Health Nerd Profile picture
4 Feb, 4 tweets, 1 min read
Something that is important to note - despite the somewhat fractious debate about this bad paper, I have not nor will I ever say that closing schools is necessarily a good thing
The issue here is a terrible paper that is wrong in many ways. The scientific community should be shocked and appalled at the actions of journals and authors when mistakes are pointed out in their work
But removing this one impactful study from the literature won't shift the needle that much. The question about opening and closing schools during a pandemic remains, as ever, complex
There are definite harms

There are probable benefits

There are innumerable ways in which schools interact with the fabric of our society

There is really no easy answer

• • •

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

2 Feb
Haven't done this in a little while, so let's have a spot of fun

Here's a headline in the Daily Mail. It seems...unlikely that this is true

Let's have a look and see
Lest you think I'm being unfair at the dumb headline, here are the next few paragraphs

Finger length impacts your choice of "masculine" or "feminine" foods! Science?
All credit to the Daily Mail here, they do actually link to the study. Wonderful doi.org/10.1016/j.food…
Read 17 tweets
2 Feb
I do find it fascinating how the usual "academic civility/silencing" brigade have completely ignored this whole episode. Apparently it's fine to publicly defame junior colleagues as long as it's in service of school reopening
It's also interesting to note that this is quite literally a case of academic "silencing", at least insofar as the journal and authors have tried their hardest to quash any hint of our critique
Without twitter, and the media attention it brought, I doubt very much that this paper would ever have been corrected. The only reason the authors were forced to respond is that the editors were contacted by the Guardian for comment
Read 5 tweets
1 Feb
If I'm really honest, there is only one characteristic that I've deeply admired during the pandemic, and that is simple:

- Those who can admit when they got something wrong
Thing is, it happens to all of us (I am no exception). It is commonplace to be mistaken, but rare indeed that people will own up to their errors
See, my problem is that everyone thinks that they tick most of the boxes on that list. No one thinks that they're too certain, or ignoring human health, or unkind

We're all the heroes of our own story
Read 4 tweets
1 Feb
The story continues - after @ikashnitsky and I pointed out that this paper was mathematically impossible, and had numerous errors, it was partially corrected

Now, the lead author is calling us "trolls"
His initial response to us, when we privately emailed him about the issue in the paper, was, to quote, "you are not just right because you THINK you are" (caps=italics)
Now, remember, this is not a minor paper

Altmetric of 3,400, in dozens of news articles, and it's been cited by the WHO and EU already

This paper is impacting school reopening policy across the globe
Read 16 tweets
25 Jan
The entire field of epidemiology is about balancing cost and benefit, risk and reward. There is no choice without consequences, even the seemingly trivial ones
Most Master of Public Health courses (MPH) have a health economics unit for precisely this reason. Enacting a policy in one place invariably (at best) takes away resources that you would otherwise use somewhere else
This is a big part of the reason I spend so much time trying to convey nuance. There is no decision we can make for public health that is purely good

There are no silver bullets
Read 5 tweets
14 Jan
It's likely that the marginal benefit - the additional improvement on top of other things - of very restrictive COVID-19 interventions like stay-at-home orders may be quite small

However, this is probably equally true of the COST of these interventions
It's something that I've seen completely ignored by most anti-restriction campaigners, but I think it's an important point that we should consider
Yes, if you've already limited how much people can go out to restaurants etc then closing them entirely might not reduce transmission all that much

But it also won't have the same negative impact either!
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!