.co/Sx5NXQcdAb] https://t.co/yRSDv2dDVM https://t.co/6PFjmPNYuC
@v8intercept @Poppy_PTMY @DrJBhattacharya Oh dear, someone has been indoctrinated by the BS artist Ioannidis. The guy that continually went out of his way to artificially lower the IFR and has been discredited over and over. An actual credible IFR study: https://t.co/lSQ8w3hX1X
@twck1986 @PeterSt16265067 @MrsMertes Genau das meine ich. Er glaubt dann solchen Bildern aus Telegram, statt sich zu informieren. Die Sterblichkeit für Länder wie Deutschland war bei circa 1%, also ist seit Bild mit 0,1% schon gelogen. https://t.co/3AkzKQ3sYI
@karenvaites @dwallacewells July 20, 2020, an exponential relationship between age and IFR for COVID-19 was observed with close to zero risk for children. From medrxiv: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Meta-Analysis & Public Policy Implications "The estimated IFR
@DavidC_Hatfield Being AWAKE for THREE YEARS, mostly
…same thing - but as I read through it I was very impressed by the methods you went through to remove bias as much as possible; I now always use it as the most robust IFR study to date and have been since I originally found it. https://t.co/lSQ8w3hpcp
@freddiesayers @whippletom @DAaronovitch Yep, based on serology and confirmed fatalities we verified this finding later in the year (although for 90+ the model is not very predictive due to the low numbers) https://t.co/DWxBY6bJ65
RT @universal_so: @dr_barrett Let me educate you before you kill a bunch of innocent kids: IFR: https://t.co/RYlVAXzkmE Less than 0.002% i…
There are also many published papers on the subject with estimates of: IFR (
@DrPaulOffit You need to consider all cause rate increase because you are horrendously cherry picking. All cause VFR (0.004%) in kids: https://t.co/XmZEEswbaj Adjusted IFR (LT 0.002%) for kids: https://t.co/RYlVAXzkmE
@DrPaulOffit You need to consider all cause rate increase because you are horrendously cherry picking. All cause VFR (0.004%) in kids: https://t.co/XmZEEswbaj Adjusted IFR (LT 0.002%) for kids: https://t.co/RYlVAXzkmE
RT @universal_so: @dr_barrett Let me educate you before you kill a bunch of innocent kids: IFR: https://t.co/RYlVAXzkmE Less than 0.002% i…
RT @universal_so: @dr_barrett Let me educate you before you kill a bunch of innocent kids: IFR: https://t.co/RYlVAXzkmE Less than 0.002% i…
@dr_barrett Let me educate you before you kill a bunch of innocent kids: IFR: https://t.co/RYlVAXzkmE Less than 0.002% in kids (on average) VFR: https://t.co/XmZEEswbaj Estimated at 0.004% That means vaccines kill twice as many kids as COVID at least. Kids aren't at risk from COVID.
@dr_barrett Let me educate you before you kill a bunch of innocent kids: IFR: https://t.co/RYlVAXzkmE Less than 0.002% in kids (on average) VFR: https://t.co/XmZEEswbaj Estimated at 0.004% That means vaccines kill twice as many kids as COVID at least. Kids aren't at risk from COVID.
Und das, lange bevor Ioannidis mit 0.22% und Streeck mit 0.36% an die Öffentlichkeit kamen. Auch seine Schätzung des R0 waren eher vorsichtig, zeigten aber klar, dass SC2 eine andere Nummer war als die Influenza. // Quellen: https://t.co/ylO3zK6nB9 https://t.co/2FuK2N7OP9
Sources: https://t.co/ylO3zK6nB9 https://t.co/pYKgqiBt3G
@not_voltaire @AllenShrugged @TheEconomist 0.5% to 1% https://t.co/eU4ZaOd1hs
@not_voltaire @djlange @MichaelPSenger @LawblogBob @Craig_A_Spencer IFR in the first wave (pre delta) was between 0.5% and 1%: https://t.co/eU4ZaOd1hs
@cjsnowdon @andrew_lilico More like the CFR then, for the sickest, and oldest. And in an initial bump, matching the late winter effect seen everywhere (with and without lockdowns), and heavily influenced by age and testing status. https://t.co/p8ftvRcfAr Otherwise, okay. https://t.co/9GDMmG9xSv
@Megalodon_2nd @SarahCaul_ONS 3. 1200 / 60mln = 0,00002 Even if that would be a causual effect. Which it isn't! That compares with 15% for covid infections for 85 year olds https://t.co/kHaCFYpFaC
@DrScheuch @Karl_Lauterbach Deutschland hat eine sehr alte Bevölkerung, und die IFR ist sehr unterschiedlich in den jeweiligen Altersgruppen. Rechen Sie bitte nochmal nach. https://t.co/jNLHPJfuxx https://t.co/8bB8dJIFiM
@lll_greece @mkeulemans @marlies1512 @WybrenvanHaga Ik vertrouw liever op onderzoeken die wel peer-reviewed zijn https://t.co/9rZESODcLR https://t.co/TC4kBswuyB
@eenvlaamsegaai @RadCentrism @TracyBethHoeg @ThatMattOBrien Here is one of the better and most robust IFR studies I have seen: https://t.co/lSQ8w3hX1X
@GeorgeMonbiot https://t.co/RQPCZMlxaP
@IncubatorNigel @PatrolNocny @szczepienie @Arcturus_xyz @Viciu13 Były różne szacunki w zależności od regionu ale nie było żadnej wątpliwości że COVID-19 przewyższa sezonową grypę. Tu masz porównania https://t.co/EHAUDsEY1d I screen z fragmentu z grudnia 2020 https://t.co/gAda9vyCpY C19 = grypa - to było wierutne kłamstwo! https://t.co/B6QJCHygxR
@anthonyistheman @Razzmom2022 @Casey_Muldoon @DiedSuddenly_ what are the chances they ALL died of covid? you know what? nvm math, just look at this link, it's, you know, the science https://t.co/Z9FQLGJf0l
@NatetheLawyer This is from Sept 2020 prior to vaccines and when covid was at it's most lethal. Odds of a 25 year old having a potentially fatal case of covid was 1 in 10,000. https://t.co/gLygmBTy8m https://t.co/ydmHVlIbwI
@BiophysicsFL @Clarksterh More reasonable estimates: "The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85." https://t.co/iXiD7p7jVq
RT @BillHanage: Our meta-analysis of how the Infection Fatality Rate varies with age is now published - great experience working on this l…
Hier de bron van de andere meta-analyse. Met dank aan @TWenseleers! https://t.co/JS3dYsTZ1H
The infection fatality rate for covid in healthy children is 0. Zero, zip, nada, zilch. This was known in 2020 and recent updates confirm the validity of the early studies. https://t.co/LuA5sP621q
RT @AtomsksSanakan: 3/M Mackary likely uses John Ioannidis' long-debunked paper: https://t.co/7uRFMZtZsx That makes no sense since 0.23%…
@DrCanuckMD @ShanaElise1 https://t.co/Z9FQLGJf0l if IFR is rate of death among people who've been infected, rate of death of total population is much lower. so if IFR is max 1.4% at age 65, why is the shot recommended for everyone? the "covid death" count? https://t.co/zc0hmHlMdR https://t.co/4uZQZ8TKUT
@corcoran4rw @Sorensenator587 @GrumpyOldDoc @Mrinemomforever @Texas_Kate @SaiKate108 @elonmusk "Need to vaccinate 7,000 people over age 80 to prevent one death" - Absolute garbage. Risk of death from covid *unvaccinated* to someone over 80 is significant - around 15% (see here: https://t.co/e9BQzuBXQu)...
8/E Fatality rates were predictably within that range the WHO gave in February 2020, despite what the pseudoskeptics claimed. https://t.co/PygdXkA5Z7 https://t.co/p47RreZIE6 https://t.co/J80O55RtLA https://t.co/Sx5NXQcLpJ https://t.co/gYLZTcv9jE https://t.co/dthBpHMtvQ https://t.co/8xTHeCWbE0
@Rn_Psi @StatesRe @talklibertynow @_Janey_J Or this: https://t.co/oSxLNmXtyF "Our analysis finds a exponential relationship between age and IFR for COVID-19. "
@Rn_Psi @StatesRe @talklibertynow @_Janey_J Or this: https://t.co/oSxLNnf4Xf "Our analysis finds a exponential relationship between age and IFR for COVID-19. "
@MagaMann82 @NealSmi40414676 @CDCFlu @CDCgov We know the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 [https://t.co/7K5ClfZiMT, https://t.co/FRyiNNqa1X] and that it causes COVID-19 [https://t.co/dtgzzqbIAh], which isn't just a weak cold (the infection fatality rates speak for themselves) [https://t.co/M7QIL9zEIH].
@FlyingCoonass @CDCgov I never brought up the infection fatality rate numbers, which do vary per age group and even person [https://t.co/M7QIL9hvuz]. Statistically, you and I probably won't die of COVID-19, but I'm not taking any chances.
@tgof137 @feheva @SamHarrisOrg @RealCandaceO Those Covid IFRs look like they come from https://t.co/nB7c19yN0c and they look right, but the flu IFRs are way too low. In 2011 for instance the flu IFR for age 65+ was 1.38%, less of a delta, and 5-17 was 0.003%, noticeably higher than Covid. https://t.co/6ikfi9nDb5
@NobodyBcc @KellieAnneDoug1 @DrJamesOlsson myocarditis rate here https://t.co/2inpclfL8r COVID IFR here https://t.co/oVmg8hHgpv
@OlgaStr92462365 @CDCgov I was close-contacted twice, still fine as well. I still got the shot because there's really no reason not to. Anyway, those are some odd infection fatality rates [https://t.co/M7QIL9zEIH].
@OlgaStr92462365 @CDCgov 99.7% is a bit general [see https://t.co/M7QIL9zEIH]. Anyway, the vaccine still nullifies symptoms (which can linger even in healthy individuals [https://t.co/NgakUq2xK5]), and myocarditis is a pretty rare adverse effect [https://t.co/a4WhFu3n6x].
@imjustaK9 @alexandrosM Marinos being a non-expert contrarian again. Usual issues: blood donors being a non-representative sample, specificity mattering more with low prevalence, etc https://t.co/p1Os92ona9 https://t.co/jBuW1oN6KC https://t.co/Sx5NXQcdAb https://t.co/cTyvCrUZXa https://t.co/I6hGNm44du https://t.co/sXSeyXT7Fj
@McCocky @moonstruckdew @CDCgov Clinical trials [https://t.co/EsbgKf4Dww]. Anyway, those are some odd IFR numbers [https://t.co/M7QIL9zEIH].
@RandallSuperior @CDCgov Okay, now we're getting somewhere. I don't know what studies you've seen, but hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin aren't effective [see https://t.co/mJ4kFQpHQk], and that 99.9% figure doesn't seem right [https://t.co/M7QIL9zEIH], and I don't know where you got 1/100 from.
@John38934556 @jeffreyatucker Umm, deaths haven't kept pace with infections because we have remediations like masks and vaccines. These lower the IFR. Of course age must be taken into account. That is done here: https://t.co/h8HgaVvSoO
@OlgaStr92462365 @CDCgov Could you provide a more specific source than "https://t.co/zYge8RNFpq"? I said this earlier, but I'm seeing much higher IFR estimate numbers [https://t.co/M7QIL9hvuz].
@Honza7478007 @CDCgov Those are some odd numbers, the IFR estimates that I have are much higher [https://t.co/M7QIL9hvuz].
