Read on Twitter
ok, so lots of people are asking for data to support why I don& #39;t think people should listen to the reckons of the epidemiologist who says we "don& #39;t want to squash a flea with a sledgehammer and bring the house down". Here& #39;s a thread.
He used the case-fatality rate (CFR) of the Diamond Princess (that most people think is unrealistically low) to give us 0.125% when applied across NZ& #39;s population. Using a more realistic estimate based on~70,000 cases and ~3,000 deaths we get 0.88% ( https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.20033357v1)">https://www.medrxiv.org/content/1...
When he says"A recent analysis of deaths in Italy..." he& #39;s referring to a 2-week old report that only 3 out of 355 deaths had no serious comorbidities. Italy now has over 11,591 deaths - this is some serious cherry-picking.
Also please note, regardless of comorbidities these are people that would not have died. If COVID-19 causes hospitals to reach capacity when they otherwise wouldn& #39;t have, and this results in deaths, then I don& #39;t think it& #39;s unreasonable to say those deaths are due to COVID-19.
"Meta-analysis of social distancing measures found that intervention was not strongly supported since little evaluation of these policies had been done...." Well, it& #39;s not like we& #39;ve needed them like this before so I think that is being disingenuous. They clearly worked in China
As for holding Sweden up as an example of a country to follow, let& #39;s revisit that in a week or so shall we?
