Make SEN make sense
@OmicronData
Followers
6,415
Following
442
Media
1,913
Statuses
26,772
Sharing my experiences, learnings and research on Special Education Needs children and children's mental health/neurodevelopment.
Joined November 2021
Don't wanna be here?
Send us removal request.
Explore trending content on Musk Viewer
महात्मा गांधी
• 133799 Tweets
からくりサーカス
• 94176 Tweets
WONWOO
• 86853 Tweets
ケンタッキー
• 85736 Tweets
ニンテンドーミュージアム
• 69065 Tweets
リネット
• 54007 Tweets
#swallows
• 48132 Tweets
原神コラボ
• 34475 Tweets
フォーエバーヤング
• 32494 Tweets
BTS NUNEW 1ST CONCERT EP2
• 27651 Tweets
OFF THE MASK COMING SOON
• 26527 Tweets
青木選手
• 25907 Tweets
FAYEYOKO BTS 1ST FANMEET
• 23583 Tweets
青木さん
• 18376 Tweets
ラムジェット
• 15351 Tweets
Alcaraz
• 14185 Tweets
ジャパンダートクラシック
• 13933 Tweets
Burberry Art Space
• 13527 Tweets
TORE
• 13246 Tweets
サンライズジパング
• 12429 Tweets
#ミラクル9
• 11746 Tweets
Pinned Tweet
Last on my various ADHD rambles today, just a single post.
Anyone wanting to know more about ADHD (not necessarily management but what it is), should take the time to watch this video series. The *single* best and most detailed explanation ever.
0
1
4
This article, shared widely today, is shockingly wrong it needs to be challenged very firmly.
There goes another day of work.
76
724
2K
So, the UKHSA have just added a new metric - reinfections by age.
This tells us some REALLY interesting information.
(Thanks to
@statsgeekclare
,
@Pouriaaa
and all the team at UKHSA!).
I've used this to work out Risk Ratios of reinfection by age group over time.
11
128
516
Let start right at the beginning - even the image of the article is solely positioned to instill fear with its imagery, and has basically zero to do with the actual content of the article. Not entirely surprisingly, it doesnt get any better.
4
25
485
The data shows no such thing. The data shows a REDUCTION in neutralizing antibodies, and immune escape. It categorically DOESN'T show "no immunity". And indeed population level data shows us unequivocally that it DOES confer immunity.
No data shared to back up this claim.
5
29
476
I'll skip past the (rather bile filled) introduction and go to the claims.
1) "As a consequence it is now possible to be reinfected with one of Omicron’s variants every two to three weeks."
This is utterly false.
15
35
446
3) "But each and every infection will damage your immune system regardless of how mild the symptoms."
Again, questionable at best on current data, but becomes an outright falsehood with the use of the word "will".
8
19
350
While I would have challenged it anyway, the use of the word "every" moves this from spurious but true (if immensely rare) to outright false.
No data shared to back up this claim.
4
18
326
4) "Let’s start with a startling U.S. Veterans Affairs study involving five million people."
OK so this is the (now infamous) reinfection study.
No mention in the article of:
- This being a preprint, not yet peer reviewed.
- The numerous challenges made around the study.
2
14
307
Interesting to note that in the UK, flu ICU admissions just overtook COVID ICU admissions for the first time in at least a year, and almost certainly for the first time since the pandemic began.
12
108
304
The article is littered with links to tweets, in cases by anonymous accounts. I say this as an anonymous account - NO ONE should quote my tweets in a media article. It lacks any form of validity.
2
15
287
This is a clearly biased article, with a clear agenda.
This in itself is fine, within reason. But the data we DO have has been horrifically misrepresented (and in a lot of sections there is pure speculation).
I view this article as unethical.
3
14
282
10) "A Danish study, for example, found that people infected with COVID “were at an increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and ischemic stroke.”
No comment on the context of the study which ALSO found:
- ONLY stroke was statistically significant over flu.
9
13
258
5) "So the virus is getting better at thwarting vaccines and evading immunity. Although vaccine protection against hospitalization and death remains strong, it is being steadily eroded by Omicron’s subvariants."
No..it isnt. An iSage video has been linked as the source for this.
5
12
252
This... Is actually a surprisingly good and balanced article on XBB.1.5 from mainstream media.
Unlikely it tells anyone here what they don't already know but maybe there's hope from the media yet..!
