BC SCIENCE
Saved by @Mollyycolllinss

https://t.co/xvP6tVlIaE
Quite a surprise. Ferguson isn’t qualified to comment on such things. He lacks understanding of basic biological concepts, partly explaining why his predictions are often so extreme.

 That said, I’ll take him as an ally. It’s clear we’re already at herd immunity. How can I be sure? London had a huge peak of excess deaths in spring. The timing of peak deaths showed clearly that the pandemic was self-limiting. Recall much debate about whether the interval...
...between lockdown & peak deaths was long enough for lockdown to have been the cause of reducing deaths? The answer was “no”. But it was close & I can understand people thinking “well, it’s close, so perhaps it was lockdown that did it?”, thereby establishing a foundational...
...myth favoured by those who genuinely believe lockdown saves lives (it clearly doesn’t).
I’ll get to London & here immunity. But those wavering about the evidence about lockdown in spring really will benefit from cogitating on this graph.
In blue are the 30 trusts with the earliest date of peak deaths in spring. In red, the 30 with the latest peak deaths. For me, this is proof that national lockdown, which began Mar 23, played no role whatsoever in turning the pandemic. You’ll see some areas had peak daily...
...deaths numbers occur before lockdown. Others so close to lockdown that obviously the intervention was far too close to peak daily deaths that lockdown can’t even have contributed to turning the pandemic. Even harder for pro-lockdown folk is the marked range in dates of peak...
...daily deaths across the country. The lockdown thesis is that this intervention sufficiently reduced social contacts that the spread of the virus was abruptly slowed & that pushed Rt below 1. That’s what saved us. But if that was even close to what happened, the dates of peak..
...daily deaths would be close together in time, perhaps a few days variation. That’s not what we see. Looking at the trusts with earliest to latest peak daily deaths we see variation of a whole month. Furthermore, the trusts with earliest turning points are mostly London and...
...those with latest turning points furthest from London. I can conceive of no crisper evidence that (1) lockdown was not responsible for turning the spring pandemic & therefore (2) something else was responsible for the abrupt turning of the pandemic. As yet, no one, not SAGE...
...nor anyone else has come up with an explanation for this data that doesn’t involve a rapidly reducing proportion of the population who remain susceptible to the virus, aka herd immunity.
What this means is that almost all of U.K. experienced what’s called unmitigated...
...spreading of the virus. Just like Sweden. It’s not surprising then that we’ve ended up with identical population fatality (0.08%).
Back to London. Three months ago, I wrote a detailed article which contained several predictions.
https://t.co/b0rT5Lq9HI
At the heart of things, I laid out why SAGE’s advice to Govt was seriously in error. If SAGE was correct, we’d expect the pandemic to resume in a similar pattern to spring, the deaths to increase in the typical respiratory virus pattern of a clear spike & importantly for excess..
...deaths in London to be marked (it was the epicentre in spring). For this next part, I recommend we set to one side for a moment the label “covid19 deaths”, because there’s some controversy about the reliability of PCR mass testing. Prof Whitty himself guided us to look at...
...excess deaths as the best indication of progress of the virus. So let’s do that. London has not had excess deaths at all this autumn & winter. That means SAGE was flatly wrong & without crowing it turns out I was closer in my prediction. Here’s the official data. Note that...
...the data is sufficiently sensitive a record to pick out the deaths associated with the August heatwave. But the daily deaths are not greater than the five year average all the way through autumn & winter. I agree with Prof Ferguson. But he’s months off the pace. The data...
...was unequivocal that SAGE’s narrative has been demonstrably wrong by early summer last year. Once it’s realised that lockdown 1 wasn’t the force that turned the pandemic in spring, lots of other things we’ve been told cannot be true. I’m willing to ascribe their errors to...
...ignorance. They didn’t have an immunologist on their team in spring. So what is obvious to me might not even have crossed their minds or entered into their mathematical models.
SAGE’s errors unfortunately have been compounded & their mistaken narrative is gradually destroying
...the country in every way. Remember the other predictions I made & how they contrast with reasonable inferences from SAGE’s position? I predicted what I termed a #SecondaryRipple which was characterised by regional outbreaks which would be self-limiting & overall excess...
...deaths rather modest compared with spring. Again, let’s follow Whitty’s advice to be guided by excess deaths & not labelling of cause of deaths (because total deaths is agreed to be objective). What we’ve seen in autumn & winter is a slow ramp of excess deaths. This is...
...because each mini outbreak is uncoordinated in time across the country. And the total excess deaths has been small compared with spring. In fact, recent PHE weekly reports have shown low to no excess deaths.
This is completely consistent with national herd immunity, with local self limiting outbreaks possible but impossible to see a widespread & growing epidemic. Note that official data shows there is no public health emergency due to the virus. I’m not going to get into the whole...
...business of misattribution of cause of death due to untrustworthy PCR mass testing again (yesterday’s thread covered that). Please follow Whitty’s advice & be guided by excess deaths. Once you do that, the whole position is seen for what it is: a reality in complete contrast..
...with the narrative of fear. I’ll close by again encouraging those at elevated risk of severe outcomes from the virus to consider getting vaccinated. It isn’t wise to do so if you’re not at elevated risk. I also repeat my demand that mass testing of the population ceases. It...
...is simply not necessary & because of unknown unreliability, I believe it’s main product is false positives, fear & superfluous ‘control measures’ which don’t work, while hurting everyone.
If anyone on SAGE reads this, please look to your conscience & alter course.

