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
Sarah Rasmussen Profile picture
Sarah Rasmussen
@SarahDRasmussen
Assistant Prof of Mathematics at UIUC. Just moved from Cambridge U, UK. PhD @Harvardmath. BS Physics. Other interests Covid-19, med journal reform, education.
Peter English #FBPE Profile picture Potato Of Reason Profile picture CMarie #CovidIsAirborne #SmallTownAB #WaterNotCoal Profile picture 4 subscribed
Dec 11, 2021 • 13 tweets • 5 min read
New @UKHSA Omicron update, including new growth estimates.

From data up to 5-6 Dec, they estimated a .35 continuous daily growth advantage of Omicron over Delta in England (so times exp(.35) = 1.42 per day). That would mean doubling every 2.0 days. 1/
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl… To estimate this growth advantage,…

Their step 1 was estimating what proportion of S-gene dropout cases in England was due to Omicron over time, using genomic sequencing to check some of their SGTF samples.

It wasn’t until ~28 Nov that most SGTF in England was Omicron. 2/
Dec 4, 2021 • 27 tweets • 8 min read
Some preliminary transmission-advantage estimates (by others) for Omicron in South Africa and England 🧵

I’ll try to give an accessible account of some main methodologies for estimating total transmission advantage, some key limitations, and preliminary results. 1/ Total transmission advantage, the fraction
R_t(new variant)/R_t(old variant),
is roughly the factor by which
Omicron_new_daily_cases/Delta_new_daily_cases
changes during one generation interval (GI). (Often 5 days is used for Covid GI. Can also depend some on variant.) 2/
Oct 11, 2021 • 13 tweets • 4 min read
If there’s one thing worse than hoarding vaccines, it’s hoarding AND wasting them.

If jabs are rolled out so slowly that the target group nearly all get infected pre-jab, that’s a big decrease in overall vaccine benefit—a serious waste.

(Results in for England 12-15 timing!) 🧵 Out of the 811 non-“see results” respondents about their own 12-15 school in England,

9% (75) jabbed in Sept,
31% (250) scheduled for Oct pre half-term,
60% (486) scheduled for later, or not scheduled at all.

(A few wrote in to revise votes, but not enough to change %s) 2/
Sep 11, 2021 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
In case anecdote is helpful re this NIMS unvaxxed count,

during my 2020-2021 visit to Princeton, the subletter of our 2-bed Cambridge UK flat received vax invitations for *4 adults* besides herself—2 for folks who’d moved out more than 10 yrs ago, and 2 for my own household. 1/ For the 2 who’d moved out > a decade ago, we asked her to send back the envelope and tick “not at this address.”

But we’ve repeatedly sent back their NHS post ticked “not at this address” for years with no effect, so I don’t know if that actually removed them from any list. 2/
Apr 20, 2021 • 25 tweets • 7 min read
Mass vaccination is key, but by far the most powerful NON-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI) is for infectious people to isolate.

I know this is contentious, but I think mass rapid testing can substantially improve infectious isolation, IF IMPLEMENTED EFFECTIVELY. (🧵) 1/ I’ve seen a lot of negative UK sentiment on lateral flow device (LFD) tests.

The thing is, being anti-LFD is a bit like being anti-screwdriver.

In some cases a screwdriver is useless, in others it’s extremely helpful, and in yet others we can impact how useful it is. 2/
Mar 22, 2021 • 25 tweets • 7 min read
My NOT PEER-REVIEWED preprint on B.1.1.7 and age is out.
medrxiv.org/content/10.110…

TL;DR:
0-19-year-olds tend to make up a larger share of total cases for B.1.1.7 than for wild type, and likely experience a larger relative increase in infectiousness than other age groups. 1/ This finding isn’t really new. Here’s Figure 4B from an earlier Imperial College modelling group paper
medrxiv.org/content/10.110…

It’s just these earlier findings were later partly discounted as likely due to environmental effects alone. My paper argues against the latter. 2/
Mar 6, 2021 • 24 tweets • 6 min read
Preliminary THREAD on B.1.1.7 infection and age

As a compromise between speed vs responsible provision of verifiable literature/data, I’m tweeting a link to a working draft, which I hope to complete and submit as a pre-print within the next few days. dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~sr727/b117/ 1/ In this UNFINISHED draft, I present a mathematical argument that the previously-observed higher relative increase in B.1.1.7 infection for 10-19-year-olds and especially for 0-9-year-olds in
medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
cannot be explained by environmental factors alone. 2/
Feb 1, 2021 • 19 tweets • 5 min read
THREAD on why

1. Primary school transmission depends crucially on child prevalence, not just community prevalence, and

2. Why we see delays for primary school transmission to ramp up, if child prevalence starts low. 1/ Imagine an ideal world where people with noticeably covid-like symptoms can afford to immediately isolate (a disastrously poor assumption in many places, but I’ll return to it briefly in tweet 6). 2/
Jan 29, 2021 • 34 tweets • 9 min read
Many have asked me to comment on the recent ONS deaths report. (THREAD)
ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulati…

So I’ll try to discuss disentangling infection rate from death, complicating factors, and uncertainty.

I'll also discuss some potential indicators of higher teacher infection. 1/ First off, the utility of data depends on what we want to ask.

If our question is: “Which 20-64-year-old workers in England and Wales incurred the most direct covid deaths, from the pandemic start up through infections from early Dec?”

then this ONS report is a great answer. 2/
Jan 4, 2021 • 10 tweets • 4 min read
Since there seems to be confusion about the 2 Sep-16 Oct ONS ad hoc teacher risk study published 6 Nov, let me highlight a few key points (THREAD). 1/10 The ONS study named 4 teacher categories: nursery (4%), primary (18%), secondary (23%), and Teacher of unknown type [ToUT] (63%).

