BAYES' THEOREM: The basic reason we get so many false positives to COVID19. The disease is so rare that the number of false positives greatly outnumbers the people who truly have the disease: THE MATHS:
https://t.co/oLHyxYJW9H
https://t.co/29FNwq0Qw2
"The national statistician has downgraded its estimate of coronavirus in England on October 17 to just 4.89 people per 10,000." or ~ 0.05%. That means that only 1 in 2000 people may be carrying SARS related viral RNA fragments which could be 2 months old. https://t.co/XqpNaY6BzQ
— Robin Monotti FRSA MA BSc (@robinmonotti) December 8, 2020
https://t.co/rthjPRJWeB
ITALY: CONFIRMED BY ITALIAN HEALTH SERVICE: False positives to Covid19 test as diagnosis are 95%. Legal cases started against testing under charges of fraud to procure public funding, false alarm, ideological false, and manslaughter. pic.twitter.com/C9b7BbzdKa
— Robin Monotti FRSA MA BSc (@robinmonotti) November 25, 2020
#BAYESTHEOREM MEDICAL MASS TESTING CALCULATOR:
— Robin Monotti FRSA MA BSc (@robinmonotti) December 9, 2020
Try it yourself to understand how many false positives you get by changing minor variables: \U0001f447https://t.co/7wVMvrpgAW pic.twitter.com/PHbweWK1TK
https://t.co/kFnQVoCspb
LATERAL FLOW: False positive rate of "0.4% with a sensitivity of 58% and specificity of 99.6%, would mean that 100\u2009000 people being tested would find 630 positives\u2014of which only 230 would actually have covid-19, while 400 would be false positives.
— Robin Monotti FRSA MA BSc (@robinmonotti) November 17, 2020
https://t.co/8hsZ1hNjD7
Official estimates from mass testing in England (including asymptomatic) puts Covid19 "infections" at 0.9% https://t.co/2ljzi9YfKN
— Robin Monotti FRSA MA BSc (@robinmonotti) December 11, 2020
@lucyfrazermp 20/11:
— Edmund Fordham (@EdmundFordham) November 28, 2020
2. Apparently @MattHancock tells HoC 17/09 how ONS \u201cadjusts for False Positives\u201d. Looked it up.@DesmondSwayne asks;@MattHancock doesn\u2019t answer.
Obfuscates with \u201crigorous Bayesian mathematics\u201d
\u201cOne of his academics" will \u201ctake him through it\u201d
(thread) pic.twitter.com/42YO9vaioy
#BAYESTHEOREM @ Cambridge University. 0.4% of 262 students came back as positive after the first "test". All came back as negative after the second. Government only tests once. ONS would say there is 0.4% prevalence instead it's 0%. pic.twitter.com/zeAQAAOeRN
— Robin Monotti FRSA MA BSc (@robinmonotti) December 13, 2020
https://t.co/pZcFlMBKEZ
"I am very happy for one of my academics to take him through the rigorous Bayesian mathematics, which I am sure will help to elucidate the debate on this matter still further." @MattHancock to @DesmondSwaynehttps://t.co/pZcFlMBKEZ
— Robin Monotti FRSA MA BSc (@robinmonotti) December 15, 2020
https://t.co/aidVGWOVqH
Numerical details aside, the use of Bayes's theorem and the principle described are valid. Taught in epidemiology courses.
— \u05e4\u05e8\u05d5\u05e4' \u05d0\u05d9\u05d9\u05dc \u05e9\u05d7\u05e8 (@prof_shahar) December 16, 2020
Extreme example. If disease prevalence is zero, predictive value of positive test is zero. Every positive is false positive.
