One thing that has hugely shaped countries' response to COVID, and which I don't think gets enough discussion: genuine constraints and perceived constraints. A thread... 1/
Some apparent local constraints have persisted throughout the pandemic. For example if you look globally, there are still notable differences in approaches to surveillance and quarantine... 2/

It's worth reading these papers on the response in Taiwan (jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…) and Korea (jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…). Should more countries include these data-intense approaches in future pandemic plans? Or does reluctance to date reflect an immovable constraint? 3/
In contrast, attitudes to duration/stringency of NPIs have shifted dramatically. Look back to Feb 2020 & prominent figures were raising human rights concerns about China lockdown. But by mid-March, countries had abandoned earlier perceived constraints: theconversation.com/what-we-learne… 4/
Stringency and sustainability can make big difference to outcomes. During the 1918 pandemic in US, the introduction of NPIs reduced impact - but they didn't remain in place for long and epidemics still ended with accumulation of immunity, e.g. pnas.org/content/104/18… 5/
Another topic is border measures - UK measures currently much stricter than most of Europe, but not as nearly as strict as some places as Asia Pacific. This constraint has shifted quite a lot - yet not fully in many countries. We should consider why. 6/
There's also the question of scaled up testing regardless of symptoms. Places like China and South Korea did a lot early on, while others like Japan and Taiwan did relatively little (e.g. from last Aug: international.thenewslens.com/article/139685). Again, need to consider underlying reasons. 7/
As @hannahhec put it last March: "constraints may be real, but they may be moveable, either by the mobilisation of resources, or by updating the mental model about what is possible". channelnewsasia.com/news/commentar… 8/
In discussing future pandemic plans (as well as plans for COVID in coming months), it will be crucial to distinguish between what are genuine and perceived constraints - because it will be impossible to define what is optimal without this distinction. 9/9

• • •

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

Keep Current with Adam Kucharski

Adam Kucharski 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 @AdamJKucharski

23 May
Preliminary UK data on vaccine effectiveness against B.1.617.2 (originally detected in India) now available: khub.net/documents/1359…. A few things to note... 1/
First and foremost, it’s another reminder that *second doses matter*. By Aug/Sep, UK will be in much better position against B.1.617.2, but there’s a risk of substantial transmission in meantime as things reopen. 2/

Also remember that when vaccine effectiveness high, small absolute differences can have big effect. E.g. a drop from 95% to 90% would double number at risk (and probably more than double outbreak size given non-linear nature of transmission). 3/
Read 6 tweets
18 May
In real-time, epidemic data streams are patchy, delayed, biased and often contradictory. That's why scientists use terms like 'realistic possibility', 'medium confidence' etc. Uncertainty is inevitable (although will reduce over time) - and yet decisions still need to be made. 1/
B.1.617.2 has been spreading fast in some areas, and people are working hard to disentangle causes & quantify exactly what it means for wider transmission. Control measures are now both going in (e.g. testing, vaccination) & being relaxed, which making analysis even trickier. 2/
For more info, people like @kallmemeg @arambaut @jburnmurdoch @erikmvolz @TWenseleers have been posting some useful summaries recently: 3/
Read 4 tweets
11 May
Have recently been thinking more about the transmissibility of endemic seasonal coronaviruses... antibody positivity increases sharply at a relatively low age, suggesting high transmissibility in susceptibile populations (below from: nature.com/articles/s4146…). 1/
Older groups have built immunity to seasonal CoVs, but above suggests R0 (i.e. R in fully susceptible population) could be quite high for these viruses. Possibly so high that even stringent measures wouldn't be enough to control in susceptible pop? 2/
If so, it would be yet another reminder of the importance of equitable, fast vaccination globally to reduce the future impact of COVID-19. 3/3
Read 4 tweets
5 May
One subtlety of below issue that’s worth highlighting – targeted travel bans (as opposed to near-total border closures) have played out in much the way we’d have expected pre-COVID, delaying rather than stopping local epidemics. A few thoughts… 1/

In December, many countries reactively banned travel from the UK (theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/d…), but this didn’t stop the rise of B.1.1.7 across the continent (nytimes.com/interactive/20…). 2/
As noted by @firefoxx66 at the time, targeted bans can delay introductions, but this will be of limited use if measures aren’t also in place to deal with (undetected) local circulation: 3/
Read 8 tweets
28 Apr
How long does immunity to SARS-CoV-2 last (and how long might it last in future)? A few thoughts... 1/
We now have data from several cohort studies showing responses can last over a period of several months at least. E.g. "Based on data currently available, a rapid decline of SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity or neutralising capacity has not been seen." thelancet.com/journals/lanin… 2/
And "immune memory in three immunological compartments remained measurable in greater than 90% of subjects for more than 5 months after infection" science.sciencemag.org/content/371/65… 3/
Read 8 tweets
26 Apr
A reminder that to estimate COVID vaccine effectiveness, we need to compare risk in unvaccinated and vaccinated groups in same population. Here are a couple of common mistakes to watch out for... 1/
You can't get an estimate of effectiveness by simply comparing how many people have been vaccinated and how many cases/hospitalisations there have been in this group (because, of course, if there's no local COVID transmission, you'd always estimate a 100% effective vaccine). 2/
Nor can you just look at what proportion of cases have been vaccinated, because effectiveness will also depend on what proportion of the population have been vaccinated. 3/

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!

:(