Share this page!

Katherine J. Wu, Ph.D. Profile picture
Twitter logo
31 Dec 20, 4 tweets, 1 min read
Spouse got his first dose of Moderna's vaccine today! His arm's sore and he's a bit tired and not feeling 100%, but that's not a worry at all — it's evidence that his immune system is already hard at work. 1/ Image
Protection takes energy and effort and I'm proud to say his body is rising to the challenge.

He got the vaccine this morning, so right now we can expect that his cells are starting to churn out some spike protein. Spike is not infectious and it can't cause Covid. 2/
But those proteins will teach a cadre of immune cells to recognize one of the coronavirus's most salient features. That way, if the real virus comes around, his body will recognize it and marshal forces to keep him from getting sick.

It's pretty incredible stuff. 3/
Spouse is headed back for dose 2 in 4 weeks so he can get full protection. This vaccine will not be changing either of our practices around masking or distancing.

But because he's feeling a bit sluggish, we're administering cats and repeating as necessary. 4/4

• • •

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

Keep Current with Katherine J. Wu, Ph.D.

Katherine J. Wu, Ph.D. 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 @KatherineJWu

Katherine J. Wu, Ph.D. Profile picture
1 Jan
It's 2021! Time for a crash course in four terms that I often see mixed up when people talk about testing: sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value.

These terms help us talk about how accurate a test is, but from different viewpoints. 1/
Viewpoint 1 is about the status of the person taking the test. Are they infected, or not infected? How good is the test at identifying these people? That's sensitivity/specificity. 2/
A test that is very *sensitive* will be very good at accurately identifying people who are infected.

A test that is very *specific* will be very good at accurately ruling out infection in people who are not infected. 3/
Read 13 tweets
Katherine J. Wu, Ph.D. Profile picture
23 Dec 20
Tests don't stop when you get your result. Think about the circumstances under which you took that test — they could really influence how you interpret what that test tells you. 1/

nytimes.com/2020/12/23/ups…
For starters: Positive and negative can be useful words, but we should be careful not to overinterpret them. Think instead about "detected" and "not detected." We're describing what a test has found — not a permanent identifier that says anything about who you are as a person. 2/
A "negative" result could be outdated within hours, either because the virus has built up to detectable levels, or because you were exposed anew.

"Positive" in the context of disease can also sound incriminating. 3/
Read 6 tweets
Katherine J. Wu, Ph.D. Profile picture
3 Dec 20
Hundreds of millions of coronavirus tests have been run in labs across the country since the pandemic first hit.

Behind every single one of those tests is a team of people. I wrote about a few of them, and the herculean efforts they've put in. 1/

nytimes.com/2020/12/03/hea…
The world has never asked this much of clin micro and public health lab workers.

Tests are not just pushed buttons and sloshing liquids. They make fingers ache. They make eyes water. They require sprinting back and forth, and perfect pipetting precision. 2/
We do not often look inside these labs. And for decades, that's been okay. “We’re accustomed to holding things up in the background," one scientist told me. "We enjoy doing it because we know we’re helping people.” 3/
Read 10 tweets
Katherine J. Wu, Ph.D. Profile picture
22 Nov 20
In the leadup to the holidays, maybe we can start talking about our coronavirus tests in a slightly different way.

If you do not test positive for the coronavirus, consider that is more about the virus being "not detected," rather than you being "negative" for the virus. 1/
Because maybe the virus is there — but it's not yet present at high enough levels to be found on a test. You could still be infected. You could still be contagious. You could test again tomorrow and be positive; you could test again in five hours and be positive. 2/
Or perhaps you're not infected yet. A test is a snapshot in time; it says nothing about your status in the future. Every trip to the grocery store, even masked, could be an exposure. And a test today won't catch tomorrow's infection. Tests are also imperfect. 3/
Read 5 tweets
Katherine J. Wu, Ph.D. Profile picture
12 Nov 20
A few weeks ago, I heard scattered rumors about bizarre positives coming out of coronavirus testing programs at universities.

It didn't seem to be the coronavirus. It also wasn't contamination in the labs processing the tests. It was weirder. 1/

nytimes.com/2020/11/12/hea…
Researchers working with harmless, noninfectious genetic material from the virus (in the form of DNA) were testing positive, over and over again.

They weren't shoving their science up their noses. They were being careful, and doing great work.

The DNA clung to them anyway. 2/
If that DNA happened to overlap with the target of a coronavirus test, that quickly spelled trouble for some. The test picked up that "contaminating" DNA, and thought hey, this is exactly what I was looking for. Positive. 3/
Read 22 tweets
Katherine J. Wu, Ph.D. Profile picture
2 Nov 20
Rapid tests are already being used to screen people without symptoms for the coronavirus — even though they're not cleared for this purpose, and the data in asymptomatics is sparse.

Some of that data is emerging. It might not be what some hoped. 1/

nytimes.com/2020/11/02/hea…
Is there still a role for rapid tests? Absolutely. More data will be needed to figure out where they fit in best. But for now, it's crucial for people to understand that not all coronavirus test negatives are created equal. 2/
Testing negative on less sensitive tests, for example, might not mean you're virus-free.

Could it mean you're not infectious? Maybe. That's really, really hard to test.

It's very likely to be the case that people will less virus in their bodies are less infectious. 3/
Read 10 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!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @KatherineJWu has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @KatherineJWu!

Read all threads by @KatherineJWu