1/ Dear ABC and other Journalists,

Please can you fact check what @CollignonPeter is telling you? It's really important as he is in the media most days and much of what he says wrongly minimises the situation. Starting with the ABC earlier today...
2/ He says "transmission... [is] predominantly by droplets from people with symptoms". No, that is wrong. It is mainly from people WITHOUT symptoms, which is vital to know, because that is one of the things that makes this illness uniquely infectious.
2/ He says "transmission... [is] predominantly by droplets from people with symptoms". No, that is wrong. It is mainly from people WITHOUT symptoms, which is vital to know, because that is one of the things that makes this illness uniquely infectious.
2/ He says "transmission... [is] predominantly by droplets from people with symptoms". No, that is wrong. It is mainly from people WITHOUT symptoms, which is vital to know, because that is one of the things that makes this illness uniquely infectious.
3/ Peter is very resistant to a significant role for aerosols in transmission, despite the mountain of evidence presented to him. He has started talking about "airborne droplets" and the importance of fresh air... https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13756-020-00868-6
Scientific evidence supports aerosol transmission of SARS-COV-2

https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13756-020-00868-6
4/ ...but almost universally in Australia the lack of clarity around airborne transmission leads to paradoxes which imperil our infection control in hospitals and HQ. It's so important we get this right. https://twitter.com/suss_mark/status/1348388372516012032
5/ The next one is startling. He minimises the importance of the highly transmissible B117 strain by saying "It's only 50% more, not double the risk". This betrays a total misunderstanding of the exponential nature of infectious disease transmission.
6/ Incredible in an ID physician you say? You betcha. The reality of what an increase in R value of 50% or more means is drastic, not something to minimise.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/science-and-technology/new-strain-variant-covid-19-coronavirus-lockdown-schools
7/ It means that during the UK's lockdown in November, R, which is the average number of people an infected person will themselves infect, sank to 0.92 for the "normal" variant, but only 1.45 for B117.
7/ It means that during the UK's lockdown in November, R, which is the average number of people an infected person will themselves infect, sank to 0.92 for the "normal" variant, but only 1.45 for B117.
7/ It means that during the UK's lockdown in November, R, which is the average number of people an infected person will themselves infect, sank to 0.92 for the "normal" variant, but only 1.45 for B117.
8/ After four cycles of infection, the normal variant will have infected 0.72 people (0.92^4), i.e. it's dying out. But B117 will have infected 4.42 people (1.45^4), i.e. its spreading like wildfire. Here's what it looks like in modelling from Alberta. https://twitter.com/GosiaGasperoPhD/status/1348056824503693313
9/ Peter said on the ABC today that "In Denmark there is a suggestion it is going up faster than the others." This doesn't accurately reflect the Danish situation. The Danes are really worried and acting urgently. https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1346899021621813249
10/ The problem is that it is much harder to get the R of B117 below 1 (which is the only way to make it go away) and only two lockdowns would have ever managed to do it: NZ and Austria first wave. https://twitter.com/GosiaGasperoPhD/status/1348056830883155968
11/ And even if you do manage to get R below 1, it is going to take you MUCH longer to get the numbers down to zero. 10 cases per day of B117 takes longer than 1000 cases per day of regular variant. https://twitter.com/GosiaGasperoPhD/status/1348409622944567297
12/ This is a series of animations which demonstrate graphically the frightening effect of the increased transmissibility of B117, far removed from the way Peter plays it down. https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1348080234265006082
13/ If we don't manage to keep B117 out - and of course it's harder to do so, because it's so much more transmissible - then the chances of getting a community outbreak back under control are very small.
14/ That's why so many of us are sounding the alarm about B117 and why we are so concerned about the lack of airborne-level PPE in our hotel quarantine, which makes an escape so much more likely.

Now, let's move on to what Peter has been saying about children and COVID.
15/ Peter minimises the risk from and to children, but the facts do not bear him out. Dr Zoe Hyde demonstrates in this thread and said: "With the greatest respect @CollignonPeter, this is inaccurate & has the potential to cause harm." https://twitter.com/CollignonPeter/status/1346576658346561536
16/ And B117 is starting to look like it could be more transmissible in children, as this data showing case positivity rate by age in France demonstrates: https://twitter.com/GuillaumeRozier/status/1348351378494787589
17/ In Sweden - and elsewhere in Europe - we are starting to see children's ICUs fill up. This is not always a trivial illness for children. https://twitter.com/itosettiMD_MBA/status/1346279473210159104
18/ Of course there are legitimate differences of scientific opinion, but Peter's assertions can be so far removed from the evidence that they risk disseminating misinformation to the public, at a time when accurate information has never been more important.
19/ No-one wants to cause unnecessary alarm, but the reality is that the world is in a very dangerous place and healthcare systems in many countries are at or near collapse, including in the UK. https://twitter.com/dannyjnwong/status/1347943875743248388
20/ I find this tweet from the CEO of Birmingham Womens and Childrens NHS Trust in England to be almost unbearably poignant in its commentary on the UK situation. I am surprised it is still up, but it is. https://twitter.com/BWCHBoss/status/1348339710943494144
21/ And I haven't even mentioned community masking, where Peter's position is very much at variance with mainstream medical opinion. It is crucial that medical experts inform the public correctly, so that we all have the right information with which to make decisions.
22/ Journalists, you have a duty to fact check, sometimes even of experts. Experts are not infallible and I encourage you to cast your net more widely than you presently do, as I encourage @CollignonPeter to ensure that the information he presents is rational and correct.
23/ We are in a good position, but this is a dangerous time for Australia and we must not mistake the relative normality we presently enjoy for security, our state of which remains extremely precarious.
24/ This thread I wrote on December 23rd outlines a number of measures which are vital to safeguard Australia. Everything we have learned since then about B117 only reinforces the need for extreme vigilance and decisive pre-emptive action. https://twitter.com/YouAreLobbyLud/status/1348376347970686977
And then, as I published this thread, @enenbee tweeted this... https://twitter.com/enenbee/status/1348608890905088001
Oh I forgot this. It's really really serious. It is not to be minimised. We are at great risk. https://twitter.com/YouAreLobbyLud/status/1348116225080090625?s=19
Oh. I didn't hear him say this about the Brisbane lockdown. https://twitter.com/kennington_u/status/1348630716926488582?s=19
☝️JOURNALISTS! we cannot have someone who apparently does not understand the nature of viral transmission commenting as an expert in the national media about lockdowns.

That isn't responsible journalism. Normally, I let any old crap past in the media. But this is serious now.
I just listened to this. Please, journalists, have a listen. Then, having listened to it, and read and digested this thread, ask yourselves if you think it is responsible to have him comment on this subject.

@isobelroe @LindaMottram https://twitter.com/kennington_u/status/1348678705204219908?s=19
Peter is not unique in his misinformation on infection in children. We need to get the politial ideology out of policy and ensure we are making decisions on high quality evidence where it's available and on the precautionary principle where it isn't. https://twitter.com/lisa_iannattone/status/1348715988657840130?s=19
You can follow @YouAreLobbyLud.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
Those who think consciousness raising & movement building are disconnected, or even a distraction from electoral politics have not paid attention to the history of social change.In this thread, we
Read more
The 2020s will be known as the Remote Work decadeA few predictions of what is likely to emerge[ a thread ] Third Space: Office and Working from Home will
Read more
1/29: Have you ever had a concept explained to you that helps frame complex issues you’ve been wrestling with and opens your eyes to new possibilities? A concept that I
Read more
By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.