I have too, but I have to say most virologists/immunologists/vaccinologists/ID epis/ID physicians I've seen take pains to get this right. They can be misquoted, which is also a problem. It's hard to explain that PRNT50 assays don't translate to functional immunity.
-
-
Replying to @angie_rasmussen @notdred and
zeynep tufekci Retweeted WebMD
Yeah. Example of what many ordinary people are seeing. I mean, sure, let's not let this @#!! freely explore the full fitness landscape through an unchecked epidemic—and we have boosters in the works—but what on earth? (It comes from an ill-sampled survey).https://twitter.com/WebMD/status/1377417935703052292 …
zeynep tufekci added,
1 reply 0 retweets 19 likes -
I especially loathe the trend of polling a non-random sample of (insert experts here) and presenting it as if it's a reliable forecast of what's to come. Certainly new variants are a possibility, but that's not set in stone. We can do something about that!
2 replies 1 retweet 28 likes -
Replying to @angie_rasmussen @zeynep and
This would be much more productive if we focused messaging on the actions we can take to mitigate the risk of new variants emerging: reduce transmission, increase immunization.
2 replies 1 retweet 36 likes -
Replying to @angie_rasmussen @zeynep and
And I am very suspicious of the actual expertise of anyone who thinks variants will evolve that can completely circumvent the totality of the immune response next month/quarter/year.
5 replies 10 retweets 92 likes -
Replying to @angie_rasmussen @notdred and
Yep! I don't like the "I'll that bet" things, because it seems like a stunt, but I'd take a five figure bet (for a global health charity of anyone's choice) against the prediction variants making vaccines "ineffective" (circumventing totality of immune response) in the next year.
1 reply 1 retweet 59 likes -
Same. And even if that were to somehow happen, defying *checks notes* the entire history of vaccines, we can easily make boosters. While there is a bit of a problem with minimizing variant concerns as well, the idea that this would happen before we could respond is not realistic.
6 replies 1 retweet 71 likes -
Replying to @angie_rasmussen @zeynep and
I've been trying to convey the concept of correlates of protection, which we haven't defined yet for these vaccines. Because antibody neutralization is generally important, people treat it as if it's an established correlate of protection. It's not. But hard to explain.
2 replies 1 retweet 25 likes -
Replying to @angie_rasmussen @notdred and
I haven't watched the segment & maybe the discussion was more nuanced, but I'd really hope that we're not "a little more" mutation away from losing effective vaccines and having vaccines that "no longer work"? This claim is not uncommon on traditional media as far as I can tell.pic.twitter.com/pdcLhAmFpy
4 replies 1 retweet 16 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @angie_rasmussen and
Disappointing. It’s good to promote continued NPI while we give vaccination a chance to get this under control, but this seems overly fear-inducing and not evidence-based.
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes
Yeah. I just kinda joked on an another thread, I'm very much "Ms. Red Team for Tail Risk" and they lost me. I have far more realistic terrible scenarios such as "we have effective vaccines and rich countries get most of them while everyone else suffers greatly for another year+".
-
-
Replying to @ClancyNeil @zeynep and
Part of the problem here is doubling down on the “if we don’t control the disease we’ll get ever-worsening variants” message.
1 reply 0 retweets 8 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.