that a few Nate silver tweets changed what the ACIP did???? paging team health care journalism @HelenBranswell @emilyakopp etc. can't believe that would be true.
-
-
-
Replying to @HelenBranswell @Noahpinion and
Brendan Nyhan Retweeted Noah Smith 🐇
clarification; what about this?https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1340836278846144514?s=20 …
Brendan Nyhan added,
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @BrendanNyhan @HelenBranswell and
Of course it had no impact. (I talked and wrote about it before Yglesias did; my blog piece isn't paywalled and, no, it had no impact; neither mine nor Matt's. The age prioritization topic was very much already on the agenda; Germany and UK just came out with recs; WHO had recs).
1 reply 3 retweets 81 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @BrendanNyhan and
I mean, I think these are important topics and deserve public scrutiny and discussion broadly, but it wasn't a few blog posts the day before the ACIP meeting that had any impact, and Helen is right. That said, now states will be doing their own thing so the topic needs attention.
1 reply 1 retweet 49 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @BrendanNyhan and
You don't think public exposure and scrutiny affected their decision-making process at all? According to
@halvorz the the public debate was alluded to at the meeting, and@Neoavatara says they were monitoring it.5 replies 0 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @Noahpinion @zeynep and
I don't think most of us read your initial tweet as referring to all public debate and exposure of any kind (this seems like a truism; how could we say it had no effect?). it was read more narrowly in light of recent events.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BrendanNyhan @zeynep and
I saw people arguing about an issue; the issue seemed to be resolved satisfactorily. My instinct is that there was at least some causality there, but even if not, I think the outcome is good, so I'm happy.
4 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @Noahpinion @BrendanNyhan and
The problem/challenge was prominent enough that there was a NYT article weeks ago. Also, there is still a lot of vagueness in the guidelines (which came out in committee questions) so I don't think we've heard the last of this topic at all.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/05/health/covid-vaccine-first.html …
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @Noahpinion and
"all voting members of the committee indicated support for putting essential workers ahead of people 65 and older." Something changed their minds. Have any guess as to what?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It’s been a month of intense discussion. Papers came out. CDC has people/debates. Other countries came out with recommendations. Governors were speaking out. Etc. It wasn’t the last few days.
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.