In 2019, I was on a planning committee for a scientific conference. One of our duties was a “hot topics” session — a hard task when you’re planning a year in advance
We were trying to predict, What will be relevant & topical in epidemiology in 2020?
It was likely top of mind bc I had a new baby in 2019. I was active on Mom Facebook & other US-based social spaces focusing on motherhood
🧵4/ And let me tell you, in these groups, childhood vaccination was a third rail topic
Some groups ended up just banning discussions of vaccination altogether
🧵5/ It would be hard to describe how intense & volatile the conversations were - *if* we hadn’t just lived through a year of intense & volatile conversations about public health issues
But you did live through 2020 (I’m so glad!), so you get the idea
🧵6/ The leader of the planning group, a man who’s at least a decade older than me (an extremely smart scientist whom I respect a great deal), was dismissive towards my suggestion
He reminded me, condescendingly, that we were looking for topical, hot-button issues 🙄
🧵7/ I was dogged (and annoyed) enough that I pushed the point and sent him articles like one, about the alarming measles outbreak in spring 2019 in NYC, due in part to increasing vaccine skepticism in some communities nytimes.com/2019/04/03/hea…
🧵8/ I think about this exchange often when I think about the importance of a diverse and inclusive scientific workforce
The leader of that planning group is brilliant, but he’s not all-knowing. No one is.
🧵9/ People ask,
Why does it matter if vaccine scientists <or insert other field> are all older White men?
If they are smart and productive scientists, why does it matter?
🧵10/ It matters because new ideas don’t come out of thin air. They come from making novel connections from other domains or from life experience to the work at hand
They can come from having a new mom, deep in Mom Facebook, on your planning committee
🧵11/ Oh, and there was another great idea from another youngish woman on the committee: Lyme disease, etc.
Leader was also initially dismissive
I laugh now thinking of how topical a session on infection-involved chronic diseases would have been! #LongCOVID
🧵12/ To his credit, @NIHDirector Francis Collins has pushed for more diversity in scientific workforce recently & NIH internal researchers produce some of best science on this topic
We can do better science & avoid being caught off guard by foreseeable challenges
Second, this thread especially grabbed my attention coming on the heels of yesterday’s @NIH_ORWH virtual conference on gaps in research about the health needs most particular to women orwh.od.nih.gov/research/2021-…
🧵1/ When we don’t get #SARSCoV2 transmission low, the most vulnerable - the old, the immunocompromised, the just plain unlucky whose bodies can’t mount a robust immune response to vaccines - they pay a high price
🧵2/ I know many people in US see #COVID19 primarily in personal terms. Their risk to others is not a main priority…
Others argue that the unlucky vulnerable should just “shield” themselves indefinitely, as if being old or sick means that you are no longer a social being
🧵3/ And others argue that the shortening of life for the old in particular is not that great a tragedy bc they would have died soon anyway*
🧵 1/ I really like the idea of “test to stay” in US K12 schools
There are actually several different policies called this, but a big one is testing to reduce K12 quarantines when a person/group is a close contact of positive case. I think that’s a great use of “test to stay”
2/ One confusion I see in comments on Dr. Mina’s post is people thinking of very sensitive PCR testing, which can pick up infections in days when people are no longer contagious
“Test-to-stay” typically uses Rapid Antigen Testing: RAT finds those who are actively contagious
3/ One drawback is there will be occasional false positives with widespread use of rapid antigen tests. So a fast, easy protocol for additional testing to confirm (or refute) positives needs to be in place
2/ Re: p-hacking: I was really lucky to learn about dangers of p-hacking/selective reporting/publication bias early when I took Charlie Poole’s meta-analysis class in my MSPH at @UNCSPHResearch
Seeing the funnel plot assymetry in study estimates was powerful!
3/ We even published this study 👇🏾 years later.
If I’d known how much work it was going to be, I may not have done it! But I was young & energetic & totally in love with Epi Methods 😍…
🧵2/n To my knowledge, my kids haven’t been infected with #SARSCoV2 - but I’ve accepted that they probably will at some point because of where we live (US)
🧵3/n So then my decision is whether I’d like that first infection to be in a naive immune system or in one already primed by vaccination for a quicker immune response
1/ This article does a good job presenting several foundational public health tenets that I’ve felt frustration at not communicating earlier and better:
A disease that hurts a small % of a huge population can hurt a LOT of people
Small increases in risk for a person can seem relatively inconsequential but still have big, longterm effects on a large group of people
3/ It’s a mind-bending way of thinking that I see people grappling w in real time re: COVID
That self-learning is cool to watch from a teaching & learning perspective but scary when critical decision-making depends on understanding the implications of this seeming contradiction