There is now some reasonably strong evidence that non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19 ("lockdowns") were associated with decreased short-term suicides in several locations in the world
In a number of other places, while not associated with a decrease, they were also not associated with an increase either. In fact, best evidence suggests no link between lockdowns and an increased short-term suicide rate
One of the most bizarre things is that whenever you point out the fact that suicide rates have not generally increased during lockdowns or indeed the pandemic, people get very angry at you

Personally, I think it's quite a good thing that there have been fewer suicides
It is almost as if people would be happier had suicides risen as some were worried they could, so that their political arguments would be stronger

But that can't be the case, surely?
The other quite funny thing is that everyone takes this as an explicit argument about mental health, which it is not - suicide and mental health are linked, but not the same issue by any means

• • •

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

24 May
So, this is still ongoing, but I think there's an important lesson here in how wildly problematic academic debate is as a forum during a pandemic
The bottom line is pretty depressing - we've spent months arguing back and forth, meanwhile this paper has had a HUGE impact and probably impacted policy decisions across the world
Thing is, our debate about this article has been FAST by academic standards

Three letters/responses for a single article published in 6 months? Snappy by many standards
Read 10 tweets
24 May
1/n Some more movement on this study from earlier in the year by Drs Ioannidis, Bhattacharya, Oh, and Bendavid

Along with @lonnibesancon, @FLAHAULT, and others, we've published a series of responses and ongoing critiques of the piece
2/n The newest response is here, and you can have a look at the previous discussion as well:

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ec…
3/n For reference, if you've forgotten, the original article basically argued that "more" restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions (mrNPIs) such as lockdowns didn't work to prevent COVID-19 cases

It is MASSIVELY popular, with an Altmetric of 19k and dozens of citations Image
Read 14 tweets
21 May
This story from @liammannix about the quashing of debate within forensic science is one of the most wild things I've ever read ping @RetractionWatch theage.com.au/national/victo…
We often discuss academic "silencing" as a sort of nasty attack on people's credentials, but rarely does that include police detectives investigating people for publishing scientific articles 👀👀👀
And while I have absolutely no expertise in paediatric forensics, I've read Dr. Brook's piece which while retracted is still available as a preprint, and it does not seem like a wild and unscientific document researchgate.net/profile/C-Broo…
Read 4 tweets
18 May
This piece has one of the weirdest uses of data that I've seen in a long time

I think it really shows that Australians are quite keen to get vaccinated! 1/n
2/n The article reports a survey that was run by @smh and @theage talking to adults about whether they were "likely" to be vaccinated "in the months ahead"
3/n According to the article, with nearly a third responding that they were unlikely to be vaccinated, there is a serious reason for concern representing an "alarming level of vaccine hesitancy"

But do the results show this?
Read 14 tweets
16 May
This sort of scientific gatekeeping is bizarre and incomprehensible

As someone who was the victim of a similar effort recently, I find it extensively gross to see senior scientists practising eminence-based science
Graduate students are the backbone of all scientific endeavours, and often do amazing work without which we would all be lost
Perhaps more importantly, it is fundamentally unscientific to argue that someone's publication record makes any difference to the truth of their arguments
Read 5 tweets
3 May
It's now been 2 months since this paper on stay-at-home orders was published in @SciReports, so I thought I'd do a quick update
After we put together a fairly detailed critique, @lonnibesancon, @RaphaelWimmer, @FLAHAULT and I preprinted the work online here osf.io/63efj/

At about the same time, the journal added an editor's note saying that the conclusions are subject to criticism
In the two months since, the paper has hit an Altmetric score of 10,824. It's been in the news dozens of times, and has been read by 343,000 people

Pretty huge impact!
Read 5 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!

:(