@70sBachchan US CDC says 'We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 (95% CI of 3.8–8.9)'. https://t.co/tGZU0CZkCX
@RoseannaDoran @JassieD That is interesting - but other studies disagree with the points raised Sources now put R0 much higher that the Penn study - for example this paper gives a median of 5.7 which is consistent with the rapid spread we see and fits wit
@RoseannaDoran @JassieD FFS At least read up on the science: https://t.co/QxbPG20D1f Research show R0 may even above 5 - for comparison this way higher than colds, flu and approaching the range of smallpox https://t.co/tlxxy5xU9R
@merjah Ja sitten tuo jutussa mainittu tartuttavuusluku ilman estototoimia: 2,5 on kyllä aika alakanttiin, jos katsoo tätä CDC'n artikkelia: https://t.co/8TVvZjHZdh
@readthinkwalk @timspector I can not find UK info that has an updated estimate of potential reproduction number. US CDC has it & is very sobering. US CDC says 'We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 (95% CI of 3.8–8.9)'. Hence why in Asia
@jaywp1 @JamesPMorrison unfortunately, a recent study shows the R0 value for this virus to be ~5.7, which means 82% is needed for herd immunity, which means just under 8 million deaths, assuming no effective vaccine. 327M, 82%=268.14M, 2.97%= 7,963,758 h
@JanusKlaasssen @ArmandVervaeck @HarrySpoelstra @DirkMonsieur CDC: median R0 value of 5.7 (95% CI 3.8–8.9). https://t.co/nyDi3QPwDL En voor de rest: dergelijke taal = Block. Prettige dag verder.
@CarlvKeirsbilck @ArmandVervaeck @HarrySpoelstra @DirkMonsieur Kijk ventje, over roeptoeteren en trollen gesproken. Hier sloeg je de plank al net zo mis, en kwam je zelfs met 5,4% aankakken. https://t.co/x2fciZXGbx Je leert niet van je fouten he?
@science_dirk we calculated a median R0 value of 5.7 (95% CI 3.8–8.9). https://t.co/nyDi3QPwDL
FL Epidemiologist Quits, FL Gov. DeSantis & Trump CRIMINALLY CORRUPT State & Fed CDC & NIH to misinform on R0 & SURVEILLANCE Testing as #1 Tools: knowing R<1 or >1 is like red/grn at traffic light. Trumps CDC & NIH post CRIMINALY
RT @jmcrookston: 2. Experts have noted this highly dispersed R0 for SARS2, and estimate that true R0/Reff may not 2.5-3.5 but in fact doubl…
@tobioworks @jljcolorado Here's the ref over to Sanche and the double comment. https://t.co/uaCnLNDZQ0
@UnknownEnby Checking Wikipedia, SARS is estimated at 0.19-1.08 (source: https://t.co/CAKD5vZMyb), compared to COVID-19 R0 of 2-6 (https://t.co/dtd0qvlMiw)
@cedmonkey @SMeerbeeck @PeterVerlee @ChristineHannes @joerideblauwe @karenvdc @HeidiWulff median R0 value of 5.7 (95% CI 3.8–8.9) https://t.co/nyDi3QPwDL Er zijn anderen die uitgaan van 3 à 4 Maar hoe je 't ook draait of keert, het is een pak besmetteli
@Fragment_84 @DavideFalchieri @AlbertoBagnai nessuno a detto rimanere chiusi in casa, ma bisogna isolare i positivi, se no succede come in #Istraele che che hanno le ICU piene purtroppo avendo un R0 > 5 quello che proponi non è attuabile https://t.co/r0
@marianomascoli1 @WRicciardi @Gianni_Pisa è uscito il definitivo dello studio #CDC che indica R0 > 5 per il #COVID19 e non 2,2 - 2,7 come creduto in precedenza per i coronavirus, sono sicuro che apprezzerà questa interessantissima lettura https://t.co/
@gianlucac1 @ThManfredi @CrossWordsCW @ciro @mtizzoni @alexvespi @FBKcom Incidentalmente l'R0 iniziale senza alcuna misura di contenimento è 5,7 (95% 3,8-8,9) come e non 2,2-2,7 come ritenuto fino ad allora https://t.co/r06T6zUbUL sfortunatamente @alexvesp
