NEW—CDC was truly suffocated by Trump WH at every turn. Kyle McGowan, a former chief of staff at CDC, and his deputy, Amanda Campbell, witnessed WH dismissal of science, WH’s slow suffocation of CDC’s voice, meddling in messages & siphoning of CDC budget.
https://t.co/HeuNbUggiw
Mr. McGowan recalled a White House fixated on the economic implications of public health.
They compromised anyway, recommending social distancing without a reference to the typical six-foot measurement.
“What’s not legitimate is to overrule science,” he said.
(Sidebar: Dr Messonier is my hero)
“They need to be allowed to lead.”
➡️ all this is incredible painful to me cuz of what I also went thru in Jan trying to warn:
https://t.co/I5G7PL6boG
More from Eric Feigl-Ding
JUST ONE PERSON—UK 🇬🇧 scientists think one immunocompromised person who cleared virus slowly & only partially wiped out an infection, leaving behind genetically-hardier viruses that rebound & learn how to survive better. That’s likely how #B117 started. 🧵 https://t.co/bMMjM8Hiuz
2) The leading hypothesis is that the new variant evolved within just one person, chronically infected with the virus for so long it was able to evolve into a new, more infectious form.
same thing happened in Boston in another immunocompromised person that was sick for 155 days.
3) What happened in Boston with one 45 year old man who was highly infectious for 155 days straight before he died... is exactly what scientists think happened in Kent, England that gave rise to #B117.
4) Doctors were shocked to find virus has evolved many different forms inside of this one immunocompromised man. 20 new mutations in one virus, akin to the #B117. This is possibly how #B1351 in South Africa 🇿🇦 and #P1 in Brazil 🇧🇷 also evolved.
5) “On its own, the appearance of a new variant in genomic databases doesn’t tell us much. “That’s just one genome amongst thousands every week. It wouldn’t necessarily stick out,” says Oliver Pybus, a professor of evolution and infectious disease at Oxford.
2) The leading hypothesis is that the new variant evolved within just one person, chronically infected with the virus for so long it was able to evolve into a new, more infectious form.
same thing happened in Boston in another immunocompromised person that was sick for 155 days.
3) What happened in Boston with one 45 year old man who was highly infectious for 155 days straight before he died... is exactly what scientists think happened in Kent, England that gave rise to #B117.
Immunocompromised 45 year old suffered from #COVID19 for 155 days before he died. The virus was changing very quickly inside the man's body\u2014it acquired a big cluster of >20 mutations\u2014resembled the same ones seen in #B117 & #B1351. (NPR audio Part 1 of 2)\U0001f9f5https://t.co/7kWiBZ1xGk pic.twitter.com/ZJ7AExB78Y
— Eric Feigl-Ding (@DrEricDing) February 8, 2021
4) Doctors were shocked to find virus has evolved many different forms inside of this one immunocompromised man. 20 new mutations in one virus, akin to the #B117. This is possibly how #B1351 in South Africa 🇿🇦 and #P1 in Brazil 🇧🇷 also evolved.
2) NPR report audio part 2 of 2:
— Eric Feigl-Ding (@DrEricDing) February 8, 2021
Dr. Li couldn't believe what they found. "I was shocked," he says. "When I saw the virus sequences, I knew that we were dealing with something completely different and potentially very important." pic.twitter.com/HT3Yt6djFd
5) “On its own, the appearance of a new variant in genomic databases doesn’t tell us much. “That’s just one genome amongst thousands every week. It wouldn’t necessarily stick out,” says Oliver Pybus, a professor of evolution and infectious disease at Oxford.
Wow. 1 in 3 hospitalized with #COVID19 gets readmitted to the hospital within a few months after discharge. ~48,000 UK patients.
Great animated lecture on #LongCovid by @Dr2NisreenAlwan, animated by @VickiGSP using info from UK @IndependentSage experts.
2) Furthermore, 1 in 8 of those who were discharged subsequently die. And many suffer long term ailments like heart disease, liver, kidney, diabetes, and more. This doesn’t even include less clinical critical cognitive effects. #LongCovid is real.
3) How common is #LongCovid overall? UK estimates 1 in 5 at 5 weeks and 1 in 10 have symptoms have even 12 weeks after initial #COVID19 diagnosis.