RT @ajsta: @TravisH57165102 @CollignonPeter Peter's 2022 study has an Infection Fatality Rate of 8% for an 80 year old, which is similar to…
@TravisH57165102 @CollignonPeter Peter's 2022 study has an Infection Fatality Rate of 8% for an 80 year old, which is similar to the estimates from the 2020 study by Levin et al. https://t.co/vipOUFipZ9 https://t.co/d2Luv1SnE0
@MiObserver @KopalniaWiedzy ...z badaniami to proszę IFR: https://t.co/VxZdiJZa2S CFR: https://t.co/E3lY973eTT
@lbb1970 @jburnmurdoch @CJstillyoung Link to IFR paper (pre-vaccines - it will be lower now) https://t.co/B3Z4Cqi5Yq Also note that Diamond Princess will not necessarily have been the highest risk populations - they don't often go on long cruises.
Les conclusions révisent considérablement à la baisse les chiffres de l'étude la plus citée sur l'IFR de Covid par âge qui maintenait l'IFR à environ : 0,004 % à 0-34 ans 0,068 % à 35-44 ans 0,23 % à 45-54 ans 0,75 % à 55-64 ans https://t.co/MIBDfzu4jx 5/n
@TheOlivr @TakethatCt @dzzzdee @LarcombePeter @Trish_NI "widely reported" - by whom? Grifters and minimsers? Best IFR study we have says no: https://t.co/lSQ8w2ZNNP https://t.co/vu7Wo7tJ0t
RT @CureCFS: @joeolivermd @MoriartyLab @Billius27 @lisa_iannattone Whoa, I've had below IFRs for unvaxxed in my head this whole time, & tha…
RT @CureCFS: @joeolivermd @MoriartyLab @Billius27 @lisa_iannattone Whoa, I've had below IFRs for unvaxxed in my head this whole time, & tha…
RT @CureCFS: @joeolivermd @MoriartyLab @Billius27 @lisa_iannattone Whoa, I've had below IFRs for unvaxxed in my head this whole time, & tha…
@joeolivermd @MoriartyLab @Billius27 @lisa_iannattone Whoa, I've had below IFRs for unvaxxed in my head this whole time, & that vax reduced that ~10X. So for age 40s, ~.1% IFR pre-vax. But here it looks like ~.1% IFR for age 40s with 2-dose vax. I've been off by 10X this whole time? https://t.co/uvb6MRYbYR https://t.co/LfgeNZxTuG
@jonkay Infection fatality rate for 16-29 yo males is ~1 in 10k. [DOI: 10.1007/s10654-020-00698-1] Myocarditis rate for 16-29 yo males is slightly >1 in 10k [DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2110737] - to say nothing re pericarditis, etc It is rational for young men to avoid the jab.
@trishgreenhalgh Infection fatality rate for 16-29 yo males is ~1 in 10k. [DOI: 10.1007/s10654-020-00698-1] Myocarditis rate for 16-29 yo males is slightly >1 in 10k [DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2110737] - to say nothing re pericarditis, etc Is it not rational for some young people to decide against?
@Diego77197524 @XayberTEK Eso se debe a que Ioannidis uso estudios con muestras no representativas que sobreestiman el denominador (% de personas infectadas). Sino se hace tal cosa, el IFR sale mas alto 1-https://t.co/T70aPbwGWS 2-https://t.co/uq7pPB09qS 3-https://t.co/jneHEBn8xb
@BeatrizTalegon @DrAseemMalhotra Por ejemplo, aqui se usa una unica fuente de estimacion del IFR Cuando hay varias revisiones publicadas. -https://t.co/T70aPbwGWS -https://t.co/ncMq7WQGz3 https://t.co/ZTpdMrARt3
@AAkwarelista @IzabellaWills @BartoszKowara @MaaPera4 Zaniżasz IFR znacznie. Wynosi on ok. 2,5% powyżej 65 roku życia, 8,5% powyżej 75 roku (https://t.co/IxCFMsdba7). Zasadniczo to już od 35 roku życia jest większe ryzyko umrzeć na COVID-19 niż mieć wysypkę na skórze po szczepieniu czy gorsze powikłania.
RT @Volksverpetzer: Der Ausschuss und die Autorin waren die hier, die schon mal zusammen Bundesregierung für den Sturz der Regierung gespie…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Der Ausschuss und die Autorin waren die hier, die schon mal zusammen Bundesregierung für den Sturz der Regierung gespie…
Der Ausschuss und die Autorin waren die hier, die schon mal zusammen Bundesregierung für den Sturz der Regierung gespielt haben
@KosherKraken @DontVoteSplit https://t.co/CHEwUdgoJM
@tweetwithJete @gorskon @MartinKulldorff @Stanford @DrJBhattacharya @DailyCaller IFR will vary widely due to demographics, variant, and immune status; the IFR *today* may very well be around .2% due to cumulative immunity. It certainly was not in 2020. IFR in 2020 in the US, assuming equal spread among all age groups, was likely 1.3% https://t.co/xJ64zvArfS
@todomejorqenada Ahora me pasa a pregunta de los de mas de 65 a 80, javier, deja de pedirme datos y acepta que te has equivocado afirmando que la efectividad era negativa, y la mortalidad preocupantes es tmb en los >65 https://t.co/Wzd0E3vpT4
@FiveTimesAugust @ScepticalAussie @mancmenace1 Oh dear. Fox News?