More from Yardley Yeadon

Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
Postcard From Luxembourg: normality is restored prior to vaccination.
I’ve repeatedly said that “test, test, test” is madness, if the tests are unregulated. Why?
‘Because pandemic’, NO PCR mass testing has a declared operational false positive rate.

So we don’t know the oFPR of PCR mass testing in U.K. This is conducted in a small number of private labs, set up at pace in summer, anticipating a ‘2nd wave’ (itself a dubious prediction from the Imperial team who’ve been wrong every time before). You’d assume these “Lighthouse

...Labs are surely regulated, inspected, accredited etc. They’re doing the most impactful medical diagnostic testing which has ever happened in history. But no. None of these are true. ‘Because pandemic’. Now, I don’t know the oFPR either. But we’re paying for it. It is NOT ZERO.

However, the authorities take every positive result as a “confirmed case” (though there’s nothing confirmed). There is no open protocol you can examine & debate. None of the results are available for understanding, thinking & interpretation. Wouldn’t it be important to learn...

...how the distribution of cycle threshold for positives varies through a run of tens of thousands of samples? Or through time? Or across geography? There is no routine evaluation of the characteristics of the test, even though we know the oFPR of complex systems is subject to...
SOCIETY
Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
@DesmondSwayne Sir Desmond is right. SAGE makes mathematical predictions based on flawed models.
I chose to stick my neck out almost 4mo ago here:
https://t.co/b0rT5Lq9HI
I experienced much anxiety doing this, aware that, if I was badly wrong here, I would be destroyed as a contributor.

That said, I thought the immunology so clear that I made three, specific & testable predictions which should apply if I was right.
Please examine them, on the right, under the pie chart:


In particular, I predicted that the epidemic would not reignite in London. Obviously, we have many “cases” but I urge people to disregard these & instead to look at excess deaths, on the principle that a severe (occasionally lethal) respiratory virus would show itself this way.

Here is a chart showing the trend of deaths in London alone over recent years. A prominent peak of deaths is evident as the virus swept through in spring. Also visible the August heatwave. But there are no excess deaths now.
I submit this is a striking example of herd immunity.


I’m still waiting for SAGE or indeed anyone to provide an alternative explanation for the sharp nature of the spring excess deaths peak which doesn’t involve herd immunity or otherwise removing from the pool those vulnerable to lethal outcomes (same result). Given this sharp...
MATHS
Advertisement
Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
In a number of Sunday papers:
Scientific advisers said it was “hard to see” when the restrictions would end as new variants continued to emerge, delivering a potentially devastating blow to the travel industry. The prime minister said that after progress with vaccinations...

...”what we don’t want to see is all that work undone by the arrival of a new variant that is vaccine-busting”.
The idea is planted in people’s mind that this virus is mutating in such a way as to evade prior immunity. This is completely unfounded, certainly as regards immunity..

...gained naturally, after repelling the virus (which well around 99.9% of the population do, fewer, obviously in the very elderly & already ill, more in those younger & well). It’s important to appreciate that upon infection, the human immune system cuts up an infectious...

...agent into short pieces. Each of these short pieces of protein are presented to other cells in the immune system, like an identity parade. Our cells have a truly astonishing range of abilities to recognise different protein structures, and there will be some which recognise...

...each of the pieces of the invader. The cells which recognise a piece are instructed to multiply selectively so that, after a few days to a couple of weeks, our bodies contain large numbers of virus piece specific cells. These have a range of functions. Some make antibodies...
SCIENCE
Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
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...
SOCIETY
Yardley Yeadon
Yardley Yeadon
@MichaelYeadon3
@scottorandojin What if the false diagnosis rate was 90%?
Don’t misunderstand me. I’m a thorough believer in the existence of this virus.

