26/42 Are there any national datasets that accurately capture what is going on? The brilliant @jburnmurdoch has highlighted number of admissions into ICU. The message from his animated chart (click on link) couldn’t be clearer – this winter is v unusual: https://t.co/76ZvHU2pmV.
NEW: a common response to reports of hospitals struggling this winter is "it\u2019s no different to a bad flu season!"
— John Burn-Murdoch (@jburnmurdoch) January 7, 2021
I\u2019ve tracked down historical data on flu ICU admissions, including winter 2017-18, a record high.
Here\u2019s how England\u2019s Covid winter compares to a bad flu season \U0001f4f9 pic.twitter.com/tsExrDZM31
Here's a detailed thread explaining how the weekly ONS data should be interpreted when monitoring all cause mortality and excess deaths. It seems very common for people to misinterpret the data relating to excess deaths so I will do my best to clarify in a series of tweets. 1/10 pic.twitter.com/r2TUH7I4wE
— Michael George (@Mike_aka_Logiqx) January 9, 2021
To believe the hypothesis posed by the sceptics you also have to believe this. Either those charged with monitoring the nation\u2019s health \u2013 the CMO, CSA, their colleagues in the regions, Ministers, officials \u2013 are unaware of the data flaws Julia and her allies have identified...
— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) January 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.