@NewtonReturned @kprather88 Regardless of IFR, it is obvious the Seasonal Influenza does not kill 15 million people worldwide (2020 & 2021, WHO) or overload hospitals the way Covid did. https://t.co/SQhIJxhn3A https://t.co/IyIarIiOwi https://t.co/ZJKUrTVX9a https://t.co/DdHmfaWWa4 https://t.co/jCkqc2ANvp
@mark_gutmann @Volksverpetzer Wir haben es vorsichtig formuliert. Wenn man allerdings berücksichtigt, dass Deutschland mit die älteste Bevölkerung der Welt hat (nach Japan), kommt man eher so auf locker über 1 Million verhinderte Tote: https://t.co/UBKytHjAq8
RT @drkaanyl: @Borayerdinc @MerkiSSelcuk IFR'ler gençler için her zaman düşüktü %1'lerin yanına dahi yaklaşmadı. 70-80 frajil grup içinse b…
@Borayerdinc @MerkiSSelcuk IFR'ler gençler için her zaman düşüktü %1'lerin yanına dahi yaklaşmadı. 70-80 frajil grup içinse basit bir idrar yolu enf. bile risktir kısa sürede ölüme sebebiyet verebilir. gereksiz yere aşılanan milyarlarca genç benim için hatadır ve bir kez daha düşmem https://t.co/CVdFUiHCHB
@Tmafkab @Dalmane15 @villagerssn @gtuckerkellogg @real_seeking @ryanbeed @ptcjoneses @OXHarryH1 @TakethatCt @SaltaoVladimir @JohnRee58027351 @Vaxed2DaMax @JonathanSarfat1 @mobindondon @StevenDaw5 @effink777 @verap1 @KStateTurk @TigerlillySusan @notagr0wer @TrevorHifi @tamlarge @DiegoHAWK6 @Lunatic__Fringe @DrAcula987 @XRadarP @DrSusanOliver1 They're simply trolling. https://t.co/Sx5NXQcdAb https://t.co/nRGv2K9oqL
@EricBillyFR @ISlovan @DDupagne 2020: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications https://t.co/mDh1NcbfMr
@Dyhr2002 @casperj33081634 @sebdor @berlingske Ja, med danske tal fra maj 2020, der ikke siger det du siger, kom igen. https://t.co/pMmSQ9UrrY
@SirGrantFleming @Jonathan_Witt @Our_DA @Action4SA @VFPlus That is why they are trying to
@michael3110au @schwing48594127 @mrmickme @NSWHealth The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85. https://t.co/6asTOUWcnS
@schwing48594127 @mrmickme @NSWHealth The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85. https://t.co/6asTOUWcnS
@Sam92651162 @NSWHealth The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85. https://t.co/6asTOUWcnS
@Sam92651162 @notjessiedean0 @NSWHealth The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85. https://t.co/6asTOUWcnS
@MIGO_Offiziell @JesseVentura86 @ECMOKaragianni1 @ONS https://t.co/ylO3zK6nB9 Levine, Meyerowitz-Katz (hier als: @GidMK ) https://t.co/YHblCCUFWf
@medpagetoday Allison Neitzel, MD is the author of the above bit of disinfo in her op/ed @medpagetoday "The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10)" Her entire hit piece is riddled with other distortions/lies https://t.co/zofi46yxdE
Next time, let's rely less on models that ignore the harm these anti-social policies have inflicted on children and instead examine reality where the IFR for covid in kids is 0.0% https://t.co/Ig3Js56gvh
@LucioMM1 @mskathleenquinn @sciam Among unvaccinated: The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85. https://t.co/BfZlFenHRy
@LCWF_TBK The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25). A 10 year old has a higher chance of drowning in a boating accident. Wake up Louise. https://t.co/Z6qmrj72jh
@Rdi22591682 @Weber_Nina Ich empfehle da lieber Herrn Drosten zuzuhören, als die Zeit mit verdrehten Argumenten von Herrn Wodarg zu verschwenden. Kein Wunder vertreten Sie diese sogenannte Meinung. https://t.co/3FjM1HggOc ich empfehle ihnen einfach mal zu hinterfragen, woran Sie so sehr glauben.
@STeBoe28 @BasTea18 @christoph_rothe Deswegen; exponentieller Anstieg der Infektionssterblichkeit mit dem Alter ist ja schon länger bekannt. https://t.co/QsxUsnzNxR https://t.co/lzRfByJt1A
@PredicterX @latimes Yes, and there have been many papers on the infection fatality rate. Age and vaccinated adjusted, it's roughly the same everywhere. As you'd expect with the same virus infecting the same species. Here's an early paper on Age. https://t.co/sY6ugTkUWV
No, no it doesn't. We are done. Stay home if sick. Get vax if in a high risk group or have comorbidities. The IFR for most is way under 1% https://t.co/Gn8Lp5NKcM Exercise, eat healthy, take your vitamins. STOP with the fear mongering already. https://t.co/ya2eozjWQI
@takesonlife @curtisjohnmurph @DrMoystMD @PeterCBC Base risk vs new risk Take infection fatality rate The base risk for 10 yr old dying is ~0.002% 85 is ~15% If vaccine efficacy is 90% (new risk is 10% of base risk) new risk for a 10 yr old is 0.0002% for 85 yr old is 1.5% This is pre-omicron risk. https://t.co/iQi8qq8vlC
@justme203040 @robertp41895580 @NTVNewsNL https://t.co/wQ5XI8Zjsd https://t.co/PRAXlrWFHP https://t.co/iQi8qq8vlC Children are not at risk. At all.
@ScholSlade @TruthMav Age adjusted mortality rate. https://t.co/iQi8qq8vlC If you want to look at breakdowns by age bracket. Otherwise take a spin on our world in data, on a bunch of things. https://t.co/wEsY0miAJJ
@Paulasrocks @prof_walace @MartinWaltherDD https://t.co/WWfR46Jzxw https://t.co/rCQXEbtfxf Wie war das?
@DanivonUK @DizzyvibeMc @SimonSt51662750 @JamesMelville https://t.co/qy9EbDY6bi
@DonaldEel @SimonSt51662750 @JamesMelville "The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85." https://t.co/qy9EbDY6bi
https://t.co/wFVgUagcC5 Pan Basiukiewicz @basiukiewiczpaw nadal podaje nieprawdziwe dane na temat IFR COVID-19. Tu przykład danych obiektywnych. https://t.co/Vu48KcEo25
@RathDeanna @jkenney Children are vulnerable to many things. Covid isn’t one of them https://t.co/v39MbFwzuF https://t.co/iQi8qq8vlC
@DebbyHillier @VOCMNEWS https://t.co/TXywcVRY8v https://t.co/iQi8qq93ba Children are the least at risk.
@OldSmokeEater14 @nilikm @purplesgem @CBCNews Because if you’re under 60, not having a cluster of underlying conditions (obese, hypertension, diabetes etc) and not vitamin D deficient, it isn’t. https://t.co/TXywcVRqiX https://t.co/iQi8qq8vlC https://t.co/241eJYrqKe
@lugrauls @wbeke @JanJambon Ook hier sla je de bal volledig mis.