To exemplify: the NHS is under severe winter pressure. Many staff are unavailable, largely due to forced isolation from testing. Also, I’m told the adaptations to the conditions make normal work almost impossible. Trying to keep apart patients in different categories must be...

...incredibly stressful. I doubt I could ever have coped. Add to this the real stream of sick people & it’s a complete nightmare. My sympathies won’t be accepted but I offer them anyway. As to “the deaths”, do you mean the reported count of “covid19 deaths”? Everyone is doing...

...their very best. But as to that count: it’s nothing to do with clinical judgement. A covid19 death is a death from any cause within 28d of a positive test. So once a person is labelled by a positive test, if they then die, they’re a covid19 death. Back to my substantive...

...question: how reliable is that labelling? It’s not a clinical diagnosis. We’re not used to this idea. Never before in medical history has someone had a disease (let alone cause of death) been defined by the result of a single year alone. Yet that’s where we are. I think that..
HEALTH

More from Science

Max Fagin
Max Fagin
@MaxFagin
November is here, and that means a massive shift is coming. And by "massive" I am of course referring to the redefinition of the kilogram unit of mass that the world has been building up to for more than 100 years. Let me explain:


1/ I've had an unhealthy fascination with metrology (the study of measurement) ever since my 2nd year as a physics major when I took a class devoted to duplicating historic physics experiments, so please indulge me for going into heavy detail (get it?) about the kilogram.

2/ So what actually *defines* a unit of measurement? If you're American, you probably know a mile is 5280 feet and a foot is 12 inches and an inch is 2.54 centimeters etc. But where does this chain of definitions end? Is it turtles all the way down?

3/ It's actually not! For all units (even the imperial units used in America) the answers all end with the Système International (SI) unit definitions established and maintained for over 100 years by the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIMP) in France.

4/ At the base of this tower are the SI base units. Just 7 SI base units define every other unit in existence. They are:

Kilogram, kg (mass)
Meter, m (distance)
Second, s (time)
Kelvin, K (temp)
Ampere, A (electric current)
Candela, cd (luminous intensity)
Mole, mol (quantity)
SCIENCE
Sri Krishna
Sri Krishna
@tellkrish
With @franklowery our new study on attributes of T cells that contribute to successful cell therapy in cancer patients in @ScienceMagazine today w/ colleagues @slgoff_SB, @NCI_CCR_SB @theNCI a TL;DR thread on key findings with caveats :) 1/10

has a long history of using tumor infiltrating T cells (TILs) to treat cancers since well.. before I was even born. We analyzed our most successful melanoma ACT trial for cell surface phenotypes in TIL infusion products of patients (aPD1/immunotherapy naive) /2

Surprisingly we found a CD39- TIL subset (CD39-CD69-, DN) associated with ACT-response. TBH we were expecting the opposite (CD39+). We only included CD39 bcz multiple groups (e.g. Simoni et al, 2018) had reported CD39+ as enriching for anti-tumor/neoantigen reactive T cells. /3


CD39- DN TILs RNA/epigenetics resemble stem-like memory progenitors, and in vitro were able to self-renew, and give rise to other CD39+ subsets. OTOH the most dominant subset of patient infusion products were CD39+ CD69+ (DP) and these guys were terminally differentiated.. /4


So, to clarify we specifically analyzed tumor-specific mutation-reactive Tcells. Turns out, ACT-responders had pool of neoantigen-reactive TILs in the CD39- phenotype, while non-responders did not (despite other irrelevant CD39- Tcells) -> not all CD39- T cells are bystanders /5
SCIENCE
Advertisement
Navin Kabra
Navin Kabra
@NGKabra
Did you know that all the nuclear bombs we exploded in the '40s-50s-60s have permanently contaminated all the steel the world has produced since then? All steel in the world is divided into two categories: pre-1945 non-contaminated steel, and post-1945 contaminated steel.

How?

Nuclear bombs (including the tests) create a lot of radioisotopes that are not found in nature. For example Cobalt-60 (a radioactive version of Cobalt-59). And since the 1945 Trinity test, these have all dispersed in the atmosphere.

What does this have to do with steel?

The process of manufacturing steel uses atmospheric air (or atmospheric oxygen). Some of the radioisotopes like Cobalt-60 get pulled in too, and as a result, any steel produced after 1945 has embedded in it some of these radioisotopes, sitting there emitting gamma rays.

