Holy shit. Again. One is RNA, the other DNA. One is a novel virus, the other has been around for decades. Why do you keep conflating them?
This is interesting. https://www.boston25news.com/news/c...-homeless-shelter/Z253TFBO6RG4HCUAARBO4YWO64/ CDC reviewing ‘stunning’ universal testing results from Boston homeless shelter BOSTON — The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is now “actively looking into” results from universal COVID-19 testing at Pine Street Inn homeless shelter. The broad-scale testing took place at the shelter in Boston’s South End a week and a half ago because of a small cluster of cases there. Of the 397 people tested, 146 people tested positive. Not a single one had any symptoms. “It was like a double knockout punch. The number of positives was shocking, but the fact that 100 percent of the positives had no symptoms was equally shocking,” said Dr. Jim O’Connell, president of Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program, which provides medical care at the city’s shelters.
I get your point. However, you may be blissfully unaware but this is a trading forum. Until Prado is proven wrong, I am going with the guy who is considered the smartest, best quantitative algorithmic trader on the face of the planet.
You know what the average IQ of a billionare is? About 130, something I learned from one of them when I worked for him. He was in the tens of billions. My IQ is also about 130, so say 1 in 50 brain in a developed nation, that makes me smart enough for one thing, I'm just bright enough to know what I don't know and a glimmer of what others far smarter may or may not know. Its a sweet spot. Without data that is true and all I see so far is potentially poor quality tests and not yet peer reviewed results, I'll stick with the Germans who have a huge pharmaceutical industry and did massive testing early. Also they are less political. I would like all this to end but while Trump and many of you seem to think a lie becomes real and therefore not a lie when most believe it, virus don't care bout dat as they say.
Hmmm...that is odd. That is exactly what Prado said. Nah...there is no way that the best quant on the face of the planet is correct. https://www.foxnews.com/science/third-blood-samples-massachusetts-study-coronavirus One third of participants in Massachusetts study tested positive for antibodies linked to coronavirus “We've long thought that the reported numbers are vastly under-counting what the actual infection is," Ambrosino told the Boston Globe. “Those reported numbers are based on positive COVID-19 tests, and we're all aware that a very, very small percentage of people in Chelsea and everywhere are getting COVID-19 tests." He added: “Still, it's kind of sobering that 30 percent of a random group of 200 people that are showing no symptoms are, in fact, infected. It's all the more reason for everyone to be practicing physical distancing."
First let me state that you provided no link or source for your information above; I do not find it in Marcos Lopez de Prado's publications, his twitter feed, on his website or anywhere else. I question the source and expect you to back it up with a url proving that the above is from Marcos Lopez de Prado. Marcos Lopez de Prado's publications has been focused on lessons the market can learn from the COVID-19 crisis - for example his "Three Quant Lessons from COVID-19" from March 31. There is no study or slides on the Diamond Princess to be found. Three Quant Lessons from COVID-19 https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/deliver...0121108117084065031082108029017115068&EXT=pdf Second - the study of one closed environment is meaningless unless you study all closed environments. There are plenty of closed environments to select for study - multiple nursing homes, aircraft carriers and cruise ships where everyone has been tested. The nursing homes which do not allow anyone in or out, and the staff must stay on site are a good study. Most of nursing homes demonstrate a death rate of over 70%. The residents being frail and elderly tend to skew the results. Trying to take the figures from one single "closed environment" and attempting to apply it to the entire population is absurd. Why not start with the local nursing home as an environment and then assume that 70% of mankind will be knocked-off.
Let's once again address the flawed Massachusetts study - since it appears the problems in this study are not clear despite posting of earlier information outlining its faults. This study can hardly be considered to back what "Prado said" (ignoring the likely issue that Prado never published the chart you attributed to him). So you go and test a mere 200 residents at the top hot spot in Massachusetts (Chelsea). 64 of the residents test positive for anti-bodies. On top of this - "While the participants appeared healthy, about half told the doctors that they experienced at least one symptom of COVID-19 in the past four weeks." "Ambrosino called Chelsea the epicenter of the crisis in Massachusetts. Chelsea has the state’s highest rate of confirmed cases, with at least 712 confirmed cases and 39 deaths – an infection rate of around 2 percent." So 100 of the 200 residents in a top hot spot exhibited symptoms of COVID-19 in the past four weeks, and people act surprised when 64 out of the 200 test positive for anti-bodies in a quick blood test of questionable accuracy. Also you are testing people with an anti-body test while they are probably still actively positive with COVID-19 which will lead to inconsistent results. On top of this the company providing the test, BioMedomics, has come under fire for inaccurate tests - including those distributed in North Carolina. BioMedtronics is small start-up located in our RTP area of North Carolina and has continually hyped itself for years -- claiming they have rapid tests for everything from sickle cell anemia to many other diseases. The FDA says that serological tests like those offered by BioMedomics are inaccurate and while the FDA would provide Emergency Use Authorization but would not likely ever approve the tests beyond the emergency use. Founded in 2007, BioMedomics is a privately-held clinical diagnostics company located in Morrisville, North Carolina.
Sample too small with 200, any trader knows the issues with this. In the same way the cruise ship being a likely high virus load space could be a bad test. There are huge scale results going on in the world Ecuador for example, Germany, Sweden vs Finland, Norway. The original Santa Clara hypothesis was covid-19 (or a mutant) was that due the high Chinese American population back and forth was an early site. Problem is I have not seen evidence of covid-19 which in severe cases is hard to miss being found before it should have been found? Maybe there are two strains in parallel. Off to fix something, not a day for thinking.
I posted the link in a subsequent post that is below. Below is the link to the paper: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3579712 The Diamond Princess example is on page 14. Here is the tweet that has the link: