Folks use CFR in gaming out herd immunity scenarios because we don't know IFR. The CDC gives a massive range for IFR, testing is being strangled, COVID-19 can be had multiple times, asymptomatic infection frequency is unknown...

All we *know* is herd immunity would kill millions
PS/ Across a range of nations/studies, IFR averages 0.8% to 1.2%—but given that we don't know the exact point at which herd immunity is achieved—and given that one can get the virus twice—death calculations can't actually be accurately done, except to say they're in the millions.
PS2/ Part of me wants to have strong words for those who nitpicked the criticisms of Trump's mass-murder plot on the basis that some used CFR, not IFR. We don't have the data to perfectly run such simulations—so there are many ways to make what's fundamentally a rhetorical point.
PS3/ I'll give an example: given that people can (possibly) get the virus an endless number of times, IFR is clearly *not* the right number to use. One could argue that if you get it repeatedly, eventually you'll get it symptomatically and be a case—which means we should use CFR.
PS4/ More importantly, why would anyone nitpick a rhetorical observation everyone knows we don't have sufficient data to make in an exacting way—when you know doing so offers cover for a mass-murder plot that, no matter how you run the numbers, would kill *millions* of Americans?
PS5/ My take: there's a competition on social media that we're all implicitly participating in—even though we don't want to—to prove that we have a better handle on the pandemic than everyone else. And even when the president casually proposes genocide, we keep playing that game.
PS6/ What we *should* all do, instead, is just agree that—in order to aid his re-election bid and protect his investments in the stock market—the President of the United States wants to *commit genocide against Americans*, and simply for saying so should be *removed from office*.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Seth Abramson

Seth Abramson 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! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SethAbramson

24 Sep
Does media understand that one reason politicians never stop lying is that even after they've proven themselves to be unreliable sources media keeps reporting on them as truth-tellers—making actually *telling* the truth immaterial to someone like McConnell?…
Imagine a media landscape in which a politician can *lose their status* as a truth-teller—meaning media stops using them as a source, or reporting the things they say as being anything but claims. How many years ago would Mitch McConnell have lost the right to straight reportage?
Mitch McConnell didn't "dismiss" Trump's position—that's the reporting a *reliable source* gets. What Mitch McConnell did was "decline to adopt Trump's rhetoric about the election," though "with McConnell's history his intentions necessarily remain inscrutable and unreportable."
Read 5 tweets
24 Sep
What I find interesting—besides the anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that a Hungarian Holocaust survivor is renting out a $30 van in KY because... uh, no one else could? It's that the story was "shields and supplies" and became "weapons" only via Mark Levin—who knows Trump RTs him.
PS/ So this anodyne story about some random woman paying $30 to transport *defensive* objects and "supplies" to protesters *wisely* fearing tear gas and rubber bullets—given how cops have been acting this summer—*became* a story about "weapons" because Levin wanted to aid Trump.
PS2/ What's funny about this is that coordination between someone at Fox News and the Trump White House on a fake news story intended to aid Trump's presidential campaign is an *actual* conspiracy of real concern to Americans—not like that George Soros red herring the GOP adores.
Read 4 tweets
24 Sep
Hey @CNN: everything about this piece must be changed immediately. You give the impression DOJ has reopened a probe into *Clinton*—when Barr's lackeys confirmed the FBI was *right* to close that case. *This* is a probe into how the *FBI* handled that case.…
PS/ Given that the fraudulent reopening of the Clinton case in October 2016—compelled by illegal extortionate threats by Trump's agents—swung the 2016 election, how dare CNN leave the impression, via image and text, *weeks before the 2020 vote*, that Clinton is under probe again?
PS2/ Here's the first paragraph of Chapter 6 of PROOF OF CORRUPTION. Anyone can readily confirm that John Huber found *nothing* amiss at the Clinton Foundation. If Barr wants to investigate how the FBI handled that case, OK. It has *nothing* to do with Clinton. Shame on you, CNN. Image
Read 11 tweets
24 Sep
There's no need to wonder anymore what you'd do if America faced a historic threat—whatever you're doing right now is what you'd do. As an attorney and author, I wrote a book that reveals Trump's plot against America. That's what I did and I'm proud of it.…
1/ I teach communications at UNH, and what I teach students is that an effective public communications practice arises from everything you are: your knowledge bases, skill-sets, passions, obsessions. Everything.

Everyone must find something to do that is founded in who they are.
2/ If you're young and energetic and sociable, activism that sees you moving about and interacting with folks is what you should be into now. If you are a great writer, you should be writing something that matters. If you're a great speaker, find any way to make your voice heard.
Read 22 tweets
24 Sep
Anyone have any luck finding a cable news report on the #TrumpCoupPlot—likely the single biggest news story in America since Pearl Harbor?

It's in THE ATLANTIC, it's in VANITY FAIR, it's in NEW YORK MAGAZINE—but if it's elsewhere, I'm missing it.

What the *hell* is media doing?
PS/ With a story of this magnitude, news outlets *will* want to run down their own sources. But—*but*—the Atlantic report can still be reported on as an "unconfirmed" (by a given outlet) "Atlantic report," and the Atlantic had some non-anonymous sources, so what's taking so long?
PS2/ Kudos to Chris Hayes of MSNBC (@chrislhayes) doing a report on this, and thanks to readers here for noting it. I'll look it up now. Let me know if anyone but Chris covered it.
Read 5 tweets
23 Sep
Anyone else think this'll shortly be overturned by a Trump appointee, a Trump fan, or a conservative judicial activist sitting on a state or federal court in the next 40 days, and/or that the appeals process ensures Eric doesn't answer diddly pre-election?…
The Trumps play the U.S. legal system like a damn fiddle; no *wonder* they consider themselves above the law. We've minimal precedent for any judge, state or federal, *ever* successfully making a Trump do *anything*. The court system *ultimately* treats them as kings, every time.
Eric Trump already made clear to the courts that any delay he seeks has to do with the election, *and yet* I'm 100% certain higher courts will take so long to rule on any Trump appeals here that they'll (knowingly) be giving Eric just what he demanded, i.e. a post-election delay.
Read 4 tweets

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/month or $30/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!

Follow Us on Twitter!