Why do we care about traces of radioisotopes in steel? When making Geiger counters, or medical devices to check for radioactive contamination, or astronomical instruments, the emissions from the contaminated steel would interfere with the measurements.

So we need pre-1945 steel

Pre-1945 non-contaminated steel is called "low background steel". And when we need it, where do we get it from?

We go, find pre-World-War-II sunken shipwrecks, and then salvage the steel (and lead) from those to build our instruments which need heavy radiation shielding.
SCIENCE
Sean McClure
Sean McClure
@sean_a_mcclure
@engexplain @nntaleb 1/10
Science is assumed to be “evidence-based” but that term alone doesn’t mean much. What constitutes good evidence? How is evidence being used? Is it supporting or refuting a hypothesis? Was the hypothesis and experimental design predetermined or found ex post facto?

@nntaleb 2/10
The reality is you can find “evidence” for almost any narrative. Limit the sample size, cherry-pick studies, etc. Systematic reviews, meta analyses, and randomized controlled trials are all susceptible to selective interpretation/narrative fallacy.

@nntaleb 3/10
At the heart of the problem is the over-reliance on simplistic statistical techniques that do little more than quantify 2 things moving together.

@nntaleb 4/10
Take Pearson’s correlation, based on covariance. Variation can increase simultaneously across 2 variables for countless reasons, most of which are spurious. Yet this simple notion of “causality” undergirds much of scientific literature.

@nntaleb 5/10
Information-theoretic (entropy based) approaches on the other hand can assess *general* measures of dependence. Rather than some specialized (linear) view based on concurrent variation, entropy encompasses the amount of information contained in and between variables.
SCIENCE
Suzie Dawson
Suzie Dawson
@Suzi3D
Epic thread incoming:

I'm going to answer the question so many people have been asking this week:

WHAT IS PROJECT X???

Here's the definitive thread to tell you - and show you -precisely what Project X is

Grab a drink, sit down with me and let's #TalkLiberation

<3

1/?

"Project X" is actually called "PanQuake".

Pan means "all". Quake is the huge effect our voices can have when our communications are uncensored and when we have access to brand new functionality that *enhances* our social reach, rather than diminishes it

Here's our logo:

2/?


You can follow the fledgling official PanQuake Twitter account here: @pan_quake and see our super cool new website here: https://t.co/F7wLSeM6aK

You can find our donation page here: https://t.co/VICFnsR0RX

Keep reading this thread to find out why we created it & what it is

3/?

SPOILER ALERT: Much of the content below this point is from my personal slides & speech notes from today's launch event. That stream got totally ruined by (big) tech problems, but I'm happy to report everything is turning out wonderfully


Here are some of our most high profile & dedicated public advocates for PanQuake - many of whom were scheduled to appear at our launch. All of whom stuck around for hours, to do a prerecord of the event, which is being edited, processed & uploaded for you as I write this.

5/?
SCIENCE

You May Also Like

Erik Torenberg
Erik Torenberg
@eriktorenberg
1/ Someone emailed me asking how to break into VC, so I wanted to answer on Twitter where others could see and contribute to the conversation.

2/ “Being a VC” can mean a lot of different things, so it’s worth asking:

What actual activities do you want to do?

- Deep market analysis?
- Be in the flow of information and people?
- Make deals?
- Work closely w/ founders over time (e.g take board seats?)
- Manage capital?

3/ It’s worth specifying what type of VC you might like to become — as there are different archetypes. E.g.

- Benchmark (Lead series A/B - couple investments a year)
- First Round (Lead seed rounds, partner w/ a few companies a year)
- SV Angel (Make lots of seed investments)

4/ Continued:

Expa - Incubate companies

YC / Village Global - Build a platform to help entrepreneurs at scale

Do you want to join a firm or start one? There’s a lot to consider.

Different paths will require different skillsets & sets of experiences.

5/ Since the person who wrote the email is a young person trying to break into VC by joining a firm (and who doesn’t want to start a company), I’ll tailor this tweet storm to that goal. There’s some overlap.
STARTUPS
Justin Jackson
Justin Jackson
@mijustin
A lot of bootstrappers think they have a marketing problem:

"I need to get better at marketing."

But, it's more likely that you have a product problem:

"Do customers really want this? Do they care enough about this to switch to a new solution?"