Lecture again by @Dr2NisreenAlwan
4) Let these numbers sink in... 1 in 10 at 12 weeks still have symptoms!
5) Here is the original study of the above lecture from few weeks ago. We need to prepare our healthcare system long term for the impact of millions with #LongCovid. This is gonna be larger than Gulf War Syndrome or long term health of 9/11 first responders.
Great animated lecture on #LongCovid by @Dr2NisreenAlwan, animated by @VickiGSP using info from UK @IndependentSage experts.
2) Furthermore, 1 in 8 of those who were discharged subsequently die. And many suffer long term ailments like heart disease, liver, kidney, diabetes, and more. This doesn’t even include less clinical critical cognitive effects. #LongCovid is real.
3) How common is #LongCovid overall? UK estimates 1 in 5 at 5 weeks and 1 in 10 have symptoms have even 12 weeks after initial #COVID19 diagnosis.
Lecture again by @Dr2NisreenAlwan
4) Let these numbers sink in... 1 in 10 at 12 weeks still have symptoms!
5) Here is the original study of the above lecture from few weeks ago. We need to prepare our healthcare system long term for the impact of millions with #LongCovid. This is gonna be larger than Gulf War Syndrome or long term health of 9/11 first responders.
LONG COVID\u201430% of hospital recovered #COVID19 patients end up back in hospital in <5 months; up to 12% die of complications. \u201cwe really need to prepare for #LongCovid. It\u2019s a mammoth task to follow up w/ these patients, but monitoring needs to be arranged\u201dhttps://t.co/h0y8WUn8sQ pic.twitter.com/Pk8GhQc9J5
— Eric Feigl-Ding (@DrEricDing) January 18, 2021
⚠️TWO DIFFERENT #COVID19 PANDEMICS—Many think with cases dropping that pandemic is nearly over. But truth is, there are now 2 different #SARSCoV2 pandemics diverging—old strain is waning, while the more contagious #B117 strain is dominating. We will be soon slammed very hard. 🧵
2) Here is what is really going to happen... most countries are having a gentle case decline with R(e) currently around 0.9. But this is deceiving. The #B117 is still relatively rare so far, so the R is being influenced mostly by the old common variant. But not for long...
3) Here is what is going to happen... currently R is ~0.9 in many places, but with the more infectious #B117, the R will jump 50% approximately. And it is inevitable (all CDC and Danish models say this) that B117 will take over as the reigning dominant variant soon...
4) and when that happens, what worked before to keep the pandemic contained at R of 0.9 will no longer work. Here is the model for Alberta, 🇨🇦 by @GosiaGasperoPhD. The B117 dotted red line will soon dominate and drive a new surge in latter half of March and April.
5) And Denmark 🇩🇰 CDC has found the same thing. I GQR works now for keeping R around 0.9 or even 0.8, will absolutely not work anymore once #B117 variant takes over. Forget about it. We will be hit hard. But there is a way—if we suppress R to 0.7 or less.
https://t.co/gOq0put4H5
2) Here is what is really going to happen... most countries are having a gentle case decline with R(e) currently around 0.9. But this is deceiving. The #B117 is still relatively rare so far, so the R is being influenced mostly by the old common variant. But not for long...
3) Here is what is going to happen... currently R is ~0.9 in many places, but with the more infectious #B117, the R will jump 50% approximately. And it is inevitable (all CDC and Danish models say this) that B117 will take over as the reigning dominant variant soon...
4) and when that happens, what worked before to keep the pandemic contained at R of 0.9 will no longer work. Here is the model for Alberta, 🇨🇦 by @GosiaGasperoPhD. The B117 dotted red line will soon dominate and drive a new surge in latter half of March and April.
5) And Denmark 🇩🇰 CDC has found the same thing. I GQR works now for keeping R around 0.9 or even 0.8, will absolutely not work anymore once #B117 variant takes over. Forget about it. We will be hit hard. But there is a way—if we suppress R to 0.7 or less.
https://t.co/gOq0put4H5
Stupid—Oregon church has huge 74+ person #COVID19 outbreak after dozens of maskless churchgoers stood onstage singing & clapping inside a packed indoor venue for Easter Sunday service. The Peoples Church, is vowing to do continue church service on Sunday.