WHO study on Covid-19: We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 https://t.co/6MRbVWuidD #Who #Covid-19 #R0
@juliamarblefaun @imclaireallen @ParkBoard At 5.7 potential contagions per infected individual, and with the observed doubling time of 2.3–3.3 days, after 10 steps of contagion we could see over 36 million people infected after one month. https://t.co/2S
@sovereignhodler @GeertNoels @LievenAnnemans @Stijn_Baert Hoge achtergrondimmuniteit in Azie niet formeel bevestigd door enige degelijke wet studies. In China ook niet consistent met extreem hoge attack rate in Wuhan (R0 5.7 volgens CDC, https://t.co/tXc8v
@ManuBuys @bslagter @mzelst IFR van 0.5-1.5% weinig controversieel (https://t.co/tfgX6PdjIZ, voor BE: https://t.co/DUZvyqN5CL), en R0 waarde wordt gem. op 3.3 geschat (https://t.co/4GC7Yi9eqz, range 1.4-6.5). Voor Wuhan was volgens studie CDC R0 5.7, https
@PartofIm @joshmich R0=5.7 paper: https://t.co/s2qcYAzwUe
@LBonneux @mdc_martinus R0 van SARS-CoV2 zonder maatregelen wel beduidend hoger (4.5 in BE, https://t.co/SHi4eWN4qk, gem. 3.3, https://t.co/4GC7Yi9eqz, in Wuhan 5.7, https://t.co/tXc8vI8rAw) dan van seizoensgriep (gem R0 1.3, https://t.co/brkmXql1Hg). Maar
@sovereignhodler @bslagter @mzelst Deze waarde was voor BE zonder maatregelen of enige gedragswijziging. In een al wat oudere metanalyse was gem. R0 3.3, https://t.co/4GC7Yi9eqz, range 1.4-6.5. Voor Wuhan was volgens studie CDC R0 5.7, https://t.co/tXc8vI8
@mus_nico @OlifaNT @ginnymooy Aan de andere kant is die 60% gebaseerd op de aanname dat Covid een R0 van 2,5 heeft. Er zijn aanwijzingen dat de R0 veel hoger ligt waardoor GI bv pas bij 80% wordt bereikt. Zie bv https://t.co/SNHZQ1oSke
2. Experts have noted this highly dispersed R0 for SARS2, and estimate that true R0/Reff may not 2.5-3.5 but in fact double that 2a. Sanche, from February as preprint and July in CDC journal said median R0 of 5.7. https://t.co/B15K8wl9UG https://t.co/mmO
@b_leeder @DamoPelham Levitt and other statistical numerologists are part of the epidemic of modeling activity we’re being exposed to He’s more optimistic than most Here’s an interesting paper that puts the median R0 at 5.7 without effective intervention a
RT @AliciaTDennis: Ongoing underestimating & denialism related to infectivity of #SARSCoV2 has led to large numbers of people infected & si…
RT @AliciaTDennis: Ongoing underestimating & denialism related to infectivity of #SARSCoV2 has led to large numbers of people infected & si…
RT @AliciaTDennis: Ongoing underestimating & denialism related to infectivity of #SARSCoV2 has led to large numbers of people infected & si…
Ongoing underestimating & denialism related to infectivity of #SARSCoV2 has led to large numbers of people infected & significant deaths This was & is #preventable suffering (physical, mental, economic) & death Ro is 5.7‼️ #airborne #PP
@DiseaseEcology @EricTopol US CDC says 'We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 (95% CI of 3.8–8.9)'. This why Asian countries take ZERO chances & want NO clusters to form!!! https://t.co/tGZU0CZkCX
@devisridhar "Four out of five coronavirus patients do not infect anyone else"? What does that say about the R0? The CDC estimated SARS-CoV-2 R0 at ~5.7 https://t.co/4SwfBWs4Cd
RT @CarlvKeirsbilck: US CDC: R0 Corona = 5.7 https://t.co/nyDi3QPwDL Die van griep ligt rond de 2. Corona is veel besmettelijker dan gri…
US CDC: R0 Corona = 5.7 https://t.co/nyDi3QPwDL Die van griep ligt rond de 2. Corona is veel besmettelijker dan griep.
