What if the false diagnosis rate was 90%?
Don’t misunderstand me. I’m a thorough believer in the existence of this virus.
I expect the ‘wait two weeks’ warning will be given & I do worry about that. Nothing in this mornings tweets asks anyone to do...
More from Yardley Yeadon
I urge all followers who have read my criticisms of PCR mass testing in U.K. to carefully read Mr Fordham’s carefully worded letter. Note that the innovation minister in the Lords, Lord Bethel, already admitted that the PCR system doesn’t have the equivalent of an MOT. https://t.co/zXzeDMKCBb
Without this information it’s impossible to interpret any result. If the oFPR is 4%, for example, and if the true prevalence is 0.3% (it’s probably less), then for every 10,000 tests, 400 positives would be false & 30 positives would be genuine. So 93% of positives are false.
As Mr Fordham points out, almost all policies pivot on PCR mass testing. Hancock previously admitted on talkRADIO to Julia Hartley-Brewer in late summer that the FPR was “just under 1%”. That was a flat lie (possibly inadvertent but he’s never corrected the record). The reason...
...we are sure Hancock told a lie is that they have never known the FPR. Those including Hancock who believe that the oFPR can be estimated by inspection of the lowest positivity ever recorded, while logical, is completely wrong. Changes in personnel, throughout, testing...
...architecture & the like can radically alter the oFPR. Since Hancock’s remark in late summer, PCR mass testing has moved into the Lighthouse Labs & this creates a new & urgent need to continually assess oFPR. I’ve good reason to believe it’s now VERY much higher now that the...
So I wrote back to @lucyfrazermp for another go. Here\u2019s my letter.
— Edmund Fordham (@EdmundFordham) November 28, 2020
They don\u2019t understand how serious this is.
If they can\u2019t tell us the oFPR, our PCR testing is worthless. (thread) pic.twitter.com/zHJ8SJCzf1
Without this information it’s impossible to interpret any result. If the oFPR is 4%, for example, and if the true prevalence is 0.3% (it’s probably less), then for every 10,000 tests, 400 positives would be false & 30 positives would be genuine. So 93% of positives are false.
As Mr Fordham points out, almost all policies pivot on PCR mass testing. Hancock previously admitted on talkRADIO to Julia Hartley-Brewer in late summer that the FPR was “just under 1%”. That was a flat lie (possibly inadvertent but he’s never corrected the record). The reason...
...we are sure Hancock told a lie is that they have never known the FPR. Those including Hancock who believe that the oFPR can be estimated by inspection of the lowest positivity ever recorded, while logical, is completely wrong. Changes in personnel, throughout, testing...
...architecture & the like can radically alter the oFPR. Since Hancock’s remark in late summer, PCR mass testing has moved into the Lighthouse Labs & this creates a new & urgent need to continually assess oFPR. I’ve good reason to believe it’s now VERY much higher now that the...
More from Health
Public Health Scholarships
This may help for those considering MS/PhD in Public Health
1. The Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degree in Public Health in Disasters
https://t.co/1Z5qpstsSu
2. Afya Bora Global Health
3. Carl Duisberg Scholarships
https://t.co/HnNXdbWBxy
4. Commonwealth Scholarships for Developing Countries
https://t.co/3fWGf5b2OH
5. Fellowships in Public Health & Tropical
6. Fellowships to Promote Mental Health Journalism
https://t.co/MVV9PFsBJ1
7. 2021-22 Jeroen Ensink Memorial Fund
8. Paul S. Lietman Global Travel Grant for Residents & Fellows
https://t.co/qK76R495QT
9. Global Health Internships and Funding
https://t.co/FD9Gh2wXvO
10. Kofi Annan Global Health Leadership
11. MA in European Public Health
https://t.co/5x0Vr7b1j8
12. MSc in Public Health Scholarships - Maastricht University,
This may help for those considering MS/PhD in Public Health
1. The Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degree in Public Health in Disasters
https://t.co/1Z5qpstsSu
2. Afya Bora Global Health
3. Carl Duisberg Scholarships
https://t.co/HnNXdbWBxy
4. Commonwealth Scholarships for Developing Countries
https://t.co/3fWGf5b2OH
5. Fellowships in Public Health & Tropical
6. Fellowships to Promote Mental Health Journalism
https://t.co/MVV9PFsBJ1
7. 2021-22 Jeroen Ensink Memorial Fund
8. Paul S. Lietman Global Travel Grant for Residents & Fellows
https://t.co/qK76R495QT
9. Global Health Internships and Funding
