And the ACIP defenders are really not reassuring me that they're thinking about it very hard when their responses are "oh you think the principles ACIP is using to decide how to distribute the vaccine makes no sense? Guess you hate clean water"https://twitter.com/gregggonsalves/status/1340610188324298753?s=20 …
-
Show this thread
-
Trevor Retweeted
And since ACIP itself is now moving towards Silver's suggestion, it seems like his content wasn't that bad, so people are really just responding to the audacity of (at least plausibly *correctly*) criticizing the vaunted experts. Seems bad https://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/status/1340700662271754241?s=20 …
Trevor added,
This Tweet is unavailable.4 replies 12 retweets 265 likesShow this thread -
If I wanted to go truly galaxy-brain, I might say that while libs were obviously right about the sexism and ludicrousness of Dr. Jill-gate, the length and intensity of the reaction has resulted from this same credentialist fixation...but I don't want to go galaxy-brainpic.twitter.com/bEW3CqzZsB
4 replies 6 retweets 131 likesShow this thread -
Trevor Retweeted
Lol like the actual logical conclusion of this tweet would be "but I don't criticize the CIA" https://twitter.com/rgay/status/1340552339279626242?s=20 …
Trevor added,
This Tweet is unavailable.2 replies 4 retweets 198 likesShow this thread -
Trevor Retweeted
Also this is a terrible comparison—the reason this is such a bad idea in finance is that your competitors have massive incentives to get it right. If we mis-prioritize vaccination and 10,000 more people die, what exactly happens to individual ACIP members?https://twitter.com/mikeandallie/status/1340474677081366528 …
Trevor added,
This Tweet is unavailable.4 replies 6 retweets 156 likesShow this thread -
Trevor Retweeted Daniel Eth 💡
Just saw that
@daniel_eth already made this pointhttps://twitter.com/daniel_eth/status/1340544477061111810?s=20 …Trevor added,
Daniel Eth 💡 @daniel_ethReplying to @mikeandallieThis is probably true in finance because there's a somewhat self-correcting, truth-seeking market, which means "obvious-to-outsider gains" should have already been eaten up. There's no similar mechanism in epidemiology (or for the vast majority of jobs, for that matter).1 reply 1 retweet 91 likesShow this thread -
On pins and needles for when this thread is going to get QT'd into less friendly territory lol
5 replies 0 retweets 77 likesShow this thread -
Some good critical responses to this have noted a few things. 1) that Nate did get several things wrong about ACIP's work, 2) that much of the focus was on his bombast and arrogance. My only response is: those are both good things to criticize him for. But:
2 replies 0 retweets 34 likesShow this thread -
Much of the criticism *was* in fact naked credentialism. I quote a couple examples above, and that's what inspired the thread in the first place. I don't want to defend everything Nate said; I just want to push back on the idea that non-PhDs need to shut up about public policy
6 replies 3 retweets 98 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @trevorjtweets
Some of this is Twitter distortions. Claim was incorrect: me, him and Matt were absolutely not the only ones looking at the data or pushing back. Otoh, circling the wagons & stay in your lane is much more common on Twitter than among really excellent, top people in these fields.
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes
But people are really tired, nerves are shot, and public health experts really are under a lot of strain and attack. So it makes it more difficult to try to have these discussions discussions.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep
All of this is true no doubt—I guess I had in mind the general blowback from Twitter at large, rather than from the field even: *non-epidemiologists* basically saying "shut up, you're not an epidemiologist." Sorta disturbing since, as you said, the public should feel comfortable
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @trevorjtweets
Yes also it’s a complete misunderstanding of the situation. Dunking on Nate Silver does nothing to put this genie back in the bottle. The field has to fight for public trust, and in my view they are, broadly speaking, misreading the situation.
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes - Show replies
New 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.