Profile picture
, 4 tweets, 1 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
Today's lesson in math: magnitudes. Are the NYC and Santa Clara study reaching really different magnitudes? Not really. Let me explain why using round numbers they use. The studies announce that real corona infection is understated by some number say 10x and 50x. 1/n
Those numbers sound really far apart don't they? They are actually much closer than they sound in a key way. Let's assume you estimate observed corona cases are 10% of the total infections that means total infections are 10x. If you estimate observed infections are 2% 2/n
Today means real infections are larger by a magnitude of 50x. With a small change in the percentage of observed cases you can have an enormous change in the magnitude difference. Why is this important? Lots if reasons small percentage differences can manifest themselves 3/n
Testing errors, disease date of arrival, weather, urban environment etc etc etc. At this stage of research we want to focus on general directionality rather than exact magnitude. Lots of general consistency, more research and consistency needed to explain variations. Done.
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with WHO Advisor Balding 大老板

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @BaldingsWorld see all

Profile picture
WHO Advisor Balding 大老板
@BaldingsWorld
Let me explain the deal structure and why Trump doesn't owe Bank of China money. First, Trump is a minority passive owner of a real estate trust. 30% so not nothing and he is the president but it isn't even his company. He doesn't manage it even before he became president 1/n
Second, the nitty gritty of the financing goes like this (and this is very common in general especially in real estate) assume Citibank agrees to lend the building $1 billion to refinance their loan in 2012. Rather than lend the entire $1 billion themselves, Citibank will 2/n
get on the phone to other banks to take a piece of the $1b they need to raise. Let's assume in this case it was five banks of $400m, $200m, $200m, $100m, and $100m. In this case Bank of China is one of the $200m slots. They lend that company the $1b to refinance their other 3/n
Read 9 tweets
Profile picture
WHO Advisor Balding 大老板
@BaldingsWorld
So here the interesting thing about the Missouri lawsuit that is being put in the headlines as suing China. Again headline writes show themselves profoundly unworthy of such control. I should say I've been pretty skeptical of suing China over corona because given the 1/n
sovereign immunities law, which basically says you can't sue countries, never thought of these law suits as anything beyond grand standing. The Missouri suit however takes an important but key distinction in its approach. It names as defendants among others the CCP. 2/n
This is important for a couple of reasons. First, the CCP is not protected by sovereign immunity. The CCP is neither a government nor a state. It is not protected by sovereign immunities. Second, though because as everyone knows the Chinese state is effectively subordinate 3/n
Read 10 tweets
Profile picture
WHO Advisor Balding 大老板
@BaldingsWorld
I see lots of hand wringing about the WHO decision but rather than cliched kumbaya hand holding let's unpack some of this. Let me posit at the start I am in spirit and in theory a full throated globalist. The burden of knowledge has made me a jaded cynic about the reality 1/n
The first mistake defenders of institutions like the WHO make is implicitly assuming it is an unqualified good. I don't think based upon evidence that is necessarily true. As we have seen with corona, at best the WHO has proven itself profoundly incompetent and unprepared 2/n
Realistically, they are little more than a branch office of the CCP. This raises the question what is their value add to efforts like fighting pandemics? If anything the WHO HINDERED the fight against corona with an awful multiplier effect. Countries and researchers 3/n
Read 12 tweets

Embed code for your website

×
Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!