☝️ this is why most of my book, @marketingdevs, is about:

1. Choosing the right market
2. Building something they want

"If your product is remarkable, getting noticed is a lot easier." – @peldi


I was reminded of this concept again this morning while reading @pjrvs' book (Company of One):

"Sales increase when you honestly evaluate what someone needs and then teach them the value of what you're selling."


To succeed, your product has to offer an outcome that is highly desirable to a large group of customers.

The number of sales your product receives is a multiple of these two variables:

1. How big is the target market?
2. How desirable is the outcome you're offering them?
STARTUPS
Advertisement
Sanjeev Upadhyay\U0001f1ee\U0001f1f3
Sanjeev Upadhyay🇮🇳...
@SanjeevUpadhy13
What Happened To Bhakt Prahlad after Hiranyakashipu Vadh
#Thread
Prahlada became the mighty king of the Asuras after Shri Narsimha killed Hiranyakashipu. Prahlada was even more powerful than his father, Hiranyakashipu ever was. He enjoyed the love and respect of his subjects.


By virtue of his good behaviour, Prahlada conquered the three worlds easily and Indra ran away from the Heavens. Indra then deceived Prahlada into giving him the power of his behaviour and Prahlada lost control of the three worlds.


Asuras grew angry at the Devas for taking advantage of their King's virtuous behaviour and invaded the heavens. The Devas, afraid of the Asuras, enlisted the help of human Kings such as Yayati, Raji and Kakutstha and defeated them.

Prahlada attacked the gods and defeated Indra in battle, forcing the King of the Gods to run for his life. Indra sought help of Lord Vishnu. Infused with his power, Indra defeated Prahlada. The latter understood that Vishnu was helping Indra in battle and he withdrew his forces.


Prahlada first gave his kingdom to Andhaka, but the latter was defeated by Shiva. So Prahlada gave it to his son Virochana and undertook a Tirtha Yatra.
ALL
Jaya_Upadhyaya
Jaya_Upadhyaya
@Jayalko1
DEVI KARUMARIAMMAN, THIRUVERKADU (TN)

Devi is worshipped here as both Swayambhu (self-manifested) and as Parashakti (with 4 arms holding skull,sword,trishul,udukkai/damru).

Here, Muruga got Vel from Devi to fight Suran. So the place was called Vel kadu which became Verkadu.


It is said that there was an anthill here long ago. Devi appeared in the dream of a devotee and asked him to build a shrine at that spot. When the anthill was removed, the swayambhu murti of Devi emerged. So Devi is called Karuvil Illadha Karumari ( not in the womb of mother).


Once, Devi went to Surya in the form of an old woman but Surya neglected her. Devi’s anger made Surya lose his brightness.
To appease her, Surya said that His rays would fall on Her directly twice in a year and touch her feet. Also, Sunday is celebrated as day of Devi Karumari.


There is also a wooden image of Devi (Marachilai Amman) here. Devotees offer locks to her in the belief that She would safe guard their houses.
Temple tank (Thiruchamber Poigai) is said to have been created by Subramanya. Taking dip in it is said to cure skin related disorders.
ALL
Mike DiCenzo
Mike DiCenzo
@mikedicenzo
"How the Avengers would respond to the Capitol riot" (a thread)

CAPTAIN AMERICA - tells Falcon, "I fought Nazis once before. They're extremely dangerous." They then see the guy scaling the Capitol wall fall into the shrubs. Falcon: "You sure these are the same Nazis?"

IRON MAN - lands by the guy carrying the podium. Says, "Mind if I borrow this?" then tosses it to Hulk, who swings it like a bat at the mob. Guy: "Hey, that's MY podium!" Iron Man: "Actually it's the Speaker's. And technically, it's a lectern." Then punches him through a wall.

BLACK WIDOW - enters hotel room where Jack Dorsey is tied up. Rips duct tape off his mouth. Jack: "I'll do anything you want!" BW: "Disable POTUS's Twitter. NOW!" Jack fumbles with his phone. "Done. Anything else?" BW: "Yeah. Trim your beard for God's sake." *tosses him clippers*

HULK - grabs a selfie stick from one of the guys and beats him over the head with it. Deeming it too small, he grabs another guy's Confederate flag and takes out a whole swath of rioters. He then tosses the flag to Cap, who uses it as a javelin to impale a fleeing Ted Cruz.

HAWKEYE - hears Iron Man in his earpiece say, "Looks like Orange Julius is tweeting from another account." Hawkeye: "On it." He locks in on Trump through the White House window and fires an arrow, knocking the phone out of Trump's hands. Hawkeye: "Damn that felt good."
GOVERNMENT