The statistical and research reporting on Omicron seems so desperate for good news that it is hyping information that may be completely misleading, buries what the researchers say, or ignores the nature of the variant, Let's show a few of today's worst. In today's NYT:.../1 
...GREAT news, right? Until we get further into the story, with a paragraph that proves Trump's old adage: Less testing lowers numbers. How much has testing dropped? How much has that contributed to the change? No one says..../2
...Now, probably the worst one. And this one really angers me. When we first had the "Omicron is less severe" articles about the initial research coming out of South Africa, the researchers cautioned that this information was likely inapplicable to much of the world because.../3
...the cohort in South Africa is not like the cohort elsewhere: Very low levels of vaccination, the highest level of Omicron infection among the young who also had a very high level of prior - and multiple prior - infection, thus giving them some level of ability to fight.../4
...it off. So now, there are two British studies, with seemingly conflicting findings. One finds there is no evidence that Omicron is less severe than Delta. The other finds a lower percentage of hospitalizations compared to the number of people infected. Therefore.../5
..the reporters write, it's less severe. And here's the headline that is being repeated everywhere. Great news! Except...there's another possibility. What if Omicron is SO virulent that it is infecting people with levels of immunity - people with prior infection for instance.../6
...then, we're comparing apples to oranges. You'd have far more people infected, but because of prior infections, a higher percentage of people who would have some ability to minimize the impact of the infection. And once again, deep in the story, that is exactly what the.../7
...researchers are cautioning its going on. The study ISNT concluding it is less severe. It is finding it is more virulent, so that even people with levels of protection are getting infected. So this changes nothing about the actual dangers of Omicron - and in fact could mean../8
...it is almost the same or the same as Delta. Or not as bad. Bottom line: We do not fucking know! The articles saying "it's less severe!" are not only not supported by the studies, they are not even supported by the articles themselves. It might be less, it might not..../9
...it might be more. Imperial College of London last week found "no evidence" it is less virulent than Delta. Bottom line: We don't know. We don't have enough data. Data is skewed by the virulence of Omicron and the desperate need for good news. I am not trying to be the.../10
...gloomy guy. I stick with the science. But when the reporters scream "YAY!" in the headlines, then whisper "well, maybe not" in the story," and the researchers say, "ahem, that is not what the study says," people need to know. Don't make decisions about your life based on.../11
...misrepresentations and bad reporting. (Worst of the day is from NPR, but it's so bad I'm not even going to cite the actual report.) Resd epidemiologists tweet. And for reporters, read @edyong209 or @Laurie_Garrett. Because so much of the other reporting is terrible.
end
end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
