Comments by "Trazyn" (@Trazynn) on "Pandemic learning from Japan" video.

  1. Why aren't more countries conducting this seroprevalence study? To me it seems like THE most important thing we'd want to know. A 47% seroprevalence amongst the population really puts things in a different light.
    20
  2.  @esecallum  knowing how far the virus has spread also tells us how far the virus still can spread.
    6
  3. ​ @esecallum  Do you understand what 47% seroprevalence means? It means that every other person breaks the chain of infection. Makes it very difficult for a virus to spread fast.
    5
  4. Hence the question, why isn't this researched further? Why do we keep messing around with this garbage CPR test data?
    2
  5.  @RyanHellyer  these studies try to establish an Infection Fatality Rate. To do that they deliberately select places that they expect a high seroprevalence. That's not very useful for drawing any conclusions about the population as a whole. Japan did a random-sample which at least lets them have an idea how prevalent it is in Tokyo.
    1
  6.  @esecallum  Seroprevalence = percentage of people that already have antibodies against the virus. 47% of Tokyo is immune by now. Florida probably has a similar share.
    1
  7.  @RyanHellyer  what's the seroprevalence in the US?
    1
  8. ​ @RyanHellyer  If infection fatality rate is the number of fatalities per infection, then you cannot infer the number of infections from the number of fatalities. Garbage data in, garbage data out. That's why I'm saying that we need antibody studies like in Japan. That gives us reliable seroprevalence data. For a brief moment you got my hopes up and thought you'd have these studies but that turns out to be bluster.
    1
  9.  @RyanHellyer  Then you don't need the IFR at all. What you need is the seroprevalence studies. Which we don't have. We do not know the seroprevalence in the US.
    1