Science asked me to -briefly- reflect on what happened in 2020. So, a thread on this year in science, the breakthroughs and breakdowns and where my head is at at the end of this difficult year.

Story is here:
https://t.co/48EDZj4tbk

First, read @sciencecohen's beautiful, personal story on the vaccines:

“I can stop worrying about my mom dying alone in an intensive care unit, away from all who love her. And she can stop asking whether I’ll let her play mahjong with the girls”

https://t.co/qX2loAuid9
@sciencecohen The rapid development of efficacious #covid19 vaccines was clearly the science breakthrough of the year. But what about all the rest that went on in #covid19 science? My story is labeled “breakdown”, but the picture is complicated.
@sciencecohen Little of what scientists did to respond to #COVID19 was really new. As @florian_krammer told me “We took out all our fancy tools and applied them to this virus”.
What was new was not WHAT scientists did, but HOW they did it: Research was faster, more collaborative, more open.
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer The early diagnostic test from @c_drosten's lab, the @WHO mission report from China showing the virus could indeed be beaten, the collaboration behind the UK’s Recovery trial and the WHO’s Solidarity trial, the preprints being analysed in real time on twitter, ...
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO For me as a science journalist and for many interested people it was an incredible thing to see:
“The process of science was rarely as visible as this year. It was like watching open-heart surgery live on TV: messy but vital and riveting.”
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO But it wasn’t all rainbows and RNA. For all the evidence that was generated, the world often didn’t act on it. As @BillHanage told me: “It’s a little like watching a zombie movie in which half of the people can’t see the zombies and keep demanding to know what the fuss is about.”
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO @BillHanage Some scientists contributed to this. The Great Barrington Declaration, questionable research hyping hydroxychloroquine or suggesting #sarscov2 was less deadly than thought: They all played into the public’s desire for easy solutions, for carrying on as before.
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO @BillHanage Some "may have been driven by a healthy distrust of accepted wisdom or a contrarian spirit, but the effect was reminiscent of industry’s playbook in the fights over tobacco and climate change: Create just enough confusion about the evidence to allow people to carry on as before."
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO @BillHanage Others stood up for sound science and became targets. In Germany, for instance, @c_drosten has gone above and beyond in explaining research in this pandemic. He has rightly won praise, but also received death threats and police protection.
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO @BillHanage Many others spoke out as well and paid a price. Some of the worst vitriol was, once again, aimed at female scientists, who dared to give voice to their expertise.
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO @BillHanage Others decided to remain quiet, to concentrate on lab work and let others do the talking. For a while, @c_drosten seemed almost alone in Germany. But what is a scientist’s role in this crisis if not to explain. That, too, is something we need to talk about it when this is over.
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO @BillHanage And all of this played out in a context that no scientist can afford to ignore anymore: an information ecosystem that helps misinformation and lies spread faster than scientific evidence, weakening our ability to respond to new threats.
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO @BillHanage So yes, science worked faster than ever before and we have a vaccine after less than a year of this pandemic.
But more than 1,6 million people have died of #covid19.
It didn’t have to be this way.
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO @BillHanage Don’t get me wrong: We didn’t know everything and it was never going to be easy to deal with a virus with the specific characteristics of #SARSCoV2. But we knew enough to do more, to act better.
@sciencecohen @florian_krammer @c_drosten @WHO @BillHanage Where does all this leave us? @JeremyFarrar is optimistic. “I think we will look back after the horror of this and say, humanity is incredibly vulnerable,” he told me. “This will inspire a whole generation to come into science.”
I hope he is right. I hope we come out of this with a new appreciation for evidence and truth, with an understanding that we need to transform the information ecosystem we inhabit to be able to live in a shared reality.
But I’m stuck thinking: where would we be without vaccines? Where would we be in a crisis in which we really only have behaviour change to get out of it.
We have a vaccine now against #Sarscov2.
But there won’t be a vaccine against CO2.

More from Science

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.
@mugecevik is an excellent scientist and a responsible professional. She likely read the paper more carefully than most. She grasped some of its strengths and weaknesses that are not apparent from a cursory glance. Below, I will mention a few points some may have missed.
1/


The paper does NOT evaluate the effect of school closures. Instead it conflates all ‘educational settings' into a single category, which includes universities.
2/

The paper primarily evaluates data from March and April 2020. The article is not particularly clear about this limitation, but the information can be found in the hefty supplementary material.
3/


The authors applied four different regression methods (some fancier than others) to the same data. The outcomes of the different regression models are correlated (enough to reach statistical significance), but they vary a lot. (heat map on the right below).
4/


The effect of individual interventions is extremely difficult to disentangle as the authors stress themselves. There is a very large number of interventions considered and the model was run on 49 countries and 26 US States (and not >200 countries).
5/
Epic thread incoming:

I'm going to answer the question so many people have been asking this week:

WHAT IS PROJECT X???

Here's the definitive thread to tell you - and show you -precisely what Project X is

Grab a drink, sit down with me and let's #TalkLiberation

<3

1/?

"Project X" is actually called "PanQuake".

Pan means "all". Quake is the huge effect our voices can have when our communications are uncensored and when we have access to brand new functionality that *enhances* our social reach, rather than diminishes it

Here's our logo:

2/?


You can follow the fledgling official PanQuake Twitter account here: @pan_quake and see our super cool new website here:
https://t.co/F7wLSeM6aK

You can find our donation page here: https://t.co/VICFnsR0RX

Keep reading this thread to find out why we created it & what it is

3/?

SPOILER ALERT: Much of the content below this point is from my personal slides & speech notes from today's launch event. That stream got totally ruined by (big) tech problems, but I'm happy to report everything is turning out wonderfully


Here are some of our most high profile & dedicated public advocates for PanQuake - many of whom were scheduled to appear at our launch. All of whom stuck around for hours, to do a prerecord of the event, which is being edited, processed & uploaded for you as I write this.

5/?
1/ Automobiles and Intake Fraction. Since cars are back in the news I thought I would retweet this model result I offered in early April 2020. I focused only on 1 micron particles & accounted for windows completely closed & cracked slightly open.


2/ Related air exchange rates were based on experimental results in literature for mid-sized sedans. Particle deposition to indoor surfaces were accounted for, as the surface to volume ratio in a 3 m3 cab is large. An important outcome was the intake fraction (IF)

3/ Here, IF is the number of particles (or virions in collective particles) inhaled by a receptor DIVIDED BY the number or particles (or virions in collective particles) emitted by an infector.

4/ Integrated over the two hour drive (in this example) the IF for all windows closed & a receptor at rest is 0.08 (8% of what comes out of the infectors respiratory system ends up in the respiratory system of the receptor). 8%! That is a very high intake factor.

5/ With additional ventilation from cracking a window open drops the IF to 0.012 (1.2%) still relatively high. Can get lower by opening more windows.

You May Also Like

The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.

View the resolutions and voting results here:

The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.

Israel and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr


The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.

Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab


The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF


The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW