Thread by @Covid19Digest

1/ This @WSJ sympathetic piece about Dr. John P.A. Ioannidis getting much attention. A couple of observations:
#COVID19
wsj.com/articles/the-b…

2/ "common denominator for everything that I was doing was that I was very interested in the methods—not necessarily the results but how exactly you do that, how exactly you try to avoid bias, how you avoid error.”
How ironic!
buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/stepha…

3/ That news report is about shoddy, questionable, and unethical participant recruitment for the same study Dr. Ioannidis proudly stands by. Perhaps example of "biases that are trying to generate significant, spectacular, fascinating, extraordinary results”?

4/ The piece mentions Stat News article & quotes fatality rate estimates ("comparable to that of seasonal flu"). But omits the following nuggets:
statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-f…

5/ "If we assume that case fatality rate among individuals infected by SARS-CoV-2 is 0.3%... this would translate to about 10,000 deaths... sounds like a huge number, but it is buried within the noise of the estimate of deaths from “influenza-like illness.”
Reality: 50K+ deaths

6/ "Some worry that the 68 deaths from Covid-19 in the U.S. as of March 16 will increase exponentially to 680, 6,800, 68,000, 680,000 … along with similar catastrophic patterns around the globe."
Deaths have grown exponentially & will almost certainly reach 68K soon and more...

7/ If it weren't for mitigation measured, we'd be marching toward 680K in no time. See what even a low IFR would mean for a highly transmissible & lethal #coronavirus:

https://twitter.com/Covid19Digest/status/1253380063996805122

8/ Back to WSJ piece: "...in the current environment, unfortunately, we have generated a very heavily panic-driven, horror-driven, death-reality-show type of situation.”
How about the carnage in NYC, Lombardy & elsewhere? Don't they at least warrant precaution?

"The couple found that people under 65 without underlying conditions accounted for only 0.7% of coronavirus deaths in Italy and 1.8% in New York City."
Conveniently omits underlying conditions are risk factor across ALL age groups:

https://twitter.com/Covid19Digest/status/1253174014534705152

9/ “But there’s far, far, far more . . . young people who commit suicide.”
Suicide takes the lives of 44,965 Americans every year. How's that "far, far, far more" considering underlying conditions put anyone at risk of deaths with #COVID19?
save.org/about-suicide/…

10/ 45%+ of Americans have at least one chronic condition. That's ~148M people, who subjected to a #COVID19 disease with even low IFR can meet a terrible fate.

11/ “I think that we should just take everything that we know, put it on the table, and try to see, OK, what’s the next step, and see what happens when we take the next step.”
Isn't that what countries have been trying to do? Eg, Phased opening with Gating Criteria here in US?

12/ In the end, yes much is unknown & can't always wait to get all data before acting (esp. in the face of a pandemic). Good to question decision-making. However, suggesting "over-reaction" after mitigation took effect & demonstrably slowed transmission is suspect at best.

@threadreaderapp
unroll please