Share this page!

Iron Economist Profile picture
Twitter logo
30 Mar, 4 tweets, 1 min read
This is terrible behaviour really. Real world data shows us closer to 85% reduction in hospitalisations in actual usage in both Israel and UK. Another Noble Lie that will burn down institutional credibility.
The clinical trials end points were typically around 150 cases. That really isn't enough to judge these numbers reliable. You would have expected only 0-1 hospitalisations in the vaccinated group even if it was ineffective.
Also... the NIH literally put out a statement that AZ reporting a lower number in a press release for effectiveness was potentially misleading, so, hypocrisy too.
This is the AZ interim report that this number must be based on: 141 cases, 2:1 split, 80% effective at stopping infection, so there must have been a total of under ten cases in the vaccinated group. No wonder there were no hospitalisations.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Iron Economist

Iron Economist 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!

PDF

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 @IronEconomist

Iron Economist Profile picture
15 Jan
I regret to inform you that what is happening in Manaus should scare everyone witless. theguardian.com/world/2021/jan…
It looks from the reports like all cause mortality is currently running ~6x normal in a population that is 90% under fifty. But worse, Manaus already achieved herd immunity, and certainly a high level of infections.
Levin et all applied their age specific mortality to a sero-study of 66% and got similar expectations to actual fatalities give the age structure. Good conditional evidence the sero study was ~accurate despite some sampling flaws.
Read 7 tweets
Iron Economist Profile picture
9 Jan
What’s so weird about this article is that in the middle he basically admits that the YIMBY argument is correct.
Here he says that if a new development lures new rich people to the city it puts upwards pressure on all housing! This is the YIMBY argument! If you build more luxury housing and it increases the per capita stock it puts downwards pressure on all housing!
Even in this concocted argument where inwards migration causes prices to rise, it must by the same argument be putting downwards pressure on the city they left.
Read 6 tweets
Iron Economist Profile picture
22 Dec 20
This is a terrible idea. The reason it’s a terrible idea is that it’s virtually impossible. People who have worked with real data for years are often still abjectly terrible at it. As evidenced by the number of well credentialed experts who were revealed as charlatans by Covid.
See also the number of people who think that supply and demand do not apply to housing.
The number of criminologists who refuse to accept that almost all of the two massive crime waves in America were driven by lead poisoning. And probably also teen pregnancy rates.
Read 11 tweets
Iron Economist Profile picture
22 Nov 20
They also attend properly to the effects of reporting lags in death:
This leaves them with the following sample:
And they find the following:
Read 17 tweets
Iron Economist Profile picture
3 Sep 20
So there seems to be a myth taking hold among the twitter commentariat that a lot of housing economists think that the rise in house prices in the UK is well explained by interest rates alone. This.... is not the expert consensus. Here is a thread of papers (in no partic order).
Nice recent paper using a planning dataset from the uk:
cpb.nl/sites/default/…
Starts with a nice little literature review:
Read 18 tweets
Iron Economist Profile picture
12 May 20
ONS now recorded 46380 excess deaths by May first. Deaths are coming off but there are still going to have been many thousands since May first, we are certainly over 50k already, and it seems doubtful death rates will fully normalise before we reach 60k.
60000 deaths is 0.1% of the population. This means a sero-prevalence at 10% would lead to an IFR of 1%. In the last ten days we have had three pieces of information that make it likely the total attack rate closer to 5% than 10% in the UK, and consequently an IFR near 2%.
Firstly Patrick Vallence gave a preview of the UK ongoing serology study (due May 14th I believe): parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/78… look around 10:20-10:20. 10% in London 3-4% UK wide.
Read 7 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!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @IronEconomist has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @IronEconomist!

Read all threads by @IronEconomist