ADHD, a thread (1)
If you have #ADHD & are struggling please know you’re not alone. This week on @Overview, we're talking about living w/ ADHD & Anxiety during the pandemic & many the stigmas & misconceptions that making things worse.
https://t.co/RO1ZGTlMq6
https://t.co/TXL9aOebDj
Like, right now, I’m furiously locked into this thread, & breaking away is super disconcerting & almost painful. When honed & controlled it can supercharge your productivity. But when unchecked it can feel like this.(12)
Quick warning, my choices and perspective don’t reflect a “right” or “wrong” way to do things. I believe everyone should do what works for best for them. (14)
https://t.co/PInu3lt8mi
https://t.co/1jJe4K02F9
https://t.co/7L6NJjSbA9
1. I want to talk about ADHD. I was diagnosed with ADD when I was 13-years-old. To say it's misunderstood (both by people who have ADHD and people who don't have it) is an understatement. What people need to understand about those of us who have ADHD is we are not homogeneous
— Yashar Ali \U0001f418 (@yashar) February 26, 2019
https://t.co/1jJe4K02F9
More from Health
This is a limited point about availability of efficacy data for vaccines under development in the context of the approval for CovidShield and Covaxin in India.
There have been many so-called experts on the idiotbox opining about apparent availability of P III data which 1/n
2/n apparently the SEC had access to based on which it "supposedly" approved Covaxin. Another argument that is prevalent is other regulators (US FDA and MHRA) also approved vaccines based on P II data alone. Let me give you a few facts so that you can make your own decision.
3/n The protocols for both mRNA vaccines are publicly available. You can check. Both protocols *define* when the interim analysis will be done. This is not subjective. They clearly define how many infections need to be documented before the Data Safety Monitoring Board meets.
4/n Find the protocols for the bridging study for CovidShield and Covaxin and look for a similar milestone.
Here is one set of efficacy data post the interim analysis of a mRNA vaccine.
Source: https://t.co/BAPnP3PxEb
5/n This data was analyzed post the interim analysis where the blind was broken by the DSMB. Now ask yourself this question:
How does the SEC, or the sponsor of these studies, or the experts who are offering their opinion liberally on the idiotbox know what the efficacy is
There have been many so-called experts on the idiotbox opining about apparent availability of P III data which 1/n
2/n apparently the SEC had access to based on which it "supposedly" approved Covaxin. Another argument that is prevalent is other regulators (US FDA and MHRA) also approved vaccines based on P II data alone. Let me give you a few facts so that you can make your own decision.
3/n The protocols for both mRNA vaccines are publicly available. You can check. Both protocols *define* when the interim analysis will be done. This is not subjective. They clearly define how many infections need to be documented before the Data Safety Monitoring Board meets.
4/n Find the protocols for the bridging study for CovidShield and Covaxin and look for a similar milestone.
Here is one set of efficacy data post the interim analysis of a mRNA vaccine.
Source: https://t.co/BAPnP3PxEb
5/n This data was analyzed post the interim analysis where the blind was broken by the DSMB. Now ask yourself this question:
How does the SEC, or the sponsor of these studies, or the experts who are offering their opinion liberally on the idiotbox know what the efficacy is