A similar graph in the thread pic.twitter.com/ddvBe36OmU
\u26a0\ufe0fWHO WARNING ON BAYES THEOREM & TESTING \u26a0\ufe0f
— Robin Monotti FRSA MA BSc (@robinmonotti) December 16, 2020
"Healthcare providers are encouraged to take into consideration testing results along with clinical signs and symptoms, confirmed status of any contacts"https://t.co/GkRJzdn70b pic.twitter.com/jXPQDqqnVE
More from Robin Monotti FRSA MA BSc
#BMJResearch update: Corticosteroids probably reduce mortality and mechanical ventilation in patients with covid-19 compared with standard care, whereas azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, interferon-beta, and tocilizumab may not reduce either https://t.co/oQ3lTWUqaz
— The BMJ (@bmj_latest) December 18, 2020
This meta-analysis of controlled trials only looks at hospitalized patients. How long were the patients ill for before being hospitalized? One week? Two? Three? Too late for zinc ionophores (HCQ) (+ZINC? No zinc no point..) to work. Severe illness becomes bacterial in nature.
Was azythromycin administered when the bacterial infections were also too advanced? I have seen Azythromycin work with my very own eyes but that's not to say that if administered too late it may not save the patient. How many patients were given AZT & ventilated? It's all timing.
All the meta-analysis is telling us is if you leave it too late you may have missed the early window for antiviral zinc treatment (Zn+HCQ) & that if you are given AZT when you are ventilated or very severe it may too late for it to save you & corticosteroids may be last resort.
And of course antibiotics need also probiotics, or they may harm the bacterial flora which is part of the immune response. Difficult to tell from a meta-analysis how this problem was managed.
I have already left both Facebook & Instagram. We need to keep agile.
They will try to ban Parler, blaming it for Capitol theatre. I think Telegram may survive as it's not based in the
Yes Telegram owner @durov received & accepted what effectively is an award, not a partnership: the Young Global Leaders membership of the World Economic Forum in 2017. Does this mean he passes users info on? I don't think so.
This is what @Snowden had to say about @durov. Since then Telegram introduced the option of end to end encrypted chats not saved in Telegram servers. These private chats cannot be forwarded, and none of the participants can capture screenshots of
Trust us not to turn over data. Trust us not to read your messages. Trust us not to close your channel. Maybe @Durov is an angel. I hope so! But angels have fallen before. Telegram should have been working to make channels decentralized\u2014meaning outside their control\u2014for years.
— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) December 30, 2017
More from Category c19
You May Also Like
Curated the best tweets from the best traders who are exceptional at managing strangles.
• Positional Strangles
• Intraday Strangles
• Position Sizing
• How to do Adjustments
• Plenty of Examples
• When to avoid
• Exit Criteria
How to sell Strangles in weekly expiry as explained by boss himself. @Mitesh_Engr
• When to sell
• How to do Adjustments
• Exit
1. Let's start option selling learning.
— Mitesh Patel (@Mitesh_Engr) February 10, 2019
Strangle selling. ( I am doing mostly in weekly Bank Nifty)
When to sell? When VIX is below 15
Assume spot is at 27500
Sell 27100 PE & 27900 CE
say premium for both 50-50
If bank nifty will move in narrow range u will get profit from both.
Beautiful explanation on positional option selling by @Mitesh_Engr
Sir on how to sell low premium strangles yourself without paying anyone. This is a free mini course in
Few are selling 20-25 Rs positional option selling course.
— Mitesh Patel (@Mitesh_Engr) November 3, 2019
Nothing big deal in that.
For selling weekly option just identify last week low and high.
Now from that low and high keep 1-1.5% distance from strike.
And sell option on both side.
1/n
1st Live example of managing a strangle by Mitesh Sir. @Mitesh_Engr
• Sold Strangles 20% cap used
• Added 20% cap more when in profit
• Booked profitable leg and rolled up
• Kept rolling up profitable leg
• Booked loss in calls
• Sold only
Sold 29200 put and 30500 call
— Mitesh Patel (@Mitesh_Engr) April 12, 2019
Used 20% capital@44 each
2nd example by @Mitesh_Engr Sir on converting a directional trade into strangles. Option Sellers can use this for consistent profit.
• Identified a reversal and sold puts
• Puts decayed a lot
• When achieved 2% profit through puts then sold
Already giving more than 2% return in a week. Now I will prefer to sell 32500 call at 74 to make it strangle in equal ratio.
— Mitesh Patel (@Mitesh_Engr) February 7, 2020
To all. This is free learning for you. How to play option to make consistent return.
Stay tuned and learn it here free of cost. https://t.co/7J7LC86oW0