zeynep tufekciVerified account

@zeynep

Complex systems, wicked problems. Society, technology, science and more. professor. columnist. My newsletter is :

floating in a most peculiar way
theinsight.org
Joined August 2009
5,066 Photos and videos Photos and videos

Tweets

You blocked @zeynep

Are you sure you want to view these Tweets? Viewing Tweets won't unblock @zeynep

  1. Pinned Tweet
    20 Oct 2020

    I'm launching a newsletter, called . I want to try to create a space for thinking deeply about complex, thorny but important puzzles, along with a community. Something between public writing and social media: some of both but neither. Sign up here:

    121 replies 536 retweets 3,363 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  2. Retweeted
    3 hours ago

    How you think about the problems, determines the kind of solutions you offer. poor philosophy -> poor outcome

    Are you confused about the zigzagging CDC messaging on rapid tests? I wish the CDC would consult with Dr. Walensky circa 2020, who explained it brilliantly. This CDC seems to be hoping you figure things out by yourself, and good luck finding a test. New:
    Show this thread
    1 reply 10 retweets 35 likes
    Undo
  3. 2 hours ago

    I really like the ones with foam around the nose, like 3M's Aura N95 line. They sell for $20ish for 10 and are available at Home Depot etc. I find them comfortable. Also this isn't just about me: I put them on *especially* if I'm around anyone high-risk.

    Replying to @zeynep
    Can you name a few masks with good seals that don't fog up glasses? Ty!
    14 replies 6 retweets 103 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  4. 3 hours ago

    Comment from Dr. Paltiel, co-author with Dr. Walensky of this article I talk about from September 2020 about the value of rapid antigen tests for identifying infectious people, and reasons to prefer them over PCR for public health.

    asks: "Might the real reason be that rapid tests are hard to find and expensive?" Of course! Shame on the White House: first for not owning its failure to invest in antigen tests; and second for scapegoating/forcing CDC to make policy around it.
    6 replies 12 retweets 59 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  5. 4 hours ago

    Aka if your particle is going faster than light, check your cables first, and if you are arguing "what if better is worse", check your thinking and do some more research before doubling down.

    Replying to @murchiston @avizvizenilman
    Zeynep's law: Until there is substantial and repeated evidence otherwise, assume counterintuitive findings to be false, and second-order effects to be dwarfed by first-order ones in magnitude.
    8 replies 19 retweets 110 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  6. 4 hours ago

    I want to highlight 's great article on White House rejecting proposals to get a lot of rapid tests. Some reportedly worried it would discourage vaccination. This. Makes. No. Sense. One can find a few examples, but that's irrelevant.

    4 replies 31 retweets 126 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  7. Retweeted
    6 hours ago

    Why I tell people to get an Ag test rather than PCR, particularly if they’re vaccinated:

    Are you confused about the zigzagging CDC messaging on rapid tests? I wish the CDC would consult with Dr. Walensky circa 2020, who explained it brilliantly. This CDC seems to be hoping you figure things out by yourself, and good luck finding a test. New:
    Show this thread
    7 replies 27 retweets 81 likes
    Undo
  8. Retweeted
    5 hours ago

    Being honest about scarcity is a better policy than pretending the scarce resources are less useful than they are

    CDC can’t recommend antigen tests if they remain in such short supply. How elitist would it look if the only people who could follow federal guidance were well-heeled Ivy League colleges and individuals with enough disposable income to stockpile?
    Show this thread
    7 replies 108 retweets 461 likes
    Undo
  9. 6 hours ago

    And here's on all this for .

    0:56
    . breaks down the CDC's updated isolation guidance: “I think they should have just told the truth.”
    4 replies 48 retweets 211 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  10. 6 hours ago

    It's 2022! Disappointed with the "masks aren't useful for you because we don't have them" vibes around rapid tests, and CDC justifying it by saying tests would provide "a false sense of security". Denying tools to the public with a claim they'd otherwise be reckless isn't okay.

    14 replies 105 retweets 375 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  11. 6 hours ago

    Are you confused about the zigzagging CDC messaging on rapid tests? I wish the CDC would consult with Dr. Walensky circa 2020, who explained it brilliantly. This CDC seems to be hoping you figure things out by yourself, and good luck finding a test. New:

    38 replies 310 retweets 1,045 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  12. Retweeted
    Jan 4

    A recent MMWR which analyzed more than 40,000 pregnancies, adds to the evidence that COVID-19 vaccination is safe during pregnancy. If you’re pregnant or thinking of getting pregnant, get vaccinated against Covid-19.

    22 replies 210 retweets 534 likes
    Undo
  13. Jan 4

    This is a good idea, especially if there are infants in the household. Viral respiratory illnesses can especially be challenging to that age group. Not sure why this isn't sinking in—we'd be worried if millions of RSV cases were sweeping through as well.

    Replying to @zeynep
    100% agree but my prior is parents are running on fumes rather than presumed anti-vaxxers. "hey, did you know there's a vaccine? you should give it to your kids" is less useful than "is there anything i can do to help logistically, e.g. look after baby, make appointment, etc."
    1 reply 8 retweets 71 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  14. Jan 4

    To remind them of the impact of vaccines, you can urge them to read biographies of people in 19th century and before—very common for families to lose multiple young children to viral illnesses. Then show them this chart on why this is no longer common.

    6 replies 38 retweets 142 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  15. Jan 4

    Many have been doing [frustrated] outreach to un/under-vaccinated elderly relatives. But let me flag. It's a good time to urge parents you know to vaccinate their eligible kids. Not too late. Even one dose will confer some protection, and dampen transmission chains as well.

    26 replies 58 retweets 332 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  16. Jan 4

    Okay, one-and-done. I'm all good with actual objections and criticisms, and I tend to ignore deliberate trolling (I get the game) but just needed it put the correction out there since "reporter" claim and blue check.😀

    5 replies 2 retweets 83 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  17. Jan 4

    Also, this is the article in May of 28, when Delta wasn't even named Delta, warning about it, with the very subtle headline the reporter could not read?

    5 replies 2 retweets 54 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  18. Jan 4

    Oh, yeah, forgot my July article in that same obscure paper reporter could not find, *before* the Provincetown paper or CDC finally responding to Delta, calling for vaccine mandates as appropriate and other precautions given Delta's threat.

    4 replies 4 retweets 58 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  19. Jan 4

    And here's my "backlash" to their reaction to Delta, from my article in that obscure outlet the reporter could not find, pointing out that there had been many technical papers already showing transmission among the vaccinated—and no need to wait for the Provincetown paper.

    3 replies 4 retweets 72 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  20. Jan 4

    Amazing. No issues, you could criticize me for being too alarmist on Delta or something, or on any actual paper or position I wrote, but one thinks someone identifying as a *reporter* can bother, you know, looking it up as the New York Times isn't exactly obscure.

    4 replies 2 retweets 115 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo
  21. Jan 4

    Except I wrote one of the earliest articles—hard to miss, in the New York Times—warning about Delta *in May* and my criticism in July was that they were *too late* to react, given UK & Singapore data, and did not need the Provincetown study, without even contact tracing, to act.

    Revisiting media coverage of the Provincetown study over the summer showing transmission in vaccinated people. Remember how fierce the backlash was from the White House and popular Twitter personalities like & ?
    4 replies 19 retweets 220 likes
    Show this thread
    Show this thread
    Undo

@zeynep hasn't Tweeted yet.

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.

    You may also like

    ·