@epi_guy @alesigdesuisse einige der methodisch stärksten Studien reine oder teilweise Wiwi. https://t.co/dOeYv0DjT7 https://t.co/PJt2ZVCdcw https://t.co/DNp1q9LsEy Wohlgemerkt sind wir uns in Bezug auf die aktuell besprochene “Studie” (der JHU-Autor ist übrigens *nicht* an der VWL-Fak) einig.
RT @pepeUKiYAN: Según estudio publicado por el NIH, Instituto de Salud de EEUU, la tasa de letalidad para grupo de hasta 25 años oscila en…
RT @JoergStoye: @GeoWieland @oliverbeige @holmenkollin @DrChristianWin1 @domliebl Tatsächlich hat Fremdwissenschaftlern bei COVID zwar zu v…
@GeoWieland @oliverbeige @holmenkollin @DrChristianWin1 @domliebl Tatsächlich hat Fremdwissenschaftlern bei COVID zwar zu viel Ausschuss geführt, einige des besten Beiträge sind aber auch fachübergreifend, wenn z.B. Wiwi-Methodenausbildung auf nicht erst gestern angelesene Fachkenntnis trifft. https://t.co/XxagFmHk63 https://t.co/26Mfja0q0P
@trianglman I should've worded that better. Survival rate in healthy humans? Very, very, very high (link). Also, 48.7% of all Covid deaths come from the demographic of age 75 and up. So back to the original point - why are we masking school students? https://t.co/jNQb8FRZoj
@VioletEglantine @drjenirwin Sounds like something the folks spreading fear should be demonstrating. Onus is on those making the claim. Data to date shows older age is one of the biggest risk factors. Systematic review: https://t.co/B9DHRKn8Fa
@Follymans EXPERIMENTEN https://t.co/VZ6M7rcGJA ZONDER TESTEN https://t.co/LKpgrmHWUm OP KINDEREN https://t.co/EglpvdzUGT ZONDER KANS OP COVID https://t.co/3twBJqc3mk IS EEN MISDAAD https://t.co/na77rN4e66 punt
@pattylees @JamesMelville @FatEmperor Here are the IFR and IFC. https://t.co/xL3jlEeEN7
@sharktyricon @LLau71 @thierrybaudet https://t.co/dw49GcF7JR https://t.co/GZ8jY4BpqB https://t.co/vsIK2W2VDk
@eughitsnotover @bosfloss @JessicaPerthWA @zz10274388 @whatisitdoing Here you go. You only had to google something like "Covid IFR rates by age group" https://t.co/3gj1fKjzLq
Here are the two studies referenced above: https://t.co/RCGG0qYLlT https://t.co/3cY73mYa0h
@niswarth @awakenindiamvmt https://t.co/ZmNtfmr74c Real world seems even better than these papers, because Britain reported 2 deaths per Million in children. Going by that standard, vaccination is crazy for children. We better tell them to play in the Sun, and just be happy.
@hydropsyche1 @ctfran62 @ProfEmilyOster Indeed, for leading examples of econometrics put to use in the pandemic see (some are collabs, and that's a good thing): https://t.co/XxagFmHk63 https://t.co/UhxN22zsrr https://t.co/26Mfja0q0P Similarly, impact of pandemic on education is the subject of a broad econ literature.
https://t.co/dYPXcHLxGe
RT @umamaheshwarb: @ANI That means the teenager was kept in the dark that IFR for 0-19 is 0.0027% (practically zero). https://t.co/ZmNtfmr7…
RT @umamaheshwarb: @ANI That means the teenager was kept in the dark that IFR for 0-19 is 0.0027% (practically zero). https://t.co/ZmNtfmr7…
RT @umamaheshwarb: @ANI That means the teenager was kept in the dark that IFR for 0-19 is 0.0027% (practically zero). https://t.co/ZmNtfmr7…
@Steelgumby1 @ConceptualJames https://t.co/V00qKROFZY. Elderly Italians Pregnant women https://t.co/zrRiniRSqM General EU mortality https://t.co/1u27JPg06s Fuck off illiterate trash bag.
RT @umamaheshwarb: @ANI That means the teenager was kept in the dark that IFR for 0-19 is 0.0027% (practically zero). https://t.co/ZmNtfmr7…
RT @umamaheshwarb: @ANI That means the teenager was kept in the dark that IFR for 0-19 is 0.0027% (practically zero). https://t.co/ZmNtfmr7…
RT @umamaheshwarb: @ANI That means the teenager was kept in the dark that IFR for 0-19 is 0.0027% (practically zero). https://t.co/ZmNtfmr7…
@ANI That means the teenager was kept in the dark that IFR for 0-19 is 0.0027% (practically zero). https://t.co/ZmNtfmr74c @awakenindiamvmt #NoJabforKids #NoVaccinePassports
@nhsurfer1313 I read them, now let's read some studies. Ya ready, https://t.co/z58M8UE8ty https://t.co/MyYDLu4XvW
@PLHartungRN @P_McCulloughMD @joerogan The fatality rate for COVID-19 is 0.002 percent at age 10 and 0.01 percent at age 25.7 It seems unreasonable to mandate vaccination for young people who are at such low mortality risk from the virus. https://t.co/X6gYUb69mU
@mellziland Our analysis finds a exponential relationship between age and IFR for COVID-19. The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults: 0.002% at age 10 0.01% at age 25 0.4% at age 55 1.4% at age 65 4.6% at age 75 15% at age 85. https://t.co/fdv2zKq8VP
@PeterdeWilde10 @ErikKohl @mzelst @Skout222 @umarebru https://t.co/dMcpr3XqUD https://t.co/V9R93WLvW3 Velen malen hoger? Nou nee...redelijk gelijk. Influnza voor kinderen is zelfs gevaarlijker dan Covid. Jammer joh
@_realBKMGK @DissonantDreams @Daneman99018579 @AdamKinzinger Ok, thats fair enuf, John. The actual link to the study is below & I wld certainly be open to u sharing w/me the current survival rate for Covid. I honestly look forward to it. I am open to correction. Pls provide whatever info u may have or may know of
The fatality rate for COVID-19 is 0.002 percent at age 10 and 0.01 percent at age 25.7 It seems unreasonable to mandate vaccination for young people who are at such low mortality risk from the virus. https://t.co/X6gYUb69mU
@stevehouf @wwwojtekk @EpiEllie That's not my perception. Indeed, some of the most useful contributions were epi-econ collaborations. https://t.co/2NMo1oJKfD, https://t.co/XxagFmHk63.