15
67
256
We can no longer accurately calculate vaccine efficacy. And, by extension, vaccine waning. There, I said it.
A 🧵.
15
35
260
Lets just be really clear about this.
When we look at population level, COVID is *not* infecting people 2 to 3 times per year or more, it has *never* infected people 2-3 times per year or more, nor is it going to.
We have *evidence* for this.
44
51
254
2) "The data also shows that each reinfection confers no immunity. A summer infection, for example, will not protect you against a fall infection."
3
13
235
6) "Meanwhile protection against severe disease has declined as the effectiveness of our vaccines progressively wanes."
Untrue. VE is a RELATIVE risk ratio, not an absolute risk ratio.
As many have said, there is no evidence of ABSOLUTE waning of protection vs severe.
3
16
237
So...ONS estimates that in the UK BA.4/5 infected almost 50% of the population.
Wow.
22
96
241
@TaylorLorenz
Tentatively stepping in here Taylor...IMO we need to be careful to seperate discussion on the science on this and policy.
Study after study has shown that infection induced immunity is longer lasting than vax induced immunity. Even better is the combination.
1/n
1
3
231
8) "What role immune-destabilizing COVID infections are now playing in the rapid advance of monkeypox or the deadly meningitis outbreak in Florida is not really understood."
Pure speculation - at best.
4
11
228
I'm not sure of the content of the video, but there is resounding evidence that the variants have NOT eroded severe disease/mortality protection.
3
16
224
Instead, the study is just taken at utter face value, and in fact doesn't even quote the CONTEXT of the study being one of excess burden. The implication is clearly left hanging that it's around a "like for like" comparison on infections.
2
9
223
This is not a view that the VAST majority of experts in the field would align to. Obviously this particular subject is fiercely debated, and I don't want to go into it here, but the main point is that this is NOT the primary expert view.
1
15
220
9) "But many experts suspect that COVID infections, along with declining smallpox immunity, are playing a subversive role."
No experts linked.
2
9
213
11) "Reinfections harm the immune system and increase hospitalizations and death even among the vaccinated. (Just watch the data coming out of England and Quebec now.)"
As someone who knows the England data about as well as anyone...this is NOT what the data shows.
2
12
199
7)" Previous COVID infections probably also play a major role in deadly hepatitis infections in hundreds of children. A Chinese study recently spelled out the likely mechanism."
One possible mechanism amongst many, a theoretical mechanism. Certainly not "the likely mechanism".
3
10
194
@chrischirp
Think this is an excellent overview of the situation Christina. Great thread and great explainer.
6
5
199
Pretty huge deal this - ONS have just released their new Long COVID survey results.
They have also (sneaky sneaky!) released their analysis on adjusted risk ratios of LC between Delta, BA.1 and BA.2.
Headline I think is - ONS estimate 50% reduction in LC in BA.1 vs Delta.
15
22
194
I would like to think that BOTH sides of the COVID discussion would agree that this is a deeply unhelpful article. Portraying such clearly exaggerated falsehoods helps no one in having a proper and accurate way forward.
6
9
185
- The finding was only statistically significant in hospital outpatients.
- Again, also a prerelease, going through peer review, and with some reasonable challenges on possible bias and lack of matching.
1
7
174
Theres an awful lot we don't know about COVID - even today.
And there are absolutely areas that remain concerning and need further information. LC and PASC being obvious ones.
But the data we DO have presents a hugely different story to this article.
3
11
178
Moreover, there are enough more valid concerns to raise to have a constructive and viable debate on the topic. Instead this article is speculative in the vast majority of areas, and outlines a position that is past even the worst possible case scenario.
It should be retracted.
2
11
178
12) "Meanwhile, the virus is now evolving at a rate faster than vaccine development (three waves this year alone)."
This at best is a little misleading. It makes no mention of the fact of BA.1 and BA.2 evolving in 2021, at the same time.
2
11
176
The whole "they told us vaccines would stop transmission" discourse is a little tedious and intellectually dishonest.
Yes they did, at a time when they almost certainly did.
Even as late as delta, with high vaccine uptake and booster transmission was almost completed stopped.
50
19
179
..are listed (i.e. not peer reviewed studies primarily, and to advise on the context of said studies).
3) To correct the outright incorrect statements made including that of "VE waning" = reduction in protection vs severe disease.