2) Now, the Oregon Health Authority says that at least 74 people associated with the church have tested positive for the coronavirus — one of the state’s largest workplace outbreaks.
3) “In a statement, the church’s leaders attributed the outbreak to a recent rise in covid-19 cases in Marion County, Ore.
Murray said the church, which has held in-person services throughout the pandemic, intends to continue with in-person ceremonies on Sunday.
4) Who saw this coming? Countless scientists. If only airborne-denialists didn’t muzzle the airborne aerosols science.
2) Now, the Oregon Health Authority says that at least 74 people associated with the church have tested positive for the coronavirus — one of the state’s largest workplace outbreaks.
3) “In a statement, the church’s leaders attributed the outbreak to a recent rise in covid-19 cases in Marion County, Ore.
Murray said the church, which has held in-person services throughout the pandemic, intends to continue with in-person ceremonies on Sunday.
4) Who saw this coming? Countless scientists. If only airborne-denialists didn’t muzzle the airborne aerosols science.
\u26a0\ufe0fAIRBORNE >6 FEET / 2 METERS! The CDC finally acknowledged #SARSCoV2 has major transmission via airborne aerosols beyond 6 feet / 2 meters, not just close contact. The CDC/WHO & airborne deniers are a year late\u2014and negligently endangered many. #COVID19 \U0001f9f5https://t.co/1YMqDGbD0v pic.twitter.com/DUm5FA3V90
— Eric Feigl-Ding (@DrEricDing) May 8, 2021
More from Health
I applaud the #EUCancerPlan *BUT* caution: putting #meat 🥩 (a nourishing, evolutionary food) in the same box as 🚬 to solve a contemporary health challenge, would be basing policy on assumptions rather than robust data.
#FollowTheScience yes, but not just part of it!
THREAD👇
1/ Granted, some studies have pointed to ASSOCIATIONS of HIGH intake of red & processed meats with (slightly!) increased colorectal cancer incidence. Also, @WHO/IARC is often mentioned in support (usually hyperbolically so).
But, let’s have a closer look at all this! 🔍
2/ First, meat being “associated” with cancer is very different from stating that meat CAUSES cancer.
Unwarranted use of causal language is widespread in nutritional sciences, posing a systemic problem & undermining credibility.
3/ That’s because observational data are CONFOUNDED (even after statistical adjustment).
Healthy user bias is a major problem. Healthy middle classes are TOLD to eat less red meat (due to historical rather than rational reasons, cf link). So, they
4/ What’s captured here is sociology, not physiology.
Health-focused Westerners eat less red meat, whereas those who don’t adhere to dietary advice tend to have unhealthier lifestyles.
That tells us very little about meat AS SUCH being responsible for disease.
#FollowTheScience yes, but not just part of it!
THREAD👇
\U0001f534LIVE \U0001f4c5Today \u23f012:00 CET
— EU_HEALTH - #EUCancerPlan (@EU_Health) February 3, 2021
We are presenting today the #EUCancerPlan as part of a strong \U0001f1ea\U0001f1fa#HealthUnion
Follow the presentation live here: https://t.co/Cr8ATvzNkg#WorldCancerDay pic.twitter.com/zdByuklWV6
1/ Granted, some studies have pointed to ASSOCIATIONS of HIGH intake of red & processed meats with (slightly!) increased colorectal cancer incidence. Also, @WHO/IARC is often mentioned in support (usually hyperbolically so).
But, let’s have a closer look at all this! 🔍
2/ First, meat being “associated” with cancer is very different from stating that meat CAUSES cancer.
Unwarranted use of causal language is widespread in nutritional sciences, posing a systemic problem & undermining credibility.
3/ That’s because observational data are CONFOUNDED (even after statistical adjustment).
Healthy user bias is a major problem. Healthy middle classes are TOLD to eat less red meat (due to historical rather than rational reasons, cf link). So, they
4/ What’s captured here is sociology, not physiology.
Health-focused Westerners eat less red meat, whereas those who don’t adhere to dietary advice tend to have unhealthier lifestyles.
That tells us very little about meat AS SUCH being responsible for disease.
You May Also Like
1/OK, data mystery time.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.