@KayLouMo @devonleighs https://t.co/1MgQE7DmQU
@StarfishPrime12 @brk7391 @ChristinaPushaw @nickmmark "† These estimates are based on age-specific estimates of infection fatality ratios from Levin AT, Hanage WP, Owusu-Boaitey N, et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications."
@JackhammerOP @ZubyMusic I need to find that exact link again. Below is a report from NIH. https://t.co/VeKO26aBZ4
RT @PerpetualValue: Average age > 80. People under 70 and without comorbidities have very little to fear of C19 death. https://t.co/a5SCA…
RT @slan19467036: Levin relatou que o IFR específico para a idade estimado foi de 0,002% aos 10 anos e 0,01% aos 25 anos. https://t.co/nhxI…
RT @slan19467036: Levin relatou que o IFR específico para a idade estimado foi de 0,002% aos 10 anos e 0,01% aos 25 anos. https://t.co/nhxI…
@irishayesha @BonnyfellaLee These aren't anecdotes? Coroner report on Lisa Shaw, Dr Wright. In .Gov data at least another 70 from AZ ITP. Risk is different by age and comorbidity and for say 25yr old IFR is 0.01%. 1:5 ICU beds covid and 48% of those unvaccinated. (UKHPA 3/12). https://t.co/NO4gy8gV8b.
These are based on OECD estimated age-specific, seroprevalence-adjusted infection fatality rates from the group of @GidMK, plus @StatCan_eng July 2021 population estimates. IFR paper: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33289900 With open access link for those interested in reading.
@2020Vision111 @PeterAttiaMD 2/2 "Most people" are not under 35 ;) "age-specific [infection fatality rate] is very low for children and younger adults ... but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85." https://t.co/ou5WWk4Pja
@Crokqz @ValenciaLoki @SchnaitmannT @sportanwalt @VfL_Wolfsburg Corona ist aber weniger tödlich als die Grippe (~0.1) für viele Menschen (~<45J). Anbei L: Levin ,Cambridge (Q: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID‐19: systematic review, meta‐analysis, and public policy implications) zu R:Verlauf Grippe pro Alter https://t.co/Wo0ISYziXK
@thorstenkguitar @FlugschuleE Noch lachst Du! Die Gestalten haben ernsthaft Regierung gespielt. https://t.co/SOijITAg60
@davetaxi67 @lamanche57 @PaulCanOnlyGet1 https://t.co/qg4fuxF5fW. <0.4% for all aged 55 and under. Admittedly it increases after that
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: #Reiskeksflagge https://t.co/xlCkXTrv3g
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: #Reiskeksflagge https://t.co/xlCkXTrv3g
RT @Volksverpetzer: #Reiskeksflagge https://t.co/xlCkXTrv3g
RT @Volksverpetzer: #Reiskeksflagge https://t.co/xlCkXTrv3g
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: #Reiskeksflagge https://t.co/xlCkXTrv3g
#Reiskeksflagge https://t.co/xlCkXTrv3g https://t.co/Wewzylm3zo
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
RT @Volksverpetzer: Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenk…
Da euch unser letztes reaction Video so gefallen hat, hat Thomas noch eines gemacht - und sich angeschaut, wie Querdenker (der "Corona-Ausschuss") Bundesregierung spielen. Zumindest so lange, wie er es ausgehalten hat.
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
RT @itsme_leclerc: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public pol…
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications | SpringerLink https://t.co/P5cVLKgJEt
RT @amoschovaki: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public polic…
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications https://t.co/YkI6UjAFQZ
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications [2020 Dec 8] https://t.co/0I9qyXE4pj https://t.co/LxGrVZH5il
@MCarazol @AisneLine @Flo020306 @xilem84 Où avez-vous trouvé ce taux de létalité ? Les estimations actuelles sont environ entre 0,5 % et 2 % selon la composition de la population (voir par exemple https://t.co/steihrF7Sr), sans compter les autres effets possibles (par exemple https://t.co/pj8Fy5oebB).
@MortWeaz @jonathanvswan @NathanDallon @HansNichols Still this denialist lie? There are peer-reviewed analyses to refute that nonsense. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19 |Pubmed https://t.co/Z5kRGzxJTS Age-specific mortality and immunity patterns of SARS-CoV-2 | Nature https://t.co/Wp0q1NOp3G https://t.co/RddE247aM0
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications | SpringerLink https://t.co/xY4jkzlAaq
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
@HarveyWall15 † These estimates are based on age-specific estimates of infection fatality ratios from Levin AT, Hanage WP, Owusu-Boaitey N, et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: Systematic review, meta-analysis https://t.co/0prQ3oKvqY
@HarveyWall15 You can’t read and you can’t math!
@WolfgangHerle @VikingRohan Jetzt verlassen wir jede ernsthafte Diskussion. Die IFR für einen 60-jährigen beträgt etwa 1%. Für einen 40- jährigen etwa 0,1%. (für den Wildtyp wohlgemerkt). Quelle: https://t.co/LAxSPVumsx Wahrscheinlichkeit Lottojackpot ~ 0.000000715%
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications https://t.co/qDX00sT3WY
@samjlord @zeynep Levin et al paper: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications, by ...
@HenrEriksson @UppsalaSara Försöker du skatta smittade från IFR+döda blir det lätt stora multiplikativa fel i yngre åldersgrupper. Möjligen kan åldersspecifik IFR bland <60 i Sverige ligga nära den nedre gränsen för prediktionsintervallet här. https://t.co/qBv8C7EekR
@the_agorist_cha @havenopotential Levin AT, Hanage WP, Owusu-Boaitey N, Cochran KB, Walsh SP, Meyerowitz-Katz G. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications. European Journal of Epidemiology. 2020;35(12):1123-38.