People are SCARED by this article.
6
9
170
I would urge the author, if he stands by the claims made in this article, to:
1) Given the Tyee's declared commitment to fact driven reporting, to add in citation to the facts established for those claims with no such links.
2) To re-contextualise the facts that..
1
9
164
And...here is the kicker. What all this has been leading up to.
"Elimination remains the only long-term and bottom-up strategy that makes any sense in terms of risk reduction. It is also imminently doable..."
5
12
159
It's misleading to outline increasing transmission and pace of evolution as the most likely cause of increased evolution - indeed the author actually quotes someone outlining the most likely evolution path (chronic infection in immunocompromised).
1
7
156
Just in case anyone hasn't seen this yet, turns out CDC *grossly* overestimated XBB.1.5 proportions last week.
There’s been a lot of concern raised about the rate of XBB.1.5 going from ~20% to ~40% of the fraction of SARSCOV2 subvariants over the course of a week, but these were imprecise estimates.
@CDCgov
now lowered the estimate to 27.6%, which is still an uncertain estimate.
8
10
56
9
25
150
I'm hoping that people are learning that the more extreme doom pronouncers were wrong about impact of BA.4/5 and wrong about XBB/BQ.1.1.
No reason to think they'll suddenly hit lucky with XBB.1.5.
(None of which means concern is wrong. But BIG CAPITAL 🚨🚨 ALARMS🚨🚨 are.)
13
17
151
Definitely my favourite tweet/response of the day.
10
14
151
Following the recent Washington Post article, it seems there is quite a bit of misunderstanding about so called "natural immunity", so thought I would so a thread on this.
This ISN'T advocating *intentional* infection as a route to immunity (!) but clarifies some wrong info.
11
42
149
While it feels like a somewhat posthumous statement to make, having been quite inactive recently, I think it's time to retire the twitter handle here.
There's a good few reasons for this - mostly personal, but two other reasons, one of which I think is important.
28
8
144
The "old shots" are not "ineffective/only 60% effective against hospitalisation" against the "new variants" FFS.
COVID tyre fire strikes again.
*Really* understand what VE MEANS before you tweet mindlessly about it pleasethankyou
20
34
144
Note that if I get chance I will share some links to info about some of these areas raised.
But I would say...this is so people can be more informed. Not to "debunk" the article. The onus for that is on the author to show more robust evidence.
2
6
130
A reminder that when people say "I think I only had flu once" they mean symptomatic flu.
Your average 40 year old has had flu ~ 18 times.
@JPWeiland
@OmicronData
@MichaelSFuhrer
@DGBassani
No. We don’t really test for influenza. When we do, we find it infects about 30-40% of the population annually, with a lot reinfection even in the same year. Much of it not very symptomatic, though, due to population immunity. (Still does a lot of damage!)
7
4
50
8
18
137
This doesn't look that impressive until you read carefully what it says.
13% reduction of ALL childhood deaths. Not malaria deaths.
😲
6
42
134
Look folks. The view is still apparently persisting about multiple reinfections per year.
This isn't going to happen. And indeed I HIGHLY doubt that reinfections will occur even once per year.
Let's have a look at some of the facts.
23
23
132
Breaking - total England hospital admissions drop for the first time this wave!
3
10
133
1) Don't tell me vaccines and boosters didnt impact infection rates.
4
24
127
Given that we are now up to 6 sequences of BA.2.86, expect a massive number of extreme takes.
This excerpt from the UKHSA assessment is literally the sum total of our knowledge and understanding at the moment.
Anyone who says otherwise is (at best) making an educated guess.
8
36
131
Ok some of the evidence to the contrary.
First on immunity.
(Note not all this evidence may be the "best" evidence available. It's what I can quickly get access to doing this in my spare time).
UK ONS studies show reduced risk...
4
7
123
Regardless of where you stand on long COVID, this is just a completely false summary of the study.
UK study of 536 people with
#COVID19
examined 6 mos and 12 mos after recovering from initial acute illness: Finds 331 of them (59%) have some form of organ failure a year after infection.
#LongCovid
107
247
388
8
8
123
I've had two messages from people over the last 24 hours both explicitly talking about the mental health impact of the more "doomer" takes around COVID here.
I wish people would talk more about this.
20
15
120
BA.2.75.2 looks like it could be the next variant of some interest.
