Thread by @balajis

Incredible.

Last week I called out a journalist who I thought was writing a piece that would be a disservice to public health.

Unfortunately, my concerns proved well-founded. Recode’s virus piece ignores WHO & CDC, gets the science wrong…and focuses on handshakes!

Thread: 🧵

As context:

- WHO has declared a global public health emergency
- Director of Mayo Clinic vaccine research: "basically at a pandemic now"
- CDC: virus may “take a foothold in the US”
- Fmr FDA commissioner: pandemic "likely"

That’s the grave reality of the current situation.

But this isn't reflected in the article. Instead it has:

- clickbait lede
- wrong science
- author w/o domain expertise
- bad faith request for comment
- outrage at assuming bad faith
- article that proves assumption of bad faith right!

See for yourself: archive.is/EPGK6

The article contains many statements that are false or omit so much context they mislead readers. Let's go claim by claim.

RECODE:
"cases...have been contained to those who have recently traveled to Wuhan and their direct family members"

FACT CHECK:
False, according to CDC/WHO

RECODE:
"chances are...low that you would come into contact at work or in a public setting"

CONTEXT:
- Confirmed transmission at conferences
- One person spread to N people
- Hundreds quarantined due to 1 attendee
- Major conference canceled
- Contagion means risk is increasing

RECODE:
"reducing handshakes...not specifically [recommended] for coronavirus"

FACT CHECK:
False, according to CDC

"Human coronaviruses most commonly spread from an infected person to others through...close personal contact, such as touching or shaking hands"

RECODE:
fecal transmission "still unclear"

CONTEXT:
- Related SARS virus spread through feces at Amoy Gardens
- Infected 300+ people, 42 deaths
- #SARSCoV2 has been discovered in feces
- Patients have diarrhea
- Multiple scientists now implicate fecal transmission

RECODE:
Quotes non-med/biotech expert on "paranoid fear about disease"

CONTEXT:
"Zuckerberg SF General is prepared with 50 isolation rooms that will keep patients from transmitting the virus to others."

"hospital staff plans to treat patients while wearing protective gear"

RECODE:
Implies Beijing has no outbreak, and that virus is distant and far away

FACT CHECK:
False, 370+ cases in Beijing according to JHU dashboard

Also, NPR reports Beijing is building another 1000-bed instant hospital to prepare for predicted uptick in coronavirus cases.

RECODE:
Implies it's paranoid to cancel Lunar New Year to prevent contagion

CONTEXT:
Wuhan: wanted to cancel events
New York: canceled events
Miami: canceled events

If Wuhan, NYC, Miami all wanted to cancel events…shouldn’t SF have done so out of abundance of caution?

RECODE:
Quotes SF officials assuring people of "no public health risk" without challenging them

CONTEXT:
- SF strewn with feces, urine, syringes
- NPR: SF like "dirtiest slums in the world"
- Berkeley prof: "once fecal matter dries it can become airborne releasing viruses"

RECODE:
Implies #covid2019 only "scary" to "public" because "new"

CONTEXT:
Omits
- NEJM, Lancet papers on sheer severity
- Caijing’s courageous reporting on severity
- Math of tail risk for a pandemic
- Fact that many qualified PhDs/MDs, both in SV & outside, have voiced concern

RECODE:
Implies flu is a "greater threat"

CONTEXT:
Omits
- Columbia's Ian Lipkin: "I reject that soundly"
- 100X increase in Chinese cases in 3 weeks [JHU]
- 100X increase in *non*-Chinese cases in 3 weeks [JHU]
- Again, pandemic threat is based on math of tail risk

RECODE:
Calls tech "terrified" and "paranoid"

CONTEXT:
Omits in-depth discussion of:
- Sheer scale of Chinese quarantine
- Hospitalization & fatality rates
- Contagiousness estimates
- 100X growth in non-China cases across 25+ countries
- Confirmed transmission at conferences

RECODE:
Also does not discuss:

- tech the Chinese are using to fight virus
- hardware implications of supply chain disruption
- what biotech is doing: antivirals, vaccines, diagnostics

This obvious omission was *also* predicted in advance!

https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1225862128168570887

It's 2000+ words. I could go on. But there's a point.

- I assumed bad faith, as I had context
- Not just on this piece, but on tech journalism in 2020
- Some lacked context & didn't understand why I called it out

But as you can see, it was indeed a piece about handshakes!

Why was I right? Contra one comment, I’m not a psychic. I just have a mental model that correctly predicts the actions of many tech journalists.

The sad truth is they are incentivized to produce clickbait. This is partly tech's fault too: social media created these incentives.

Again, this article is something of a rubicon for tech journalism, as it crosses the line into a hazard to public health.

More later, but for now:
- Take virus seriously, WHO/CDC are
- Don’t take unserious journalists seriously
- And avoid handshakes!

🙏

https://twitter.com/pmarca/status/1227471118233219072

CITATIONS

Twitter didn't have space to link these inline, but I compiled all the references in this thread into a Medium post.

Here it is!
medium.com/@balajis/citat…

BACKGROUND

I'm not big on credentialism. Need multidisciplinary effort vs virus. But since some deem it relevant, my bio:

- Taught bioinformatics at Stanford
- Papers in clinical/microbial genomics
- MIT TR35
- Cofounder/CTO of biotech co sold for $375M
technologyreview.com/lists/innovato…