@TWenseleers @bartderre @jdceulaer @vanranstmarc @ann_vdb @demorgen Volgens CDC zelfs 5.7, dus totaal niet vergelijkbaar met griep zoals bonneux doet https://t.co/nyDi3QPwDL
@AdamJKucharski @JuanjuanZhang1 is now in line with initial China modelling in January. US CDC says 'We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 (95% CI of 3.8–8.9). 😯 The global evidence now looks conclusive by the day that this the big one. http
RT @AliciaTDennis: @VictorianCHO talking about Ro & quotes Wuhan Ro around 2 This is wrong ‼️Ro is 5.7 (95% CI 3.8-8.9) (median) ❌Must qu…
RT @AliciaTDennis: @VictorianCHO talking about Ro & quotes Wuhan Ro around 2 This is wrong ‼️Ro is 5.7 (95% CI 3.8-8.9) (median) ❌Must qu…
@VictorianCHO talking about Ro & quotes Wuhan Ro around 2 This is wrong ‼️Ro is 5.7 (95% CI 3.8-8.9) (median) ❌Must quote this higher figure so that community (and #infectiousdiseases #physicians & #publichealth specialists) are aware https://t
@Galaxy2Galaxy5 @hoosier1710 @NateSilver538 Yes the info you shared just 13 days ago!! Seems very good https://t.co/ItLKxiZhAH
@_thesnaggle_ @bassonna @yaneerbaryam @alessi0p Send us what you smoking. It sounds very potent stuff. I do not have time to do back and forth. Read the book, understand history. You are lying CDC latest update say RO median is 5.7, very sobering. https://
@epsilon3141 Weil es für Covid-19 aufgrund der hohen Ansteckungsrate >82% für Herdenimmunität bräuchte - siehe diese US CDC Studie: https://t.co/G7hdjtIIUt
@COVID_Analysis @DHSCgovuk @PHE_uk Latest update from US CDC finally confirms it. We looking at one of the most infectious novel virus to emerge in history. Insane some US States disregarded their own CDC advice, they are now finding out what a monumental
RT @FrankfurtZack: @AdamJKucharski @nataliexdean As expected, calculation of "early R0" is a total BS. The model cited by CDC makes the na…
@AdamJKucharski @nataliexdean As expected, calculation of "early R0" is a total BS. The model cited by CDC makes the naive assumption that all covid cases were known in January 20, and that the disease was only in wuhan. In fact, it was already on the who
RT @altNOAA: @tmshrout @Minervasbard @vcw2121 @AOC You're grasping for straws. The reproduction rate for the threshold of herd immunity is…
RT @altNOAA: @tmshrout @Minervasbard @vcw2121 @AOC You're grasping for straws. The reproduction rate for the threshold of herd immunity is…
RT @altNOAA: @tmshrout @Minervasbard @vcw2121 @AOC You're grasping for straws. The reproduction rate for the threshold of herd immunity is…
RT @altNOAA: @tmshrout @Minervasbard @vcw2121 @AOC You're grasping for straws. The reproduction rate for the threshold of herd immunity is…
@tmshrout @Minervasbard @vcw2121 @AOC You're grasping for straws. The reproduction rate for the threshold of herd immunity is based on "raw" number without PPE and other measures. In July, CDC published that number at 5.7. Equation: (R0-1)/R0. Check your m
@lewis_goodall @TheLancetInfDis And the CDC link stating R0 re-evaluated to 5.7 for SARS-cov-2 https://t.co/9kX64ZoLGZ
High Contagiousness and Rapid Spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 - Volume 26, Number 7—July 2020 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC https://t.co/JXlQLx16pb
RT @ibrhmTanyalcin: @DrMetinCakir @drbulentpolat Mevsimsel grip icin su verilere: https://t.co/f6i9xRZxdO birde h1n1 icin bile su makaley…
