3 ms·
If this is true, wouldn't that mean that the R is in fact not as high as we believe it is, because it was spreading for longer on a slower rate as opposed to sp
by dustinmoris 6y ago
If this is true, wouldn't that mean that the R is in fact not as high as we believe it is, because it was spreading for longer on a slower rate as opposed to spreading fast in a shorter time period? If we think that it is still highly infecious then the only other conclusion can be that we have a much larger population already immunonised?
- s1artibartfast 6y agoNot necessarily. r0 can be much more reliably measured than severity. hospitalization and death rates give pretty clear picture of doubling time, but could represent wildly different percents of the overall infections