Yeah. Point in this particular piece is, sadly, a fault of the journal not to have pushed for the data and software / code - as seems to be their policy otherwise.
Good thing that my SO and I have been 900km apart since February then.
Sorry I didnât mean to give that impression. I was trying to imply that this was utterly fraudulent in the manner of fake conferences accepting papers or predatory academic publishing. Except you canât even pretend to yourself (the griftet I mean) thst you are engaging in a victimless crime.
This is fucking awful. Criminal.
The reference to attempts to avoid this were to open data movements and replicability.
I hope you mean that it is sad that people are drawing this kind of conclusions about Tegnell without knowing much about the man or the policies. Both Tegnell and Johan Giesecke, another Swedish epidemiologist (and former chief scientist at the ECDC) supporting the Swedish approach, have unimpeachable reputations and as high approval in Sweden as Fauci has in the US, Drosten has in Germany, and Ferguson used to have in the UK, and that will be true no matter how right or wrong they turn out to have been.
Thatâs what I thought you meant, I was just trying to clarify. However, there is nothing fraudulent about the Lancet, and it is a growing problem of legitimate journals publishing questionable research. (A colleague just sent me a paper that was published in a physics journal from a national society. The paper should never have been published, and I canât imagine that the journal used reviewers from anywhere near the subject matter of the paper.)
Iâve got you beat: 11,000km to my SO.
I know the Lancet is highly respected, though it isnt the first time they have been taken in by fraudulent and possibly criminal deceit. Itâs good they corrected quickly, they took far too long with Wakefield.
Pretty surprising, actually. I assume it is because in this case the red flags were of a sort that even a nontechnical journalist might catch, as opposed to more subtle issues that require careful reanalysis by other experts in the field.
Actually I meant that people actually say shit like "only the old die, so let them ". Mostly, they donât blurt it out like that but talk about disproportionate measures since younger people arenât as much affected, with additional musings that the age cohorts which are allegedly affected the most (seriously, âallegedlyâ? What the fuck?) are, âin factâ, above the average lifespan of the general population.
I have no beef with Tegnell, despite my opinion that it was a mistake not to implement stricter measures to ensure the most vulnerable age groups would be better protected and better taken care of. Which he kind of acknowledged. Better late than never. That I find this unacceptable, on a personal level, doesnât really matter. In no way I would imply that he, and Sweden as a country, followed their course to kill off their pensioners. Seriously, that is conspiracy bullshit, and thus I said this was madness lies.
The reason Iâm posting this here is that the video downarticle of the large crowd packed into Sergels torg, all without masks, suggests a big Swedish spike in the next couple of weeks. (The police dispersed the crowd not because the Stockholm police are Trump acolytes, but because of the violation of Swedish social distancing regulations. I expect they could/should have used something other than pepper spray.)
Welp, threesomes it is!
Thanks for the reminder.
This
We followed thesuggestions to drop the Kruskal-Wallis test and 45 post hoc pairwise tests and instead use Welchâs t-test and the Mann-Whitney rank test to examine the three binary splits just mentioned.
and this
We added a Bayesian analysis of the differences between these categorizations and a
Bayesian analysis with age as a continuous variable (based on day of birth) predicting log10 viral load.
answers my own questions in regard to the study, and this
It was also suggested that we additionally treat age as a continuous variable in an overall regression analysis. To address these issues, we now examine just three divisions of the samples (0-9 years versus >9 years, 0-9 versus >19, and 0-19 versus >19).
answers another thing Spiegelhalter wrote and which I didnât think of, at all.
I still have to dive a bit deeper, but I have a bet on this: this study will be published, and it will have an impact on many peopleâs personal life.
This is not what we wanted to hear, at all.
ETA: I have to point out that the debate is still heated. Holy shit, what a mess on twitter there is.
Covered at some length here, in this audio diary of an emergency room nurse in Queens, New York:
https://transom.org/2020/pandemic-er-notes-from-a-nurse-in-queens-the-hour/
Hard to take, but I listened, transfixed, to the entire piece (about an hour long). Kate OâConnell eloquently and urgently takes the listener into the middle of the pandemic experience in her hospital.
Glad youâre here now.
Last week the government received a report from a working group it appointed, led by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, stating that widespread use of face masks have little or no effect on reducing the spread of upper respiratory infections
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
The government said the use of face masks do not replace preventative measures such as social distancing and good hygiene in preventing the spread of coronavirus, noting that face masks do not protect wearers from infection, but others around them.
In other news, water is wet. And personally, I would recommend to take precautions against drowning others.
Suomi, quo vadis?
â
In other news, New South Wales just made it to a week with no new local Covid detections. Theyâve had a couple of new fly-in cases, but those are securely quarantined.
Tasmania is now at 20 days with no new cases, and only one over the last 28 days. Weâve got three people still infected; two in hospital, one self-isolating at home.