TL;DR - Inequality in vaccine uptake exists both as a function of deprivation and ethnicity.
The gaps between the proportions of people in different groups getting vaccinated are getting wider as the vaccine roll out goes on.
1/9
Breaking first dose coverage in the over 50s into quintiles (fifths of the population) by deprivation, there is a clear disparity between uptake in the most deprived areas (83.9%) and the least deprived areas (94.1%).
2/9
Obviously one of the quintiles has to have lowest coverage and one highest, but the clear deprivation gradient (more deprivation correlating with poorer coverage) suggests a clear link between the two.
The trend has been clear for a while, but the gap has been widening over time.
Breaking first dose coverage down by age, it's also clear to see that the gap between the most and last vaccinated deprivation quintiles is getting larger in the younger age groups as overall first dose coverage also falls.
4/9
By ethnicity, the trends we have seen so far in first dose coverage continue. White people have the highest proportion of vaccine uptake at 93% while black people have the lowest uptake at just 65%.
5/9
These disparities have become clearer as the vaccine programme continues its roll out. We really need to work hard to level-up on vaccine coverage so people of all ethnicities are afforded equal protection.
6/9
In a similar picture to disaggregation by deprivation, it's clear to see overall first coverage falls off for younger age groups and the disparity between the most vaccinated and least vaccinated groups gets larger.
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…