Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked Oct. 6, 2020

Created

Wed Apr 22 15:46:35 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@DanRosenheck It's also extremely dubious if he's claiming that R is 3-5, which is definitely not the consensus view. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted April 22, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Deaths are not necessarily a perfect way to estimate infections (the IFR may vary from place to place for many reasons) but they're at least decently good. So it could *easily* be the case that say 30% of the population had COVID-19 in NYC but only 1.2% did in Santa Clara. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted April 22, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@kmedved @DanRosenheck It may have evolved a bit but the methodologies that produce super high R's are often dubious IMO (i.e. not accounting for increase in detections) and anything much greater than 3 (perhaps outside of relatively narrow settings) would show up in the deaths & hospitalizations data. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted April 22, 2020 Hibernated