@ReformTarion @wmiddelkoop Levin, A.T., Hanage, W.P., Owusu-Boaitey, N. et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications. Eur J Epidemiol 35, 1123–1138 (2020). https://t.co/2dTKmxfN1R
@ggvanloon @pjvanerp @theodorus_VII @mus_nico @eaglehibma @Bourdonne @BorgerPieter Is niet van de WHO. De WHO geeft zelf aan "with estimates of IFR converging at approximately 0.5 - 1%" https://t.co/P0M5twlEJg En een beter overzicht vind je hier: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19 https://t.co/iSg6IrDbMo
@ggvanloon @pjvanerp @theodorus_VII @eaglehibma @Bourdonne @BorgerPieter De IFR is volgens de WHO tussen 0,5% en 1%. Volgens RIVM tussen 1% en 1,3%. IFR is sterk afhankelijk van leeftijd (en aanwezige comorbiditeiten). "Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19" https://t.co/iSg6IrUMDW Maar staar je niet blind op 1/2
@John38934556 @justinsmithecon @robfoot @SteiniBrown @fordnation This is where your stupidity thrives...IFR less than 0.05% Levin, A.T., Hanage, W.P., Owusu-Boaitey, N. et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications. Eur J Epidemiol 35,
@40runner1 @KrutikaKuppalli @aetiology For the data, see: Levin AT, Hanage WP, Owusu-Boaitey N, Cochran KB, Walsh SP, Meyerowitz-Katz G. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications. Eur J Epidemiol. 2020 Dec;35(12):1123–38.
@pierrebezukhov5 @joostzaat @rubenivangaalen @volkskrant Deze is namelijk sterk afhankelijk van o.a. leeftijdscategorie en eventuele aandoeningen. Age-specific mortality and immunity patterns of SARS-CoV-2 https://t.co/i87qTWPuky Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19 https://t.co/iSg6IrDbMo 2/3
RT @kuwahao: COVID-19の感染致死率(IFR)の年齢特異性の評価:(2020年12月14日） ＊高齢者における感染を軽減するための公衆衛生対策は，総死亡者数を大幅に減少させる ＊COVID-19は高齢者や脆弱者だけでなく，健康な中年成人にとっても危険である…
COVID-19の感染致死率(IFR)の年齢特異性の評価:(2020年12月14日） ＊高齢者における感染を軽減するための公衆衛生対策は，総死亡者数を大幅に減少させる ＊COVID-19は高齢者や脆弱者だけでなく，健康な中年成人にとっても危険である https://t.co/qVSI4wzl2r https://t.co/VMFZZ0Q7dI の翻訳 https://t.co/oxIGAywiH7
@Freedom4Ever29 @ZombNation108 @DonaldJTrumpJr Disinformation. Peer-reviewed meta- analysis shows infection fatality rate ranging from 1.4% to 15% for those aged 65+. "Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis" https://t.co/05ffUuIHvz https://t.co/lilomX53Sl
@Jerky16976705 @estherendennes @WybrenvanHaga Die 0,23% is wel degelijk een onderschatting. Bovendien moet je vooral niet naar een algemene IFR kijken. "Age-specific mortality and immunity patterns of SARS-CoV-2" https://t.co/i87qTWPuky "Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic 1/2
@maithi_nk @BMauschen @hendrikstreeck Übersterblichkeit und Infektionssterblichkeit durch/von SARS-COV-2/COVID-19 in den USA https://t.co/dRGYCm8Eei
RT @mdkatrsk: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy i…
@PerHelgeM @Folkehelseinst @Legemiddelinfo "The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85" https://t.co/f1HCzUmzlm
@JandeVr00337962 @rolfje @Dobber92473354 @mkeulemans @WybrenvanHaga wordt dat nader uiteengezet. "Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications" https://t.co/WibPUilSWG 3/3
@DaithiHarmon @fact_covid @AlistairHaimes Eh, IFR of 4.6% at 75 and 15% at 85: "Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications - PubMed" https://t.co/goziZRC6vg
@mus_nico @bahavandermeer Haha, ja, ik blijf ze ook met de feiten om de oren slaan. Deze is handig: "Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications" https://t.co/WibPUilSWG 1/2
Quelle: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19 European Journal of Epidemiology volume 35, pages1123–1138 (08.12.2020) Zitat: https://t.co/4fhKGZnh6F Tabelle: https://t.co/ysSDyBfjzm
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
RT @BENNERWW: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy i…
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications | Result: infection fatality rate increases with age, but affects overall all age groups. More so > 55 years and above. https://t.co/afyq8VhLo8
In this systematic review by Levin et al in the European Journal of Epidemiology, the authors estimate age-specific infection fatality ratios (IFRs) for COVID-19. They searched for peer-reviewed articles published before September 2020. https://t.co/VhMk7mGuRb https://t.co/1KKAKEjevl
@ModeledBehavior @arindube Age explains ~90% of the variability. "Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications | medRxiv" https://t.co/tDvcxkmFhn
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications https://t.co/nLFAurDlPh מחקר חשוב שכבר הועלה כאן ומפרט היטב את סיכוני תמותה לפי גיל מקוביד 19 IFR . בגיל 20 מוערך בסדר גודל של 1/20000.
@VictimOfMaths @jm_aburto Just in case (came across your Q again) Just age, large meta: https://t.co/qmRuNIcWik (
Quellen (2/3): ▪️Altersspezifische Mortalität: Levin et al. (2020). Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications (https://t.co/6DU5lC38yB). Online Appendix.
@VanSophia @GrantADDingwall @Roman_Baber @OntarioPCParty @fordnation For me and my wife, according to https://t.co/fzT8Dw435p, our IFR is 1%. Do you normally engage in activities that have a 1 in 100 chance of dying?