ToUT was largest: included anyone who wrote “teacher” or “teaching assistant” instead of eg “primary teacher” or “primary teaching assistant.” 2/10
Dec 28, 2020 • 50 tweets • 15 min read
Follow-up on ONS ad hoc teachers study (THREAD)

Many people have continued to ask me for updates on my earlier 2-thread series on the 6 November ONS “ad hoc” teachers risk study.

Sorry for the delay. I was trying to be patient with the authors. 1/ Back story: in Nov, due to a SAGE (schools group) request, a few ONS authors looked at random sampling covid test data (their associated questionnaires ask for occupation) to compare risks to teachers, health/social-care-related key workers, + an “Other professions” category. 2/
Dec 18, 2020 • 21 tweets • 6 min read
In case anyone wanted to see some examples of prevalence curves that do and do not “mirror what’s happening [in the general population] outside the school gates,” here’s a graph.

Hint: parents—same trend; kids—qualitatively different. 1/ Here’s the weighted fortnightly estimate version.
Dec 16, 2020 • 12 tweets • 10 min read
@SingleWithKids @UsforThemUK I believe they harm both children and education by spreading misinformation about masks and testing and encouraging lack of compliance with both, in both schools and the general public.

Avoiding masks and refusing testing increases transmission in communities and schools. 1/ @SingleWithKids @UsforThemUK Increasing school- and community- transmission harms education:

-it forces more school staff to self-isolate,
-it forces more children to self-isolate,
-it forces more families with school children to self-isolate,...
2/
Dec 15, 2020 • 4 tweets • 2 min read
Any medically vulnerable household with school children should read this!!!

Massive thanks to @publiclawcentre for their work.

This is a huge step forward, although a craven response by govt to claim it was always the schools’ discretion and their fault for following guidance. Of course, the govt response is still not good enough.

Passing the buck to schools fails to protect families from the whim of individual school leaderships.

The whole point of these CV + CEV categories is they were meant to offer protection from the caprices of individuals.
Dec 14, 2020 • 16 tweets • 6 min read
Inquiry+DfE (THREAD).

Various followers alerted me that Parliament are conducting an inquiry into covid impact on education and social services, and on DfE response.

It claims it “will scrutinise how the Department for Education is dealing with the situation.”

EXCEPT... 1/ Image This would be more analogous to if Parliament had said,

“We’re now conducting a call for evidence on Russian interference.*

*Only accepting evidence for LACK of interference.”
committees.parliament.uk/work/202/the-i…
2/ Image
Nov 29, 2020 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
Unless they made a sick typo in their updated guidance,

the DfE is sending CEV teachers back to the classroom, effective 2 Dec. 1/ Here’s the new DfE guidance.
gov.uk/government/pub…
The section on CEV staff says that, effective 2 Dec:

“All staff can continue to attend school in all three local restriction tiers.” 2/
Nov 23, 2020 • 23 tweets • 7 min read
Teachers, ONS, + SAGE etc FOLLOW UP THREAD.
As Twitter is bad for nuance, I’d like to follow up on a recent thread.

TL;DR:
(1) The ONS is still a good agency.
(2) Don’t panic (about teacher risk).
(3) The teachers study and its usage are still a problem. 1/ (1) ONS still good.

The ONS employ loads of people, and collaborate with yet more. These ppl work very hard, to stringent deadlines, on essential work that has likely improved and even saved lives.

The ONS component of my complaint involves only a TINY number of these ppl: 2/
Nov 21, 2020 • 24 tweets • 10 min read
ONS, breaches, + teachers: THREAD

Today I reported an ONS breach to the UK Statistics Authority.

Two breaches in fact: one regarding an “ad hoc” analysis on education staff in part 9 of the 6 Nov ONS covid survey pilot, and one for a related 3 Nov government leak. 1/ On 3 Nov, the Department for Education tweeted a video of Chris Whitty saying:

“All the data, including ONS data, do not imply that teachers are a high risk occupation, unlike, for example social care workers, and medical staff like myself.” 2/
Nov 5, 2020 • 27 tweets • 11 min read
School + CEV households: THREAD

New update yesterday for UK Guidance on shielding. Guess what stayed the same:

“Children who live with someone who is clinically extremely vulnerable, but who are not clinically extremely vulnerable themselves, should still attend school.” 1/25 “Should” is a euphemism for “must.”

If parents deregister, they lose their school place, must educate their child on their own from scratch, and risk denial of re-admission at their local school.

But trying to stay at school but work from home means fines and prosecution. 2/25
Oct 24, 2020 • 22 tweets • 8 min read
Schools + comments on some sources (THREAD)

This recent schools article makes some great points, and @apoorva_nyc is one of the top science journos on covid out there, but a few of the sources cited in this one have some issues, especially a few pages from govt websites. 1/22 -UK link is outdated. For late Oct, random sampling estimates all 3 child age-groups more infected than any adult group. 2-11s are 2nd highest!

-The Netherlands govt website badly mischaracterises its study.

-Pediatrics childcare-worker study and NYC article need comment. 2/22
Oct 19, 2020 • 21 tweets • 14 min read
@apsmunro @interpolated I have no problem with the article itself. It’s with the summary written for it, which you amplified without explaining any corrective context, not even the fact that those positive results were from random sampling, whereas the ordinary assumption would be targeted testing. @apsmunro @interpolated In the meantime, you cheer on 0-follower 21-tweet trolls who attack me when I try to have a nuanced discussion where I simply ask questions about the level of evidence we should demand before advocating for a certain policy—a question relevant to your own advocacy. Image