Atomsk's Sanakan Profile picture
Apr 28, 2021 26 tweets 19 min read Read on X
1/Y

Many criticized the article below co-authored by Jay Bhattacharya, who also co-wrote the Great Barrington Declaration.

But I haven't seen a detailed explanation of why the article was wrong + dangerous. So I'll give one here



theprint.in/opinion/majori…
3/Y

Imagine the spread of SARS-CoV-2 as an accelerating car.

Some brakes help slow the car, such as masks, social distancing, contract tracing, etc.

But even without brakes, the car will eventually start slowing down on its own; that's herd immunity.

4/Y

Once you have enough people immune to infection at herd immunity (whether immune by prior infection or vaccination), you can stop using the brakes and the car still won't accelerate.

Bad idea to release the brakes too early without herd immunity.

5/Y

Bhattacharya doesn't like various brakes for ideological reasons (there's a reason he goes to right-wing outlets a lot).

So he exaggerated how close India was to herd immunity.

"a near majority of the population has developed immunity to the virus"
theprint.in/opinion/majori…
6/Y

That's consistent with Bhattacharya exaggerating the number of infections for over a year.
It's convenient for him in a number of ways, such as allowing him to give COVID-19 fatality rates so low they're impossible.



archive.is/QLmJt#selectio…
7/Y

Bhattacharya accepts models when they're convenient for his ideology, + ditches them otherwise. He mixed that with his usual bad extrapolations from non-representative samples.

Anyway, India was nowhere near ~50% of their population being infected.

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
8/Y

So the car is facing the edge of the cliff.

Bhattacharya (falsely) tells the driver they are very close to not needing the brakes anymore to slow down the car.

What could be worse than that?

Well... Bhattacharya telling them brakes don't work. 🤦‍♂️

theprint.in/opinion/majori…
9/Y

I'm not going to rehash the reasons why limiting people being near each other limits transmission of a virus that spreads by people being near each other.

Not like Bhattacharya + his fans will learn at this point anyway.


10/Y

One of Bhattacharya's proposed solutions is to reserve vaccinations for people who were not infected before.

That would be an interesting point,... except that he can't help but add to that his distortions of immunology and vaccines.

theprint.in/opinion/majori…
11/Y

There's good reason to think that vaccines will work better than "natural" infection with SARS-CoV-2.

There's also a chance they may improve the immune response of those previously infected.

There are other issues as well.



12/Y

For herd immunity, we want antibodies + B cells / plasma cells that prevent re-infection; i.e. we want neutralizing antibodies that cause sterilizing immunity.

(If any non-expert says, "but T cells!!" to you, ignore them
)

sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
13/Y

Unfortunately:

- not all antibodies are neutralizing
- neutralizing antibodies can wane, allowing for re-infection
- SARS-CoV-2 mutations could evade antibodies, or result in a more contagious form needing more people immune for herd immunity

Etc.

14/Y

Vaccines can help with this by increasing levels of neutralizing antibodies or addressing variants (see part 11/Y).

Conversely, allowing many infections facilitates the evolution of harmful mutants.

medrxiv.org/content/10.110…


15/Y

So who in their right mind would advocate for taking off brakes to allow for many infections?

Jay Bhattacharya, and his Great Barrington Declaration group.

At this point, he's just sabotaging the brakes for India and pushing the car off the cliff.

16/Y

But if you're going to push the car off the cliff, you may want to downplay how dangerous that is.

So Bhattacharya reaches into his usual bag of tricks for doing that. For example, citing Ioannidis' work on fatality rates:



theprint.in/opinion/majori…
17/Y

But Ioannidis' poor work leads to fatality rates so impossibly low that they require more people are infected than actually exist (Bhattacharya did the same in part 6/Y).

One of the places that happens is... India.



18/Y

And of course, Bhattacharya knowingly abuses the misleading "infection survival rate" framing.

Easy to cover up how bad 600,000 deaths are by saying '99.4% survival rate', without mentioning 100 million infected.



19/Y

As the car progresses on its descent towards the cliff, Bhattacharya downplays the risk to younger people onboard.

Ioannidis' debunked + impossible work makes room for that, as does willfully ignoring better studies



theprint.in/opinion/majori…
20/Y

Bhattacharya also downplays the risk of sabotaging brakes, by side-stepping how India + other nations under-estimate their number of COVID-19 deaths.

bmj.com/content/372/bm…

medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
github.com/akarlinsky/wor…



theprint.in/opinion/majori…
21/Y

The "brakes / cliff" analogy might offend some.

I no longer care. 🙂

I value the feelings of deniers like Bhattacharya less than the lives they put at risk.



