In the Coronavirus Fight in Scandinavia, Sweden Stands Apart

gwb-trading said:
Obviously you still don't understand the different between R0 and R despite it being explained to you multiple times complete with links to scientific references and papers.
More...
You are out of your element AND DEAD WRONG.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7267092/
A review written by Liu et al 53 compared 12 published articles from the first January to the seventh of February 2020 which estimated for the R0 for COVID‐19 a range of values between 1.5 and 6.68.

The article by Kucharski and colleagues 54 combined mathematical modelling with multiple datasets to calculate the median daily reproduction number in Wuhan, within 2 weeks of introducing travel restrictions; this crucial number began at 2.35 and declined to 1.05 throughout December 2019 and January 2020.

Initially, the WHO estimated the basic reproduction number for COVID‐19 between 1.4 and 2.5, as declared in the statement regarding the outbreak of SARS‐CoV‐2, dated 23 January 2020. 52

What’s the Ro????
 
LacesOut said:
You are out of your element AND DEAD WRONG.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7267092/
A review written by Liu et al 53 compared 12 published articles from the first January to the seventh of February 2020 which estimated for the R0 for COVID‐19 a range of values between 1.5 and 6.68.

The article by Kucharski and colleagues 54 combined mathematical modelling with multiple datasets to calculate the median daily reproduction number in Wuhan, within 2 weeks of introducing travel restrictions; this crucial number began at 2.35 and declined to 1.05 throughout December 2019 and January 2020.

Initially, the WHO estimated the basic reproduction number for COVID‐19 between 1.4 and 2.5, as declared in the statement regarding the outbreak of SARS‐CoV‐2, dated 23 January 2020. 52

What’s the Ro????
More...

Why don't you quote the full context of ALL of the provided papers and then read their SUMMARIES and CONCLUSIONS for the value or R0. Most studies have set the global R0 (the unmitigated infection rate at time zero) for COVID at 4.5 after an evaluation of countries across the globe... with ranges given from 1.5 to near 7.
 
Another one from the same source. This one easily verifiable - the data for cases per 1M is readily available.

EvA5pNtVoAEuyFO


https://covidtracking.com/data/state/utah
 
Tsing Tao said:
And another. Same thing - data widely available.

EvA5pwhVIAAlrtN



https://covidtracking.com/data/state/west-virginia
More...

Both of these charts (West Virginia and Utah) are nonsense posted on Twitter by COVID deniers. Neither chart shows when the mask mandates expired -- which drives case rise.

Why don't you provide a direct link to the Tweet.... you won't since you know it is a crap source with a history of complete COVID-denier misinformation.

Once again the claimed data source versus the charts is probably questionable.
 
gwb-trading said:
Both of these charts (West Virginia and Utah) are nonsense posted on Twitter by COVID deniers. Neither chart shows when the mask mandates expired -- which drives case rise.

Why don't you provide a direct link to the Tweet.... you won't since you know it is a crap source with a history of complete COVID-denier misinformation.

Once again the claimed data source versus the charts is probably questionable.
More...

Because the source doesn't matter. The data on COVID is easily shown (the covid tracking project). We can easily research whether the mask mandates expired or not. I'll do so for WV right now and post back. The person who posted the chart is the same as before, and completely irrelevant outside of the fact that you just don't like the guy and want to slander him.

Still doesn't change the facts posted. Facts, GWB. Unless you have data to show the data is wrong.

WV virginia mask information. One has been in place since July 7, that expired Nov 14th and was expanded at that point and is still active. JUST LIKE THE CHART SAYS!

https://governor.wv.gov/Pages/Statewide-Indoor-Face-Covering-Requirement.aspx
 
Of c
Tsing Tao said:
The WV data directly from the COVID tracking project with the mask mandate data put into the chart BY ME. Please pardon my poor arrow graphics done in haste.

View attachment 253009

https://governor.wv.gov/Pages/Statewide-Indoor-Face-Covering-Requirement.aspx
More...

Of course the source for your charts is the same old crap source that you used before. We already established this is a crap source -- why don't you go find a mainstream source.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1355241377316040705

https://twitter.com/x/status/1364654073123799043
 
Last edited:
Tsing Tao said:
The WV data directly from the COVID tracking project with the mask mandate data put into the chart BY ME. Please pardon my poor arrow graphics done in haste. Sheer coincidence, I'm sure, but it looks EXACTLY LIKE THE OTHER CHART.

View attachment 253009

https://governor.wv.gov/Pages/Statewide-Indoor-Face-Covering-Requirement.aspx
More...

And yet you never take in consideration the temperature, season, other restrictions and all the other factors in your chart. It's pretty meaningless -- unless you can show the removal or addition of a mask mandate changing the trend in the few following weeks -- with all other factors remaining nearly equivalent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top