Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Kelley K Profile picture
@KelleyKga
Jun 28, 2022 • 9 tweets • 4 min read • Read on X
1/ The revised pre-print of the misleading paper used by CDC is now available. Rankings are now lower, as I said they would be. medrxiv.org/content/medrxi…
2/ Note that the authors *changed the time period of the study*, selecting only April 1, 2021 - March 31, 2022 for Covid, comparing that to 2019 deaths, increasing the mortality rates for Covid by choosing the worst 12 month window.
3/ Here's what the table for ages 1-4 looks like now. Notice that accidents, which includes car crashes, drowning, fires/smoke, and other accidental deaths is much larger than Covid. Image
4/ They also added a % of top 10, which is an odd choice IMO. That helps show the scale, but is misleading bc it's not a percentage of all-cause deaths, just a percentage of the top 10. And it's also odd because the Covid deaths are from a different year than the other deaths.
5/ Here are the rankings that were shown on the CDC slide from the earlier version of the pre-print, and the new rankings. Rankings went down for every age group and are out of the top 5 for every group other than 15-19, which includes adults (18 and 19 year olds). Image
6/ Keep in mind that even by manipulating the dates to choose the worst months of Covid they couldn't get Covid to stay in the top 5 for age groups under 15. Is @CDCgov disappointed their big talking point has been officially busted? Will @CDCDirector ever admit it?
7/ Here's the official revision summary from medRxiv. They admitted to the error about not using underlying death data, but they called changing the time period to select the worst 12 month window as "simplifying" the comparison time periods. medrxiv.org/content/10.110… Image
8/ Here is a really helpful side-by-side comparison of the previous version and the revised version of the pre-print so you can see the scope of the changes. (Thanks to @susan_bewley for this!)
@susan_bewley @threadreaderapp unroll

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Kelley K

Kelley K Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @KelleyKga

Kelley K Profile picture
Jul 21
Do you have aging relatives who struggle to use their cell phone? Turns out iPhones have a special mode just for this, and it's amazing! It's called Assistive Access, as part of the Accessibility settings. It could also be useful for children or even as a focus mode. A thread... Image
First off, I'm not a big fan of iPhones, but I must admit Apple did a great job with this. It is extremely flexible, and allows you to lock the phone down as little or as much as you want for ease of use, to block unknown callers, and to restrict access to unneeded apps/options.
It uses a greatly simplified home screen in rows or a grid, with large text and images. And you choose which apps are available. The apps below are specially designed for use with Assistive Access mode, so you can also configure various settings and limit functionality. Image
Read 8 tweets
Kelley K Profile picture
Jun 18
This study was finally published yesterday, and one of the first data points seems implausible, in a way that suggests there may be faulty data involved. The study claims 46% (159/343) of the cohort hospitalized with Covid and acute kidney injury (AKI) in 2020 was fully vaccinated?!?

BUT the Covid vaccine rollout in the US began on Dec. 14, with second doses beginning Dec. 28, so virtually all of the 2020 hospitalizations should have been unvaccinated or partially vaccinated at best (and they say the 94 partially vaxxed patients were excluded from the study).

How does this make sense at all? Did nobody notice this during peer review?!?
(More details and a link to the study in the thread below.)
According to the study, "the median time between vaccination and COVID-19 diagnosis was 206 days (IQR 50 - 314 days)."

That would mean just 25% of people were vaccinated less than 50 days before infection, which again, doesn't match with their data, which shows 34% of the vaxxed cohort were hospitalized in 2020 (159/467).
And fwiw, the paper also includes a sentence fragment that I guess nobody caught. Image
Read 6 tweets
Kelley K Profile picture
Jun 3, 2024
Fauci today: "The first iteration of vaccines did have an effect, not 100%, not a high effect, they did prevent infection, and subsequently, obviously, transmission. However, it's important to point out something that we did not know early on that became evident as the months went by, is that the durability of protection against infection, and hence, transmission was relatively limited."

Oh really? Let's check what scientists actually knew about the first iteration of vaccines...🧵

In Dec. 2020, the FDA said there wasn't evidence it prevents transmission and no data about how long protection would last.

In Feb. 2020, the CDC said "protection may wear off after 3 months." Image
In March/April 2021:
- The CDC said vaccinated people were "potentially less likely to transmit."
- Fauci said whether or not vaccinated people could transmit was "a question of extreme importance."
- A CDC spokesperson said "The evidence [on transmission] isn't clear..."Image
Image
Read 7 tweets
Kelley K Profile picture
Mar 14, 2024
Back in January, I complimented the CDC on some reassuring messaging about Covid, that it turns out was the work of @dr_kkjetelina and a team she's working with at CDC. I took the opportunity to reach out to Dr. Jetelina to see if she'd be open to talking with me. 🧵
I'd admittedly been critical of Dr. Jetelina during Covid, but I appreciated that she was trying to improve communication and rebuild trust, and I wanted to share my perspective as someone who had lost trust in public health. We ended up having a very interesting Zoom call!
Dr. Jetelina suggested we write a brief article together about some of what we talked about in our call, and I eagerly took her up on the opportunity. This just touches on some of the topics we covered in our call. checkyourwork.kelleykga.com/cp/142609262
Read 6 tweets
Kelley K Profile picture
Feb 20, 2024
Laurie Garrett is most certainly NOT "the country's leading public health journalist." 🤦‍♀️
Read 7 tweets
Kelley K Profile picture
Feb 14, 2024
Apoorva is out with a terrible take in the NYT on the new proposed CDC isolation guidance. It's a very one-sided piece that doesn't include a single expert who supports dropping isolation. She can't stand the idea that we haven't reorganized society around Covid precautions. 1/4 Image
And I'm disappointed to see @JenniferNuzzo acting like Covid is still very different from other respiratory infections. She suggested the CDC could "at least" recommend N95s in lieu of isolation. (People aren't going to do that, and there's no good evidence it would help.) 2/4
Image
Image
And I've got news for Apoorva and Jay Varma... Most people eschew masks simply because they are unpleasant to wear. It really is that simple. 3/4 Image
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(