A short thread on vaccination data in lieu of the @IndependentSage data presentation today.
TL;DR Vaccine roll out still going well despite a slight slowdown. High proportions of older individuals receiving second doses.
With thanks as always to Bob Hawkins for his help.
After a slow-down over the Easter weekend vaccine delivery rebounded, but has slowed over all in comparison to pre-easter delivery rates.
As expected, the majority of doses being delivered now are second doses.
Looking at cumulative jabs given we can see how the the first doses delivery has slowed right down vaccinating just 1% of the adult population in the latest week compared to 4% in previous weeks.
Second dose delivery is still going strong though.
Wales now has the highest first dose coverage of any home nation at 62.5% of the adult population and there is a gap opening up to Northern Ireland at 55.5%.
But all home nations are doing well (England 59.1% Scotland 58.9%).
Wales is also surging ahead with second dose coverage having given a second dose to 21.3% of it's adults. The other home nations are a but further behind at around 15% each.
Just looking at England now.
75% of over 80s and 52% of 75-79 year-olds have received their second dose.
This is great news for the enhanced and continued protection of of our most vulnerable age demographics.
Still a little way to go until we reach first dose levels of vaccination at 95% in over 80s.
At 75%, second doses are much higher than where first doses were 12 weeks ago (59%) indicating that we are keeping pace with first dose roll out.
Looking at coverage by English region, we can see that London still has the lowest coverage rates of any region across all age ranges.
Worth interpreting this in context with this thread by @chrischirp on vaccine equity in England.
Overall a good and improving picture.
Vaccine delivery has slowed down slightly, as we had expected, and switched largely to second doses, but some first doses are still being given and over 45s are now being invited to book their appointments.
\ENDS
Today the Royal Society will meet to discuss “Fellows’ behaviour”. Without doubt the fellow they will primarily be discussing is Elon Musk.
The behaviour may range from his public dissemination of unfounded conspiracy theories to his attacks on the science
🧵
1/38
Musk is also an important figure (some would argue the most important) within a US administration that is laying siege to science and to scientific inquiry itself.
2/38 researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-world-…
The new administration’s executive orders have restricted research, silenced climate scientists and cut funding, as part of a systematic targeting of the scientific community.
3/38
Here's what I think we should be doing to ensure that the UK (and indeed other non-US countries) does not suffer the same fate.
🧵
1/37
The United States is currently witnessing an unprecedented assault on its scientists and scientific institutions, driven by populist agendas that prioritise ideology over evidence.
These orchestrated attacks threaten the foundations...
Silence will not shield scientists from the consequences of an increasingly hostile political landscape.
UK and other non-US scientists must act to support our US colleagues.
Here's what I think we should be doing...
🧵
1/35
Science thrives on collaboration and openness.
The people who practice science are committed to seeking truth and combatting falsehoods.
2/35
In an era where political forces increasingly seek to distort, suppress, or co-opt scientific knowledge for ideological purposes, the global scientific community must recognise that staying silent in the face of these challenges is no longer an option.
Fiona Fox’s recent article in Research Professional News cautions that expelling Elon Musk from the Royal Society could undermine public trust in science.
I disagree...
🧵
1/25 researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-vie…
I think that this perspective overlooks the critical role that scientific institutions play in upholding ethical standards and defending the integrity of science, especially at times when science and scientists are subject to threats and intimidation from political institutions
2
It's imperative that scientists and their representative bodies actively engage in political discourse to protect scientific integrity, particularly when it is under direct threat, as has been clearly evidenced by recent developments in the United States
3 iflscience.com/us-science-is-…
After hearing some underwhelming testimony last month at the #COVIDInquiry on the use of respirators, @trishgreenhalgh and I decided to write a rapid response to the @bmj_latest to set the record straight.
Here's what we wrote...
1/15 bmj.com/content/386/bm…
"Respirators outperform surgical masks; fit-testing is desirable but not essential"
Professor Susan Hopkins (UK Covid Inquiry, 18th September 2024) claimed that evidence for the superiority of respirators (which are made to an industry standard and designed to fit ...
2/15
closely around the face) over medical facemasks (which are not generally made to any quality standard and often fit loosely, leaving gaps around the sides) is “weak”.
She also claimed that respirators are of little use if they are not fit-tested.
3/15 bmj.com/content/386/bm…
As the UK’s general election campaign enters its final few weeks, we’ve already seen numerous examples of dodgy declarations, substandard stats and graph gaffs.
So I thought I'd write about the importance of numeracy to the functioning of democracy.
🧵
We can expect to see more questionable claims in the run up to polling day.
The factor that all these all these missteps have in common is that they involve the manipulation or misrepresentation of numerical quantities.
One of the most hotly disputed figures of the campaign so far has been the Conservatives’ claim that Labour’s policies will, as Rishi Sunak put it, “amount to a £2,000 tax rise for everyone”. Labour have rebuffed this figure, arguing that... theguardian.com/politics/artic…