@VanSophia @GrantADDingwall @Roman_Baber @OntarioPCParty @fordnation CDC page dates from September. More recent & comprehensive paper here: https://t.co/fzT8Dw435p
@VanSophia @GrantADDingwall @Roman_Baber @OntarioPCParty @fordnation That's a VERY misleading summary of the danger. OF COURSE if you don't consider the group for which it is MOST DEADLY, it is less deadly. Here, read this. https://t.co/fzT8Dw435p
@hereconcentrate @GrantADDingwall @Roman_Baber @OntarioPCParty @fordnation Yes, everyone who is paying attention knows that. Here is a more recent article that gives a formula to estimate your IFR based on age. https://t.co/fzT8Dw435p
RT @kenmomd: プレプリントだった年齢別IFRのメタアナリシス論文がいつの間にか掲載されていた Levin, A.T. et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVI…
@Net_Arts @WvanWaas Voor leeftijdsgerelateerde mortaliteit zie bijgaand artikel. Voor jonge personen is sterfte aan COVID laag maar niet triviaal. 1:2700 bij 35 jr 1 oplopend naar 0.4% bij 55 jr. Long COVID bij overlevers is echter ook een dingetje... https://t.co/Ss3wAYdYKL
RT @kenmomd: プレプリントだった年齢別IFRのメタアナリシス論文がいつの間にか掲載されていた Levin, A.T. et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVI…
RT @kenmomd: プレプリントだった年齢別IFRのメタアナリシス論文がいつの間にか掲載されていた Levin, A.T. et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVI…
RT @kenmomd: プレプリントだった年齢別IFRのメタアナリシス論文がいつの間にか掲載されていた Levin, A.T. et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVI…
RT @kenmomd: プレプリントだった年齢別IFRのメタアナリシス論文がいつの間にか掲載されていた Levin, A.T. et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVI…
RT @kenmomd: プレプリントだった年齢別IFRのメタアナリシス論文がいつの間にか掲載されていた Levin, A.T. et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVI…
プレプリントだった年齢別IFRのメタアナリシス論文がいつの間にか掲載されていた Levin, A.T. et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications. Eur J Epidemiol https://t.co/ZLyyRtyGAf https://t.co/x67rEkxWln
@HansdeBoer18 @HansdeBoer18 Zo dan moet jij wel een stuk jonger zijn dan ik. Kijk nog maar eens goed naar dit artikel. https://t.co/6dsnewdoUs
@Denkvrij1 @C19RedTeam Je zou kunnen beginnen bij deze recente meta-analyse: 'Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications' (European Journal of Epidemiology).
RT @COVID19digest1: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public po…
RT @COVID19digest1: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public po…
RT @COVID19digest1: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public po…
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications https://t.co/DX4l3TSfCU
RT @michaelscally: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public pol…
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications | SpringerLink https://t.co/u9cGGakvMc
@EnergyCynic @MidwestHedgie Gotta be careful when intertwining CFR and IFR metrics. IFRs have been estimated using seroprevalence data +Fudge factor for many months now yet in some circles remain a hotly debated topic. https://t.co/iNgDbrrd5y https://t.co/ViBosvItPe https://t.co/mvqHmWS60i
RT @pingeye2phile: 基礎疾患の有無までは分からなかったが、高齢者ほど致死率が高いとのこと。年齢、人種、既往歴は関係するだろう。 Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COV…
基礎疾患の有無までは分からなかったが、高齢者ほど致死率が高いとのこと。年齢、人種、既往歴は関係するだろう。 Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications - PubMed https://t.co/7j3SIKAOyY
RT @Pintocles: Cuáles son los grupos en mayor riesgo, en comparación con otras habituales de muerte?
PaperOfTheDay From @BillHanage + @GidMK, on SARS-CoV-2's infection fatality rate (IFR): https://t.co/80xww0qSeX "Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications" https://t.co/Sx5NXQcdAb https://t.co/XmzViMTCBt
RT @daforerog: Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy…
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications https://t.co/e3AG4XUS9f
Cuáles son los grupos en mayor riesgo, en comparación con otras habituales de muerte?
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications https://t.co/U3Te1Z002l
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications https://t.co/PVynRAFxGo
RT @andrewsbowie: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Poli…
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications | medRxiv https://t.co/b70HdgPhpI
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications https://t.co/fikfXm6xGI @medrxivpreprint @GidMK
RT @MJosling53: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy…
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications https://t.co/55Eydfgogk
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
RT @pash22: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Imp…
RT @pash22: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Imp…
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications https://t.co/2Q13LQkO2c via @BillHanage et al
RT MackayIM https://t.co/LX8U1QP4In "Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications https://t.co/4GsORLKegY"
Update: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications https://t.co/6VXPfKA29M read/write/request review https://t.co/RnurTL3DyM #influenza #COVID19
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
RT @philippefroguel: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public P…
RT @philippefroguel: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public P…
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications | medRxiv https://t.co/GxmwTFUNQh
RT @philippefroguel: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public P…
RT @philippefroguel: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public P…
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications | medRxiv https://t.co/GxmwTFUNQh
RT @avivajazz: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID -19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy…
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications ——• Andrew Levin Dartmouth College October 1, 2020 ——• Vimeo Video https://t.co/6LK6lyoOx4
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID -19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications | medRxiv #COVID19 https://t.co/naeOxIxwwA
RT @Sonja6272: Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy…
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications | medRxiv https://t.co/N84UODelHL
Assessing the Age Specificity of Infection Fatality Rates for COVID-19: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Public Policy Implications | medRxiv https://t.co/xUCgVh03lB, see more https://t.co/1IqoMON3XW
RT @AtomsksSanakan: Disinformers use the paper below to say COVID-19 is less deadly than the seasonal flu. Don't believe them. @GidMK "As…
ASSESSING THE AGE SPECIFICITY OF INFECTION FATALITY RATES FOR COVID-19: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW, META-ANALYSIS, AND PUBLIC POLICY IMPLICATIONS | medRxiv https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.23.20160895v4
ℂ