Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
GidMK's profile
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Verified account
@GidMK

Tweets

Health NerdVerified account

@GidMK

Epidemiologist. Writer (Guardian, Observer etc). "Well known research trouble-maker". PhDing at @UoW Host of @senscipod Email gidmk.healthnerd@gmail.com he/him

Sydney, New South Wales
theguardian.com/profile/gideon…
Joined November 2015

Tweets

  • © 2021 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

      I find this immensely frustrating There is actually not really any evidence at all that serology surveys are 'flawed' or 'dramatically underestimate' how many people have had COVID-19 Sighpic.twitter.com/Q8yWz2FHgV

      11 replies 46 retweets 157 likes
      Show this thread
    2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

      This headline is based on an editorial in the BMJ. So, firstly, not a study per se, this is a few academics' opinions about something (granted, they sound very clever) https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3364 …pic.twitter.com/wIzrFeYFWg

      2 replies 2 retweets 16 likes
      Show this thread
    3. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

      Thing is, the editorial is, well, pretty speculative. They are certainly not making any hard claims here, just raising the potential possibility that serology tests are missing mild/asymptomatic cases of COVID-19pic.twitter.com/9rhxGLoZxo

      1 reply 1 retweet 14 likes
      Show this thread
    4. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

      But even there, I actually disagree with the authors of this editorial quite a bit For example, they cite a study conducted in Luxembourg as evidence that IgA serology tests would pick up more people than the more commonly-used IgGpic.twitter.com/HtclbPwXvd

      1 reply 1 retweet 11 likes
      Show this thread
      Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

      This sounded odd to me, because I've read that Luxembourg paper - it's in my review - and I couldn't remember it making this argument Because it doesn't, really

      10:38 PM - 3 Sep 2020
      • 1 Retweet
      • 16 Likes
      • Arch-Physicist 😷 #ZeroCovid James Pitt Luna Guffy Ian Morris Tom Jim Captain Science PhD 🔰Georgist🔰 Economic Pervert ✊💦
      1 reply 1 retweet 16 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

          In fact, the Luxembourg paper DID find that more people had IgA responses than IgG responses, but this was expected because the IgA test WAS NOT AS GOOD The specificity was VERY low for just IgA, meaning there were many false positivespic.twitter.com/Hc64LUyUsD

          1 reply 1 retweet 18 likes
          Show this thread
        3. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

          In fact, if you correct for test characteristics, you find that the IgA test predicts a seroprevalence of ~1% Not that different after all!

          2 replies 1 retweet 14 likes
          Show this thread
        4. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

          Another study the authors cite as supportive of the idea that seroprevalence studies are missing loads of patients is this Austrian study that found a seroprevalence of 42% in an outbreak locationpic.twitter.com/SmByKNqUwS

          1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes
          Show this thread
        5. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

          The authors of the editorial say that this is a red flag, because other serosurveys of Austria have found lower seroprevalence but used only IgG testing, so it's the IgA tests that are pushing up this number (and therefore many IgG-only studies are wrong)pic.twitter.com/doJEoeC8Cw

          1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
          Show this thread
        6. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

          Except, this doesn't make any sense whatsoever The seroprevalence in Ischgl was 42% because it was the epicenter of the entire COVID-19 outbreak in Austria and indeed Europe!pic.twitter.com/Y1vN1OonqX

          1 reply 0 retweets 14 likes
          Show this thread
        7. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

          Moreover, if you actually look at the IgA vs IgG positives in the study, you'll see that there are only a tiny fraction (~4%) who are IgA positive but not IgG positive Completely contradicting the editorial 👀pic.twitter.com/s1LF2DXFoE

          1 reply 1 retweet 12 likes
          Show this thread
        8. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

          So, the evidence that this editorial cites in favor of its argument appears to completely contradict the main point, which is...not great And yet, reported as fact As I said, sigh

          1 reply 2 retweets 16 likes
          Show this thread
        9. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 3 Sep 2020

          More broadly, we know that the antibody tests for COVID-19 are pretty good, and probably don't miss a huge proportion of people who have actually had the disease https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m2516 …pic.twitter.com/O5vRLc0yY8

          1 reply 5 retweets 24 likes
          Show this thread
        10. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 4 Sep 2020

          I wrote this up in a rapid response to the article which has now been publishedhttps://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3364/rapid-responses …

          3 replies 6 retweets 32 likes
          Show this thread
        11. End of conversation

      Loading seems to be taking a while.

      Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2021 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info