Red circle is when Bhattacharya's India article was published:

ourworldindata.org/explorers/coro…
22/Y

On vaccinating infected people (see part 10/Y):

- vaccines help infected folks
- other priorities, like vaccinating the elderly + those in regular contact with the infected (ex: healthcare staff)
- risk of doses expiring waiting to find non-infected
23/Y

And Bhattacharya's January 2021 article was in line with horrible advice he's given to India *for months.*

For example, before there was a vaccine he advocated for herd immunity via people getting infected.



July 30, 2020:
techpolicyinstitute.org/2020/07/30/jay…
24/Y

Yet Bhattacharya + his Great Barrington Declaration team refuse to admit to they were wrong.

That's in contrast to those with integrity like Monica Gandhi, who apologized for what she said on India + herd immunity.

😡



25/Y

The results in 7/Y showing ~24% infected, were out by February 4.
I re-tweeted them on February 10.

So if Bhattacharya bothered to pay attention, he had weeks to correct his dangerous mistake + warn people.

Yet he didn't.



26/Y

So hopefully this thread explained some reasons why so many experts were rightly upset with Jay Bhattacharya.

He's been ludicrously irresponsible during this pandemic.






• • •

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

Keep Current with Atomsk's Sanakan

Atomsk's Sanakan 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 @AtomsksSanakan

Feb 23
71/J

I recently got a copy of Dr. Judith Curry's book without buying it myself.

Looking over it confirmed to me that it's largely misinformation.

I'll illustrate that by assessing its claims on COVID-19.



"11.3.1 COVID-19"

amazon.com/Climate-Uncert…
Image
72/J

To reiterate: Curry draws parallels between COVID-19 + climate change.

But some of the sources she cites suggest an ideologically convenient narrative misinformed her.

That becomes clearer when assessing her claims.




Image
73/J

No mention of the misinformation she + other contrarians promoted, and which conflicted with knowledge advances by experts.

(8/J - 12/J, 32J - 36/J, 44/J, 45/J, 63/J, etc.)








Image
Read 31 tweets
Feb 17
1/J

Dr. Judith Curry recommends people read at least the 45-page preview of her new book.

I did.

It's bad enough I wouldn't recommend buying the book.
It's largely contrarian conspiracist misinformation.




amazon.com/Climate-Uncert…
Image
Read 72 tweets
Aug 30, 2023
PapersOfTheDay

"Executive Summary to the Royal Society report “COVID-19: examining the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions”"


"Effectiveness of face masks for reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2: [...]"
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rs…
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rs…
Jefferson + Heneghan don't like the papers.

Makes sense they wouldn't given their track record, especially Jefferson on the Cochrane mask review he led.







brownstone.org/articles/royal…



cochrane.org/news/statement…
Image
Read 5 tweets
Mar 13, 2023
69/E

A reminder, since there's a resurgence in Musk + right-wing politicians trying to score political points by saying they want Fauci prosecuted:

Musk's dislike of Fauci drove him to post an easily debunked lie (57/E, 56/, 41/)


Image
70/E

Still no apology from Musk for falsely smearing Grady based on untrue things he was told, or that he made up.

"Elon Musk calls British diver in Thai cave rescue 'pedo' in baseless attack"
theguardian.com/technology/201…



thedailybeast.com/elon-musk-mock… Image
71/E

Another good example of the willful ignorance + baseless paranoia underlying Musk's lab leak conspiracism and his criticisms of Fauci.




archive.is/GZ6er#selectio…
archive.is/ughZK#selectio…
archive.is/WWKtc#selectio… ImageImageImage
Read 11 tweets
Dec 12, 2022
1/E

Some illustrations of the pseudoskepticism that overtakes many crypto / tech bros, using the example of Elon Musk's COVID-19 claims.

"My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci"


onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11… Image
2/E

No, neither chloroquine nor hydroxychloroquine worked for SARS-CoV-2.

Fortunately, Fauci recommended neither in March 2020.

9:12 - 14:41 :



Image
Read 29 tweets
Jun 8, 2022
1/B

Thread on a myth Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) continues to peddle to undermine confidence in public health agencies and to suit his policy agenda.

The myth may undermine responses to future public health emergencies.




stanfordreview.org/the-review-int…
Image
2/B

Some background:

The infection fatality rate (IFR) states the proportion of *SARS-CoV-2-infected* people who die of the disease COVID-19.

The case fatality rate (CFR) states the proportion of *reported cases* who die of COVID-19.

institutefordiseasemodeling.github.io/nCoV-public/an…
Image
3/B

Reporting systems are not perfect, so they sometimes miss infected people. That makes reported cases less than total infections, and thus CFR is higher than IFR.

The WHO was open about this since the early stages of the pandemic:

March 17, 2020:
web.archive.org/web/2020102205…
Image
Read 26 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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(