I've had a bit of a look at this now using my calculator utilising Bloom Lab deep mutational scanning data.
4
16
119
I think this is a really important and powerful demonstration of how disinformation surrounding COVID can cause really significant harm.
Worth reading the whole thread (it's a bit broken for me but worth clicking through replies etc to find the follow ons).
@demeatloaf
@lionel_rich1
I'm happy to share my story. When COVID hit in 2020, I was working in a nursing home. It was terrifying. We had so many residents die that it made COVID seem like an unstoppable virus. Early in the pandemic, I began participating heavily in COVID related subreddits. The... (1/x)
19
20
136
15
25
114
Whoa whoa whoa.
(another study tweet).
Am I reading this methodology right?
13
19
110
This is an excellent thread on the Florida vax study from
@dgurdasani1
.
I agree with everything raised here. The study is highly flawed, especially the immortal time bias discovered here.
Deleted my earlier post, as I wanted to correct it & do a a detailed debunk. It took me six reads to even start to understand what the authors had done, because the methodology makes little to no sense in many ways. Here goes- 🧵
131
918
3K
10
27
108
I find it telling that 24 hours after the US policy change on Chinese entrants, all I've seen in my Twitter feed from *actual scientists* are the reasons, objectively, why it's pointless. From all sides of COVID discussion.
And not one objective argument in favour.
12
10
101
"if" is doing a LOT of heavy lifting here.
Sorry, not heavy lifting, lying. Got confused. Lying.
14
4
95
For chrissake.
NEW: U.S. to require negative COVID test for travelers from China amid concern about possible new variants
172
660
2K
14
8
96
This is such a stupid decision. There's basically zero benefit of this.
On the downside it serves to increase cost, inconvenience, and xenophobia.
12
11
94
I see the reinfection study has been published. Which I'll be honest I think is madness.
But let's just do a brief recap.
1) peer review DOESN'T establish accuracy of results. I'll come back to the data piece shortly.
A big misconception about peer review is that it's designed to stop erroneous papers being published.
That is categorically not the purpose (and never really was) of peer review. It is designed to ensure that conclusions within a paper are supported by the data within said paper
4
50
319
5
30
94
This will, categorically, be the trigger for my farewell to Twitter.
17
3
91
Well blow me down with a feather.
We have a long COVID study with a control group.
Still digesting it but this at first glance is an excellent study.
6
22
92
Covid twitter becomes H5N1 twitter *sigh*.
Detecting H5N1 in milk does NOT mean you can get H5N1 from drinking milk, in case it needed to be said.
Good thread from
@angie_rasmussen
on this here.
Very important to note here that qPCR positives are not the same as "virus particles." It's much easier to detect viral RNA by qPCR than it is to detect infectious virus or intact virus particles (as the article correctly notes).
This finding does have some big implications:
28
396
2K
4
11
89
This is such a real concern for me.
@Brian_Orak
@wanderer_jasnah
It really is becoming a "boy who cried wolf" situation where if/when an actual real variant of concern or new disease comes around that requires emergency action, no one is going to believe them. So much trust is lost constantly pushing the alarm button.
5
5
90
7
7
88
@VtuberYubel
@BadMedicalTakes
Not sure which I want to disappear more - him, or my pretty debilitating imaginary ADHD.
No ..him. Definitely him.
1
0
85
Said it before, will say it again.
Reduced VE vs severe does NOT demonstrate waning protection.
In fact, if VE was zero, this just means that (broadly speaking) the vaccine provides the SAME protection as prior infection given most of control are now prior infected.
10
8
86
OK....*deep breath*
My initial assessment of this study.
Note that this may be a little disjointed as having to do it faster than I have in the past.
7
18
86
Lets be clear. EVERY child death is a tragedy and we should strive to prevent it.
However, the argument around preventing deaths in children due to COVID, without considering this objectively, is heavily flawed and emotive.
1/n
6
12
86
Worth mentioning that in the UK we almost certainly reached crossover point no later than the last couple of days - i.e. more infections are now from one of the various variants with key mutations than from BA.5 without mutations.
1/n
5
31
83
Why has COVID Twitter suddenly become "let's ignore the denominator" twitter
8
2
83
So...now that monkeypox cases have dropped like a stone outside Africa, I'm assuming all those that were super concerned about school spread etc but have moved onto ebola are ok with it now it's mainly in lower income countries?
