This story by @samueljlovett about the lack of transparency around JCVI decision making is excellent - clearly the lack of transparency is worrying *JCVI members* too...
Meeting minutes should be published within 6 weeks - no Covid ones since Feb. 1/4
In the article, JCVI seemed to blame lack of admin support - although minutes of a June non Covid meeting are public.
There has also been a Freedom of Information Request to ask for minutes - this was denied but JCVI seemed to confirm that the minutes *were* available. 3/4
Reason for refusal given was that they would be published in "due course" & "in line with "the publication schedule" - but they already aren't! Schedule is 6 wks.
JCVI Covid minutes from meetings in Nov, Dec & Feb met that schedule.
There is a failure of transparency here. 4/4
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
TLDR the two epidemics theme continues and the impact of summer infections on long covid is becoming evident... 1/13
On vaccination, we've started on 12-15s but roll out is slower than it was for 16-17s... and in younger age groups we are substantially behind Scotland who have been using walk in clinics for teens.2/13
For boosters, we've now given a quarter of 80+ their booster and rollout is progressing. When the programme started, 3.5m people were already elgibile for their booster - we've got a bit of work to catch up to all the eligibles as soon as we can! 3/13
A conversation with @adamhamdy prompted me to look at how different home nations are dealing with reinfections (people testing positive with Covid more than once, at least several weeks apart)
There are differences that will matter more over time as Covid keeps going 1/7
England only counts the *first* time someone tests positive. So if I tested positive last summer and then tested positive again now, I'd only appear in last summer's numbers.
This means England is undercounting cases (but not by much as long as reinfections are rare) 2/7
Wales *does* allow for reinfections as long as they are 6 weeks apart. So if I tested positive last summer and again today, I would count as a Covid case twice - once last year and once again this year. 3/7
1. Vaccinating 12-17yr olds has a lot more impact than just vaccinating 16 & 17 year olds.
Note vaxxing all children is not currently possible (no authorised vax<12 yrs) but shows theoretical best case.
2. You can get significant reductions in cases & outcomes by using public health protections in schools - and given current situation (late & slow vax roll out) - these are a super important tool we could use right now.
1. THREAD on transparency & JCVI statements on teen vaccination.
This is *not* about the results of the risk benefit analysis but about the fact that 4 weeks after 3 Sept statement, the information we need to interpret & understand their analysis is missing.
14 Tweets (+2)
2. First off - in JCVI code of conduct, openess and transparency are required.
The code states that in any mathematical modelling (which risk/benefit is), the *full assumptions* should be given in sufficient detail to allow *full assessment*.
3. The recommendations also say that the minutes of meetings should be published. While some delay is allowed, there have been NO minutes of JCVI meetings about Covid 19 since a February meeting, published in April. app.box.com/s/iddfb4ppwkmt…
TLDR: two epidemics really - one in under 18s (and their parents) which is bad and getting worse and the other in everyone else which is getting better.
First - vaccine uptake in 12-15 year olds in England hasn't really started. With such high rates in teens right now this feels like a missed opportunity :-/
1/12
Looking at cases by date of test for each home nation, England and Wales are going up and NI and Scotland coming down. NI seems to be plateauing though.
England and Wales might be peaking (for now at least) 2/12