Great thread by Adam as ever on transmission risk. I want to highlight what we collectively do around at risk people, mainly people >60 old, in particular >70, obese, male over Christmas.
Adding to transmission levels overall will be bad news but can be buffered elsewhere in the system. Eg regions in Tier 2 might move up to Tier 3. But infections to at risk people run a serious chance of irreversible impact of hospitalisation and very possibly death
(base line numbers >70 is around ~5% chance of dieing if infected; this goes up if you are overweight and if you are male. It is a serious, appreciable chance).
So - these are grandparents in effect, and I think we'd be better of with them "visiting on one specific day" over Christmas, ideally minimising overnights. Winter walks outside, all wrapped up, thermos of hot chocolate and choccy biccies will be good.
A friend of mine reminded me "I can't help thinking of the parallel of the time between the signing of the Armistice in WW1 at 05:45 and it coming into effect at 11:00 on 11 November 1918 during which time there were 10,944 casualties of whom 2,738 died."
The distance from Christmas to vaccination may not be 5 hours 15 mins, but for these at risk groups it will be very short. Loving our parents (or grandparents) means helping them get to that point.
Christmas 2021 will be a celebration; Transpose Christmas to Epiphany 2021 or mid-summer as the Scandis do; skype, hangout and zoom and send love.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There are some good and bad hot takes about the Oxford/AZ vaccine going around - I'd like to add my view which I hope is more light than heat.
Context: I am not a clinical trials expert, (rather a computational biologist / genomics expert) and I have an interest because I am trials participant in the Oxford/AZ trial.
The headache in this trial reporting is that a dosing error/operational change made a different dosing regieme which looks more effective. This has complicated analysis, reporting and communication.
More musings on human genetics and race, but this time from a personal level to explain I think the different ways people "think about" racism and their role in it.
In this thread I am going to be critical about how many people think about broad structural racism/unconscious bias, but I will do this via critiquing my younger self, as it is super-hard to do this broadly without offending people; I can own offending myself :)
In my 20s I spent a fair bit of time in America and considered myself reasonably cool and trendy - worked hard at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories, partied hard in NYC and Harvard, where I had friends.
The ... level of self belief on Twitter is quite remarkable and apparently I don’t know much about the human genome or genetics. That’s me told ...
More seriously, conversations about ethnicity and race are loaded because it is both a big active part of many societies and discourse - most obviously US but many western countries (UK included of course) and >>
<< for many people this is a key part of their identity. There are shallow issues here -it is far too easy to use words that mean different things or for people to read strong motivational stances or inferences into statements
Another evergreen reminder - ethnicity (or "race") is a process of self identification, often ticking a set of boxes, or gestalt assessment using visible characteristics of people (skin colour, hair type, clothes) by others. It is *not* a good representation of anyone's genetics.
The collapsing of ethnicity or race concepts as some sort of crude readout of genetics is plain wrong.
We can sometimes go the other way - genetic measurements in some places can predict the ethnicity box you will tick on a form - but we definitely can't predict your genetics from the box you tick.
A reminder and perspective on this COVID, mid November.
(context: I am an expert in genetics/genomics and computational biology research; I know experts in a variety of other domains; I have a COI as I am a long established consultant to Oxford Nanopore, which makes a new COVID test, LamPORE).
As ever, it is good to start with the overall perspective - SARS_CoV_2 is an infectious human virus which causes a nasty disease for a subset of people, often leading to death.
Vaccine safety thread - briefing to journalists as much as anyone else as ever, and an offer.
Vaccines are safe. They are safe principally because of the extensive and multiple testing that happens before they are licensed, and that ultimately is due to 100,000s of people who volunteer for trials to assess and quantify safety. I am a scientist and one of these volunteers
"Safe" here of course can never mean never - strange things happen in life, healthcare and biology and like many things we do in life - crossing roads, going biking, drinking wine - we have constantly do things which are safe but have some small risk of something going wrong.