Read on Twitter
many have said things like "we should have done what japan did" or "singapore epidemiologists got it right" but i find this unpersuasive.
the whole pacific rim had basically no covid regardless of what they did.
so i fear we're dealing with a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
the whole pacific rim had basically no covid regardless of what they did.
so i fear we're dealing with a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
some of these countries locked down hard, many did not. some has widespread mask use, many did not. some responded early, some late.
none of it seems to have mode much difference. they were pretty much all in the single digits for deaths per mm and all were 12 or less.
none of it seems to have mode much difference. they were pretty much all in the single digits for deaths per mm and all were 12 or less.
those are extraordinary numbers. they are 1/100th of many EU countries and several US states.
there is just no way the response was that good and that different
i have a different theory:
it was widespread prior exposure to SARS-like viruses. immunity was already widespread.
there is just no way the response was that good and that different
i have a different theory:
it was widespread prior exposure to SARS-like viruses. immunity was already widespread.
the prevalence of existing t cell mediated resistance in the west was 30-60% based on numerous studies.
i posit that that number was much higher on the pacific rim and would have cut R and symptomatic spread off at the knees. https://news.ki.se/immunity-to-covid-19-is-probably-higher-than-tests-have-shown?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=kasocial&utm_content=Immunity%20to%20COVID-19%20is%20probably%20higher%20than%20tests%20have%20shown
i posit that that number was much higher on the pacific rim and would have cut R and symptomatic spread off at the knees. https://news.ki.se/immunity-to-covid-19-is-probably-higher-than-tests-have-shown?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=kasocial&utm_content=Immunity%20to%20COVID-19%20is%20probably%20higher%20than%20tests%20have%20shown
R0 is premised on the assumption of no pre-existing immunity. when such immunity exists, Rt drops like a stone. past a point, the virus cannot spread at all.
this seems a more plausible explanation than "18 countries with widely varying responses all got the same result."
this seems a more plausible explanation than "18 countries with widely varying responses all got the same result."
and this is borne out in all the countries that neighbor china. we see the same lack of spread in the middle east where MERS has been an issue.
this seems to pose a real problem for the idea that some NPI (non-pharmaceutical intervention) worked in some pac rim/asian country.
this seems to pose a real problem for the idea that some NPI (non-pharmaceutical intervention) worked in some pac rim/asian country.
this is the danger of working backwards from a couple outcomes. you say "japan did X" and "japan had low deaths" so X must lessen deaths. but you really need to look at X and see how everyone who did X fared vs similar folks that did not.
or you wind up like this:
or you wind up like this:
so be wary of any claims that start with "X county did Y and got Z, so Y causes Z."
that's anecdote and is not proof of anything. always seek a control group and wide comparison. you can cherry pick or post hoc claim lots of things.
but that's not evidence.
that's anecdote and is not proof of anything. always seek a control group and wide comparison. you can cherry pick or post hoc claim lots of things.
but that's not evidence.
