Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
Kristian G. Andersen
Infectious diseases & genomics. Immunologist in (voluntary) exile. Sarcasm score of 0.01. Fierce HOA (Hater of Acronyms).
4.394
Tweetovi
85
Pratim
4.136
Osobe koje vas prate
Tweetovi
Kristian G. Andersen 4 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @MackayIM
Oh, gee - if only I could insert a photo of Noodle in that link instead of our default image...
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 4 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @MackayIM
Hey, that's like my cat man! Is she somehow involved in all of this? Wouldn't surprise me - she's been trying to kill me for a while.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 6 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @christinaw181
I would assume anybody teaching volleyball at Harvard (!) should be perfectly qualified to weigh in on this issue.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen proslijedio/la je tweet
Richard Neher 16 h
Here are my latest graphs of case and fatality counts from globalcitizen's aggregated data. The doubling time of case counts has increased to about 6 days. But be aware that labs might reach testing capacity limits in the most affected areas. [1/6]
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen proslijedio/la je tweet
Maryn McKenna 16 h
There’s been a lot of chatter about whether masks protect against . Difficult fact: If you can’t get them, it doesn’t matter. Most of the world’s masks are made in China, and that could disrupt healthcare worldwide.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 11 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @dmaccannell @BillHanage i 5 ostali
Yeah, all very good points and it's a highly complex issue - even if you spelled bioRxiv wrong 😜.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 11 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @BillHanage @LauringLab i 4 ostali
My worry is that the status quo of doing nothing - specifically for outbreak research - will destroy the platform in the long run, which would be devastating. The bioRxiv is amazing and there are so many good papers - including on nCoV - and we need that to continue.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 11 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @BillHanage @LauringLab i 4 ostali
After this screening bioRxiv could then chose two different paths - (1) not put it online, or (2) put it online but put a somewhat stronger statement saying "screeners have reason to believe this study may be unreliable". I prefer 2, and I think there are many viable hybrids.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 11 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @BillHanage @LauringLab i 4 ostali
In this case, Facebook wasn't the root problem, misinformation was (coupled with Facebook AI of course). I'm not advocating slower down preprints on nCov, but maybe consider a bit more in-depth screen - doesn't have to take more than 15mins. All submissions are already screened.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 11 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @BillHanage @LauringLab i 4 ostali
I agree that preprints aren't the root problem - far from it. Bad science is. However, given the world we live in, we have to take steps to counter misinformation. It's the same argument that made Facebook say that misinformation spreading on their platform wasn't their problem.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 13 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @dmaccannell
Oh, crap, you're right - didn't think of that. Maybe it's time for a new Blast program so I can check? We could call it BlastArse.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 13 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @LindorffLarsen
🤪
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 15 h
Here's my analysis for today - take *every single* base in and blast each base *individually* against nt. Then I'll tally up the totals to give me (1) the exact animal this came from, and (2) any evidence of recombination/mutation. What could possibly go wrong?
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen proslijedio/la je tweet
Betz Halloran 3. velj
1/8 The 12th Summer Institute for Statistics and Modeling in Infectious Diseases () is scheduled for July 13-29, 2020. However, currently we have no funding. We need to find core funding by early March or it will be cancelled.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen proslijedio/la je tweet
Nathan Grubaugh 16 h
I think that it’s about time that we had The Talk about the role of bioRxiv during outbreaks. Some of this is so far out that individually they wont impact much, but collectively they are shaping the narrative. We wanted real-time results, but it comes with an accuracy trade-off.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 15 h
Totally agree with you - in fact, I have had some internal discussions about this over the last few days about exactly this. There must be some sort of screening when it comes to outbreak research - the current model unfortunately isn’t working. It’s highly disruptive.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen proslijedio/la je tweet
Kai Kupferschmidt 3. velj
So, that paper we all reported on showing transmission of from an “asymptomatic case”? Well, it turns out the woman did have symptoms. Here’s what we know so far:
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen proslijedio/la je tweet
Andrew Rambaut 🦠🧬🌲🔮🤦‍♂️ 3. velj
Obviously we have all got a bit distracted lately but Virus Genomics and Evolution 2020 (15-17 June) is open for registration:
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen proslijedio/la je tweet
Ed Yong 3. velj
Epidemics are mirrors that reflect the society they affect. I wrote about what the new coronavirus, 2019-nCoV, tells us about the world as it stands in 2020--the pace of modern science, the threat of fake news, the growth of isolationism, and all the rest.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
Kristian G. Andersen 2. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @CoronaVirusHebr @BrianPardy i 2 ostali
The study in question is false. The specific sequence they mention (EPI_ISL_403928) has a lot of highly obvious sequencing errors and have been excluded from most analyses. In the present study, their entire signal is due to sequencing errors not natural variation.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"