Health Nerd Profile picture
2 Dec, 7 tweets, 2 min read
The important thing to remember is that (outside of a trial) REPORTED side-effects are common. Side-effects LINKED TO THE VACCINE are much less so
Worth clarifying here that what I mean is that there will undoubtedly be many reports of problems that people have following vaccination - this is NORMAL
It's just the law of large numbers at work. If enough people are given a vaccine, sooner or later one of them will be, say, hit by a car shortly after

The question is whether this is related to the vaccine or not!
Now, we know that common/minor things, like headaches, probably are

We've excluded common/severe things, like heart attacks, in the trials

But what about rare/severe?
Well, we've tested enough people that even rare/severe things are extremely unlikely. But there will almost certainly be very rare side-effects that can't be captured even with 10,000s of people
If something only happens 1 in a million times, it's hard to pick it up in even the biggest trial

What this means is that there will be some issues that we only find out about once the vaccine has been rolled out
This is what Phase 4 (post-license) studies are all about. To sort out whether the things that happen to people after getting vaccinated are related to the vaccine or not

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Health Nerd

Health Nerd Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @GidMK

3 Dec
Ugh both the headline and the study it's based on are...pretty dubious

Let's look at some science on twitter 1/n Image
2/n Paper is here, it's really your bog-standard epidemiological study. The authors took a large database of people who had tested positive to COVID-19 and compared them to people who hadn't in Israel
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
3/n The two groups were different in loads of ways. However, after putting all the variables into a statistical model, they found that asthma appeared to still be significantly connected to risk of COVID-19! Image
Read 14 tweets
27 Nov
Wow. Yet another ecological paper on COVID-19 that appears to have some astonishing flaws

Let's do a bit of peer-review on twitter 1/n
2/n Paper is here. Basically, the authors took total COVID-19 mortality in a range of countries by August 31st and correlated them with country-level metrics such as average BMI frontiersin.org/articles/10.33…
3/n The authors found that country-level metrics compiled by the University of Oxford on the stringency of lockdowns did not correlate well with the number of deaths that a country experienced from COVID-19, but other things like BMI and latitude did
Read 18 tweets
25 Nov
This is actually an excellent point that is not made often enough. Most vaccine trials are done over years, so they have smaller numbers because more people get infected. The COVID-19 trials are VAST
We won't pick up on any long-term side-effects that only take place after 6-12 months, of course, because of the shorter time frame

Still, the trials are pretty amazing
Worth noting here that when I say "long-term" I really mean "only diagnosed after 6 months". By the time vaccines are rolled out, we'll have at least 6 months of follow-up data so anything that you'd expect to be picked up in that time-frame should show some signal
Read 5 tweets
25 Nov
I added some very useful context

Tests take a short time to be recorded as cases. Cases take a while to go to hospital and then be recorded. Deaths take weeks to appear in the stats

The deaths reported today represent people who got sick ~3-6 weeks ago 😬
The corollary, of course, is that we won't see deaths attributable to the enormous rise in cases for another few weeks, and that hospitalizations from the record-breaking days of new cases are still coming in
This is all very rough, and since @COVID19Tracking aggregates all the different states there's a lot of variance. Different places report differently!
Read 4 tweets
25 Nov
A really fascinating paper looking at contact tracing in England that provides some convincing evidence that testing/tracing reduces infections and deaths

warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/econom…
The authors used the now-famous Excel spreadsheet stuff-up to perform a quasi-experimental analysis of whether places where no contacts were traced had higher levels of infections

They did
The estimates imply that, for every case that was not traced, there were an additional 25 cases down the track
Read 5 tweets
25 Nov
In the dissection of the Year That Was COVID-19, one of the most depressing failures will probably be the vast, almost uncountable sums we've spent proving over and over that HCQ doesn't work
Glad that these results are getting published, but it's still astonishing just how much effort we threw behind a single drug despite many early indications that it was a red herring
We should never really have been in a situation where, simply because it was popular, most of the urgently needed research funds (and patients) went to research a single medication
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!