The other day, I tweeted about a recent study that adds to a growing body of evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of masks in preventing the spread of COVID-19...
Here it is again--note that it's not a naturalistic or epidemiologic study, but a modeling study based on known information about the penetration of SARS-CoV-2 sized particles through N95/KN95 masks.
...and retweeted this graph (w/ >1000 likes & 366 retweets to date) of COVID cases rising sharply in Nov in Germany, where they've had N95/K95 mask mandates in place for awhile, and used that to claim that their commitment to "science" had "failed."
But let's take a closer look at this claim. First of all, no one claims that masks, or social distancing, or lockdowns, or even vaccines are magic armor reducing COVID risk to zero.
So, what we want to know is just how much such interventions reduce the risk, if at all.
6/
For Germany, we'd want to know how many COVID cases would've occurred had they not been "following science."
One rough way to estimate that is to look at COVID cases per capita in Germany compared its 7 neighboring border countries.
Suddenly, Germany's looking pretty good.
7/
And here's another study of the actual effects of mask mandates in Germany, published in Dec. 2020.
"Weighing various estimates, we conclude that 20 days after becoming mandatory, face masks have reduced the number of new infections by around 45%."
After Trump retweeted their video, it went viral and sparked a deluge of false claims on Twitter about #HydroxyChloroquine effectiveness for treating COVID19, with 84% of 2.7 million tweets about the drug over 9-day period containing misinformation.
"...while a few mass shooters in history have had serious mental illnesses, the more typical shooter has experienced the kind of milder difficulties with mood, anxiety, and social interactions with which most of us have some personal familiarity."
- no grey matter volume change in controls
- volume *loss* w/ placebo/psychosocial tx
- volume *increase* w/ meds
3/
The authors found no evidence to support confounding factors and therefore concluded that antipsychotic medications "prevent or perhaps even reverse" illness-related volume loss, consistent with a possible neuroprotective effect of 2nd generation medications.
Harrow et al. have published another study demonstrating an association between antipsychotic treatment and poorer outcomes compared to non-antipsychotic treatment, this time for both schizophrenia and affective psychosis.
2/
To date, no RCT (no, not even Wunderink) exists to address potential causality or more precisely *direction* of causality. The million $$ question is whether antipsychotic discontinuation leads to recovery or whether recovery leads to discontinuation.
Harrow often uses baseline prognosis as a proxy of severity to address this question, but the only thing that really matters is *actual* disease severity. Why were meds stopped?
This is a chicken-egg issue as I discuss w/@awaisaftab here:
A few points worth discussing. First, addiction as disease is a counter-narrative in response to the:
"prevailing nonscientific, moralizing, and stigmatizing attitudes to addiction [that framed it as a] moral failing or weakness of character, rather than a 'real' disease.
3/
"This argument was particularly targeted to the public, policymakers and health care professionals, many of whom held that since addiction was a misery people brought on themselves, it fell beyond the scope of medicine..."
Finally got around to reading and really enjoyed this new paper by @JasperFeyaerts et al. that offers a critical view of traditional conceptualizations of delusions and the (mis)assumption of a delusional continuum.
It affirms my view that firmly distinguishing between delusions and delusion-like (and shared) beliefs is ultimately doomed, because we do not have coherent existing definitions of "delusions" nor for that matter "beliefs"
Here are my favorite quotations from this paper:
3/
"Jaspers... points towards the experiential context within which primary delusions originate. Whereas delusion-like ideas arise in intelligible ways from everyday experience, primary delusions develop... as "a transformation in our total awareness of reality."