Here is another very enjoyable conversation, with @Pandata19’s scientific advisory board member, Dr Jay Bhattacharya. Key ideas in this thread.

We are making world-changing decisions on the basis of evidence that is not very good. Vast scientific evidence tells us that infection fatality rates are much lower than originally expected. A small fraction of people get severe illness. 2/10
The scientific community has been resistant to evidence not supporting the majoritarian view, preferring instead to gin up panic, focusing on the worst case for everything the virus does & the best case for everything lockdowns do, and ignoring the range of uncertainty. 3/10
Academe is a strange place now, with debate stifled. But there's a sense some are opening up to considering opposing views. This is key, since suppression of views stops knowledge from progressing—the end of science. Public health norms of unified messaging complicate this. 4/10
Why did we, from the start, assume we knew nothing about this virus, instead of assuming a reasonable prior? Low susceptibility was evident early on. Assuming any virus is new is hard to square with our deep-time co-evolution with viruses, & their slow evolution. 5/10
A lot of smart people changed their minds about what to do in March, and need to change them back. Our hope has to be that people will lose respect for scientific institutions, and not for science itself. 6/10
From the first day Jay heard about lockdowns, they felt like a violation of everything he knew about public health. Shutting down of schools has been their most shocking manifestation. 7/10
Asymptomatic people and children are at least much less efficient at transmitting. B- and T-cell responses persist after antibody levels have waned, so it is unlikely that people who are reinfected will get severely sick. 8/10
The issue of Long Covid is overstated by the media. Similar to the flu, there are occasional extra-respiratory manifestations, but they appear to be relatively uncommon and seldom serious. 9/10
Fear of the disease prevents young, healthy people from doing the usual thing & shouldering the burden of infection, so the elderly are spared ending up in the exposed group. Then there is an interesting discussion about vaccinations, including who should seek them. Enjoy! 10/10

More from Science

1. I find it remarkable that some medics and scientists aren’t raising their voices to make children as safe as possible. The comment about children being less infectious than adults is unsupported by evidence.


2. @c_drosten has talked about this extensively and @dgurdasani1 and @DrZoeHyde have repeatedly pointed out flaws in the studies which have purported to show this. Now for the other assertion: children are very rarely ill with COVID19.

3. Children seem to suffer less with acute illness, but we have no idea of the long-term impact of infection. We do know #LongCovid affects some children. @LongCovidKids now speaks for 1,500 children struggling with a wide range of long-term symptoms.

4. 1,500 children whose parents found a small campaign group. How many more are out there? We don’t know. ONS data suggests there might be many, but the issue hasn’t been studied sufficiently well or long enough for a definitive answer.

5. Some people have talked about #COVID19 being this generation’s Polio. According to US CDC, Polio resulted in inapparent infection in more than 99% of people. Severe disease occurred in a tiny fraction of those infected. Source:

You May Also Like