@DrMetinCakir @drbulentpolat Mevsimsel grip icin su verilere: https://t.co/f6i9xRZxdO birde h1n1 icin bile su makaleye bakar isek: https://t.co/5IPXcqOzWo kabaca bir r degeri karsimiza cikiyor. covid icin su makaleye bakarsak: https://t.co/GsImsvP7tq
.@NJGov CDC, Emerging Infectious Diseases, July 2020: "We further show that active surveillance, contact tracing, quarantine, and early strong social distancing efforts are needed to stop transmission of the virus." https://t.co/qjFIonQdjT
@KirstenTElliott @chrischirp @frankmueller101 The public health messaging on 'physical distancing' has been muddled. This is critical. It is this update from US CDC on their estimation of the basic reproductive number that is very sobering. How contagious
@jlaansma @LindaSusanDawso @Laurie_Garrett We've managed to make a dent in the fatality rate over the past few months, thank God, but there are actually (legitimate) reports that the R0 value is as high as 5.7(!) https://t.co/zeb8qocW4q
@OYCar @swww2198 @EricTopol @youyanggu @CDCgov @DiseaseEcology Why would cases go down ? Most of these States have abysmal track & trace. Looking a plateau at 60,000 + confirmed daily then upwards to 100,000 in August as Dr. Fauci warned unless drastic
@JustTheFacts37 @DrewDalton @youyanggu @SSNaushon @EricTopol HI introduces another variable into (2), namely the acquired resistance of a subsection of the population to infection. But in this case, the *true* R0 of COVID-19 is likely somewhere between 2.2
Re: "Unfortunately, SARS-CoV-2 re-emerged in portions of eastern / central Europe" COVID-19 deaths should lag cases by at least around a couple of weeks: https://t.co/HRQZ7cHLm6 https://t.co/xlQZwVRIiN https://t.co/9ZwLtRocB8 COVID-19 deaths per day :
RT @M1tchRosenthal: @saxena_puru Herd immunity depends on the R0 of the disease. CDC data shows that Covid has an R0 of around 5.7, which…
RT @M1tchRosenthal: @saxena_puru Herd immunity depends on the R0 of the disease. CDC data shows that Covid has an R0 of around 5.7, which…
@saxena_puru Herd immunity depends on the R0 of the disease. CDC data shows that Covid has an R0 of around 5.7, which means >82% of the population has to be immune (via vaccination or other), to achieve herd immunity. Read up more on the science.(https
@Quamasparagi @alexevans26 @tomaspueyo in their latest update. It is insanity Southern States disregarded it. 'We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 (95% CI of 3.8–8.9)'. Most infectious novel virus to emerge. Europe is taking huge risks too.
@JacktVanguard @Nerdrotics @LondonBreed It's relevant to his situation. There are far more studies on masks showing the same thing. You're also wrong saying risk of transmission of this virus is low. This virus spreads very, very easily. https://t.co/q
20/H Risch makes a similar claim for Switzerland. Again: correlation =/= causation; his causal claim failed in controlled settings. Also, symptoms-to-death is closer to 2 - 3 weeks: https://t.co/HRQZ7cHLm6 https://t.co/xlQZwVRIiN https://t.co/9ZwLtRocB8
@NateSilver538 All one had to do was read CDC's latest estimated RO, it was very sobering. They were saying this is the 'BIG ONE'. . US CDC says 'We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 (95% CI of 3.8–8.9)'. 😯 https://t.co/tGZU0CZkCX
@bofackson @glovepurse @StephHQU1 @davidsonmark650 @ScottAdamsSays @kat_anan This is from July 7. Seems the data is the same. Weird, man, I know. https://t.co/2NtiPIAVAu From May: https://t.co/Cn7S2SEvkO Same. Weird.