Just checking I've got that right.
9
6
82
Well, this has certainly sent the remnants of COVID Twitter into a tailspin.
(TL;DR - does need to be monitored closely, which is exactly what's happening, but there's basically zero indication of this being a novel virus or "indication of immune damage" from COVID)
10
10
81
In a bit of a pivot, I am going to occasionally start tweeting about a subject I am passionate about -
#ADHD
, and in particular Adult ADHD.
This is an incredibly poorly understood condition outside of specialists in the field.
This thread will explain what it actually is. 🧵
5
11
82
This is probably the first *real* set of mutations to keep an eye on for quite a while.
This is a pretty big jump in sheer distance from currently circulating variants and has some clear signs of transmission.
Two more sequences of this 2nd-generation BA.2 lineage just showed up in Denmark. This is the real deal. There are slight differences between the three sequences, but they are nearly identical. Below is my preliminary summary of the mutations it has on top of BA.2. 1/2
36
289
976
3
16
82
Or perhaps some of the "minimisers" have urged objectivity rather than sensationalism exactly because avian flu (and other things) pose a far larger risk moving forward.
4
6
79
This is madness.
Fur farms are effectively large machines for mutating novel avian flu into novel mammalian flu: a big jump in the direction of humans.
The Finnish authorities recognise this, so have decided to clos… no [checks notes] keep them open? But [checks notes again] kill all the birds?
6
106
243
3
22
80
And a more specific *revision* of a Pfizer study that shows basically zero waning Vs severe disease.
5
8
77
1500 measles reports in 2023.
Double that of 2022.
PLEASE vaccinate your children against measles.
I had genuinely never seen a child with measles in my paediatrics career until 2 weeks ago and I’ve seen multiple every day since.
Not a single one in a child who had their MMR (even just first dose if not old enough for their preschool booster yet).
Vaccinate your children!
392
3K
20K
3
20
80
@Julesisbusy
@BenKentish
@dylanjonesa
So... Boris Johnson refused to perform easy work and got paid for it, and Kier starmer performed difficult work he probably didn't want to do but knew he had to as a professional responsibility?
I agree, I do like that anecdote.
0
0
76
Data has dried up because of this. The reality of today is that people will have COVID infections, likely several a decade, but this is no longer a significant health issue for most individuals. And the discourse remaining is just enormous echo chambering and tedious tbh.
4
1
77
I think as we come to the tail end of the JN.1 wave, there are some interesting observations and discussions to have, bit of a combo of data and anecdata here.
2
17
78
It is, to be frank, a disgrace that EFD continues to be able to spread his ridiculous brand of misinformation masquerading as an "expert".
This expert must be confusing me with someone else, I was the one that raised the alarm on Omicron and got it recognized as a Variant of Concern by the WHO and the world, never mentioned in any of our scientific and peer review results that Omicron was mild. But still stand by
90
56
479
4
6
78
My ire is reserved for those who prey upon the cautious. Those who are determined for power, glory, clicks, to continue to portray COVID as a threat individually that it quite simply is not.
This is (being kind) unethical.
3
10
76
As a parting shot on the COVID topic, I would implore people to be:
- more critical of information
- more empathetic to each other
- more open to genuine discussion and being open to change views
None of this is happening now in COVID twitter. Simply a race to the bottom.
1
8
76
Well hello ONS!
New data release (*EXPERIMENTAL*) from ONS on estimated *incidence* of LC following first infection AND reinfection.
11
13
76
@sailorrooscout
Very welcome.
I think there are plenty of genuine things to be *concerned* (not, IMHO, fearful) of around COVID.
But this is really not an article founded in fact, and we shouldn't be scaring people without VERY strong evidence.
6
3
73
Not an overall surprising finding (the more sensible of us have been saying this for months) but the scale of protection shown here surprises even me.
However, omicron infections provide very strong protection against a further omicron infection. This recent test-negative study found hybrid immunity (vax+omicron) gave 96% protection against further omicron infection!
8/8
16
28
137
8
12
73
If they were "ineffective", in England we would currently have around 15000 people hospitalised per day.
If they were "60% effective", it would be around 6000 per day.
Current daily average...450 (around 65% of which are incidental).
Dont mindlessly circulate lies.
9
11
73