Coronavirus
Coronavirus
Out of context: Reply #2449
- Started
- Last post
- 6,418 Responses
- shapesalad-3
Stanford study ripped apart by common sense analysis:
- ha ha, watch it before you downvote it, very good points made about all this 'a study says..' which when you dig deeper is full of bad study techniquesshapesalad
- we need it to be randomised, did't the last stanford study get torn apart too? there's now >10 of these serology tests suggesting far bigger numberskingsteven
- some of them are lab testing/ not test kits and taken from blood donations (slightly more randomised sample) - if they're correct it also suggests a higher R0kingsteven
- the next round of testing should show at least a doubling in numbers if they're correct... it would also bring the numbers out of the range of false positiveskingsteven
- Here's a mad one from yesterday (needs translate) https://www.svt.se/n…kingsteven
- even for sweeden's high death rate this would suggest 30% in stockholm have antibodies with a test selected to give no false positiveskingsteven
- also, from blood donors (all have not been ill recently so - asymptomatic, and > 18y/o) actual randomised population sample would be higher.kingsteven
- also, something he doesn't touch on here but if cases ARE out of the realms of our current models it lowers the % needed for herd immunitykingsteven
- hah ^ i shoulda done a big IF ffskingsteven