@BobDisney4 @NateSilver538 Peaked ? ha ha ha! You going to see eye popping numbers it is just starting. Read this paper from US CDC. How the hell can the States disregard this ? Who in their fucking right wind will allow ICU beds to start maxing out ? Igno
@suitedupwook @NorthmanTrader Do the math. No way this number of infection will not result in a system breakdown. CDC warned about it!!! US CDC says 'We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 (95% CI of 3.8–8.9)'. Most infectious novel virus to e
@BarbaTruc20 @sante_qc La tendance semble être hors de contrôle. Sachant que le taux d'infection nominal R0 est de 5.7 (https://t.co/1b6bHwJ46T), il y a malheureusement potentiellement pire à venir. Nous devons respecter les règles sanitaires afin de limit
RT @carpe_diem0820: 中国武漢でのCOVID-19流行初期に患者数が倍増する期間は2.3〜3.3日、再生産数(R0)値の中央値は5.7(95%CI 3.8〜8.9)と推計、初期の推計値よりも感染力が高い結果 High Contagiousness and R…
RT @carpe_diem0820: 中国武漢でのCOVID-19流行初期に患者数が倍増する期間は2.3〜3.3日、再生産数(R0)値の中央値は5.7(95%CI 3.8〜8.9)と推計、初期の推計値よりも感染力が高い結果 High Contagiousness and R…
RT @carpe_diem0820: 中国武漢でのCOVID-19流行初期に患者数が倍増する期間は2.3〜3.3日、再生産数(R0)値の中央値は5.7(95%CI 3.8〜8.9)と推計、初期の推計値よりも感染力が高い結果 High Contagiousness and R…
@BallouxFrancois Where does your low estimate of #COVID19's R0 of 2-2.5 come from? Seems unrealistically low for the R0 without any mitigation. See e.g. https://t.co/SHi4eWN4qk or https://t.co/tXc8vI8rAw, which arrive at way higher estimates (for Italy &am
@alicialoxley It can also be written (or pronounced) 'R naught' or 'R zero'. Not sure about Victoria, but a recent article put it at about 5.7 for the virus. https://t.co/dXFEcgbocG
RT @SamInSilico: @dan_diekema It is well-written & glad they commented on the prior meta-analysis. I would note that a different calculatio…
@dan_diekema It is well-written & glad they commented on the prior meta-analysis. I would note that a different calculation of SARS-CoV-2 R0 was 5.7 in non-distanced populations (https://t.co/NcCFjCMqm9), which puts it way ahead of influenza and thus n
@EpsilonTheory @imetatronink COVID median R0 is 5.7. US CDC says 'We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 (95% CI of 3.8–8.9)'. Most infectious novel virus since Measles. Final R0 will be historical. You can not let this one go as US has done.
@12345ben1 @CraigSpillard @DHSCgovuk @PHE_uk CDC latest estimate COVID median R0 is 5.7. US CDC says 'We estimated that the median of estimated R0 is 5.7 (95% CI of 3.8–8.9)'. Most infectious novel virus since Measles & Small Pox. https://t.co/tGZU0CZ
@gapadroroh @AlanVRK @AtheistMission @JohnMTalmadgeMD @MelissaJPeltier And then we have stuff like this: https://t.co/7YLD2YIv9y
High Contagiousness and Rapid Spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 - Volume 26, Number 7—July 2020--Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC https://t.co/S1E5xbZlDX via @CDCgov WOW, UNREAL, r naught is 5.7! #BreakingNews #BreakingN
@biomathematicus @angie_rasmussen Sanche ended up published here, for anyone bumping into this thread: https://t.co/Ya0jSf9i9n
@anagnorisis1234 @CCDHate @Imi_Ahmed @TheSun It's here in this paper. https://t.co/T0mtuzLUf5 https://t.co/kG9bYoou37
RT @Tonydavidgo: @CatSense27 @BarryWhyte85 @IrishAntifa Wrong! The mortality rate for COVID 19 is 0.98% (New York study based on antibody t…