Read on Twitter
Wasn't actually in the mood for this, but people asked, so.... 
.
Mini thread to refute. I have strong suspicions this will not be well received. https://twitter.com/baldricman/status/1348668284284112897
.Mini thread to refute. I have strong suspicions this will not be well received. https://twitter.com/baldricman/status/1348668284284112897
1) âFatality rateâ?
If you mean âCase Fatality Rateâ, then yes, that is by definition exactly what it means.
Nobody I know thinks it means anything else...
This was the most accurate tweet, but was ended with "This [sic] incorrect..."
?
![1) âFatality rateâ?If you mean âCase Fatality Rateâ, then yes, that is by definition exactly what it means.Nobody I know thinks it means anything else...This was the most accurate tweet, but was ended with "This [sic] incorrect..."?](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErebPSPXUBY9ds3.jpg "1) âFatality rateâ?If you mean âCase Fatality Rateâ, then yes, that is by definition exactly what it means.Nobody I know thinks it means anything else...This was the most accurate tweet, but was ended with \"This [sic] incorrect...\"?")
If you mean âCase Fatality Rateâ, then yes, that is by definition exactly what it means.
Nobody I know thinks it means anything else...
This was the most accurate tweet, but was ended with "This [sic] incorrect..."
?
2) Correct for 2 reasons:
1) ±20% of infections are asymptomatic (this is NB, so remember it.)
2) lots of people go untested/undiagnosed (we are *not* testing everyone, as youâve pointed out) - Excess Death figures give us a strong clue as to how many are dying, undiagnosed.
1) ±20% of infections are asymptomatic (this is NB, so remember it.)
2) lots of people go untested/undiagnosed (we are *not* testing everyone, as youâve pointed out) - Excess Death figures give us a strong clue as to how many are dying, undiagnosed.
3) âApparentlyâ? If you want to challenge this, do so. Donât just hint at it.
But back to your tweet: Largely correct, but your numbers are just guesses right? Otherwise, how did you calculate this?
Regardless, lets move on...
But back to your tweet: Largely correct, but your numbers are just guesses right? Otherwise, how did you calculate this?
Regardless, lets move on...
4) No - this all hinges on your confusing of different âdeath ratesâ, starting with first tweet. The fact remains, CFR is not up for debate, and Recorded Deaths, Excess Deaths, and hospital numbers are all high.
Read up on difference between CFR, IFR, interim vs final values, etc
Read up on difference between CFR, IFR, interim vs final values, etc
5a) Irrelevant AND misleading.
Testing is critical to understanding movement of the epidemic. Surely this is known?
Also, statement that we are randomly testing people...is simply not true. See common requirements for getting a test in SA (you need to have symptoms, as 1 example)
Testing is critical to understanding movement of the epidemic. Surely this is known?
Also, statement that we are randomly testing people...is simply not true. See common requirements for getting a test in SA (you need to have symptoms, as 1 example)
5b) Furthermore, "all this reporting" is exactly what people are asking for, and should really be regarded as good public health service. If they said nothing, people would complain about them hiding something...
6) Iâve already responded to this, but this is not true. Asymptomatic people *can* infect others. Furthermore, you (and most people) ignore the relevance of âpre-symptomaticâ cases. None of this is unique to covid either.
7) Where did Dr Mkhize say you had permanent immunity if you had the virus?
And, where did Dr Mkhize say you would get vaccinated even if youâd had the virus?
Neither of these statements would make ANY sense, and I am not aware of him ever saying this - if you have proof, show it
And, where did Dr Mkhize say you would get vaccinated even if youâd had the virus?
Neither of these statements would make ANY sense, and I am not aware of him ever saying this - if you have proof, show it
8) Again, youâve claimed the testing is random, and you frame it to sound as ridiculous as possible. But, where is your proof?
Where is your proof that âitâs not even meant toâ?
If Iâm very generous, I would call this disingenuous.
Where is your proof that âitâs not even meant toâ?
If Iâm very generous, I would call this disingenuous.
Sources.
1) https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid
2) https://jammi.utpjournals.press/doi/full/10.3138/jammi-2020-0030
5a) https://www.gov.za/coronavirus/faq
6) (see pic) https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30172-5/fulltext
7) for interest: https://www.cell.com/med/fulltext/S2666-6340(20)30032-5
1) https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid
2) https://jammi.utpjournals.press/doi/full/10.3138/jammi-2020-0030
5a) https://www.gov.za/coronavirus/faq
6) (see pic) https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30172-5/fulltext
7) for interest: https://www.cell.com/med/fulltext/S2666-6340(20)30032-5
quick addendum: one thing which is correct is that there have been a lot more covid infections than what is listed in the official stats. But we all know this (because of lack of testing and asymptomatic cases) We know it statistically, and its evidenced by Excess Deaths...
...but the notions that this means the vaccine is irrelevant, or that testing is pointless, are both completely illogical (as described in my thread and more so in the sources I linked)
Ultimately, the original author seems to criticise testing as a pointless and wasteful exercise, but at the same time, bemoans the lack of hard knowledge about exactly who has been infected (which he raised in a different thread before too)... which c/would be solved by testing.
