A short thread on cases by age.
TL;DR Despite much being made of rises in younger age groups, these seem to be localised and are not reflected in the overall numbers which are mostly flat albeit at high levels.
More concerning is the steeper rises we are seeing in the >60s.
1/6
There have been some up-ticks in case rates for the under 20s in the SW, SE and NW, but other regions are flat or falling, albeit rates in these age groups are high and we would like to see them come down before schools return. 2/6
Overall numbers in the under 20s are fairly flat, as are numbers for the 20-59s, although both are quite high.
What's more worrying is the rises we are now seeing in the over 60s undoing all the falls we saw during the July dip. 3/6
This is not driven by one particular region, but worryingly is consistent across all regions of the UK.
Although their rates are lower overall, this is the most 'at-risk' age group so rises in this cohort are particularly concerning. 4/6
You can see all this from the heat map.
Cases are still highest in the younger age groups (although lower than mid-July), but have been slowly rising in the older age groups. 5/6
Broken down into 5 year bands we can see rises in most age groups, reflecting the overall rises across the country, with some age groups rising faster than others and a few still falling. 6/6
With thanks, as ever, to Bob Hawkins for his help preparing the data.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Science is under siege. Political forces are undermining expertise, dismantling research institutions, and replacing evidence based policymaking with ideology.
This is a global crisis.
🧵
1/31
The covid-19 pandemic underscored the importance of scientific independence.
While vaccines, diagnostics, and therapeutics saved many lives, governments that ignored expert advice and downplayed the threat allowed lives to be lost.
2/31
Sometimes, it became a political battleground as public health experts were vilified and disinformation flourished, with deadly consequences.
3/31 bmj.com/content/379/bm…
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…