https://t.co/FD9Gh2wXvO
10. Kofi Annan Global Health Leadership
11. MA in European Public Health
https://t.co/5x0Vr7b1j8
12. MSc in Public Health Scholarships - Maastricht University,
Now you know I love to sh-t in Harvard. But I also like accuracy. So I decided to go look at Harvard’s catalog to see its lack of military history that this article describes (they only teach history of pets it claims) and what I found shocked me! Shocked me! A thread: 1/
First off, Harvard students literally have multiple sections of military history that they can take listed. (It appears these ones are taught at MIT, so they might have to walk down the street for these) but... 2/
Say they want to stay on campus...they can only take numerous classes on war and diplomacy...3/
They have an entire class on Yalta. That’s right. An entire class on Yalta. 4/
But wait! There is more! They can take the British Empire, The Fall of the Roman Empire for those wanting traditional topics... 5/
\u201cMilitary history\u201d is only in decline if you\u2014like the author & experts in this obnoxious piece\u2014see the subject as a narrowly defined, white dude-oriented, guns & bayonets approach. The field is 1000% better off w/today\u2019s diversity of topics & historians. https://t.co/dUf3OWyVpQ
— Jonathan S. Jones (@_jonathansjones) February 1, 2021
First off, Harvard students literally have multiple sections of military history that they can take listed. (It appears these ones are taught at MIT, so they might have to walk down the street for these) but... 2/
Say they want to stay on campus...they can only take numerous classes on war and diplomacy...3/
They have an entire class on Yalta. That’s right. An entire class on Yalta. 4/
But wait! There is more! They can take the British Empire, The Fall of the Roman Empire for those wanting traditional topics... 5/
1/15
Why can cefepime cause neurological toxicity?
And why is renal failure the main risk factor for this complication?
The answer requires us to learn about cefepime's structure and why it unexpectedly binds to a certain CNS receptor.
#MedTwitter #Tweetorial
2/
Let's establish a few facts about cefepime:
🔺4th generation cephalosporin antibiotic
🔺Excretion = exclusively in the urine (mostly as unchanged drug)
🔺Readily crosses the blood-brain barrier (so it easily accesses the brain)
https://t.co/rjYG1BfGPR
3/
The first report of cefepime neurotoxicity was in 1999.
A patient w/ renal failure received high doses of cefepime and then developed encephalopathy, tremors, myoclonic jerks, and tonic-clonic seizures.
✅All symptoms resolved after hemodialysis.
https://t.co/u7JLVitQpp
4/
Cefepime neurotoxicity is surprisingly common, occurring in up to 15% of treated critically ill patients (w/ symptoms varying from encephalopathy to seizures).
💡The main risk factors = renal failure and lack of dose adjustment for renal function.
https://t.co/nxbnzSq8AR
5/
What about cefepime induces neurotoxicity?
One clue is that it's not the only antibiotic that causes neurotoxicity, particularly seizures.
This actually is a class effect w/ other beta-lactam antibiotics (including penicillins and carbapenems).
https://t.co/Lf4BhON9IY
Why can cefepime cause neurological toxicity?
And why is renal failure the main risk factor for this complication?
The answer requires us to learn about cefepime's structure and why it unexpectedly binds to a certain CNS receptor.
#MedTwitter #Tweetorial
2/
Let's establish a few facts about cefepime:
🔺4th generation cephalosporin antibiotic
🔺Excretion = exclusively in the urine (mostly as unchanged drug)
🔺Readily crosses the blood-brain barrier (so it easily accesses the brain)
https://t.co/rjYG1BfGPR
3/
The first report of cefepime neurotoxicity was in 1999.
A patient w/ renal failure received high doses of cefepime and then developed encephalopathy, tremors, myoclonic jerks, and tonic-clonic seizures.
✅All symptoms resolved after hemodialysis.
https://t.co/u7JLVitQpp
4/
Cefepime neurotoxicity is surprisingly common, occurring in up to 15% of treated critically ill patients (w/ symptoms varying from encephalopathy to seizures).
💡The main risk factors = renal failure and lack of dose adjustment for renal function.
https://t.co/nxbnzSq8AR
5/
What about cefepime induces neurotoxicity?
One clue is that it's not the only antibiotic that causes neurotoxicity, particularly seizures.
This actually is a class effect w/ other beta-lactam antibiotics (including penicillins and carbapenems).
https://t.co/Lf4BhON9IY