3 linked tweets from Dr. Eric Feigl-Ding,:

[tblue37]

Link to tweet

Text

well, this escalated quickly — look at the new Omicron wave (black) vs past waves in Gauteng

key reminder that kids are “critical hidden superspreaders” according to research …. And that was even before #Omicron. Omicron now seems 4-6x more transmissible (from combination of contagiousness and evasiveness). Kids outbreaks at schools happen often…

KIDS

[unweird]

1. Dang kids always spoiling all the fun

Nt

[SheltieLover]

2. I love Dr. Ding's tweets

[chia]

3. He's controversial.

But as Feigl-Ding’s influence has grown, so have the voices of his critics, many of them fellow scientists who have expressed ongoing concern over his tweets, which they say are often unnecessarily alarmist, misleading, or sometimes just plain wrong. “Science misinformation is a huge problem right now—I think we can all appreciate it—[and] he’s a constant source of it,” said Saskia Popescu, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at George Mason University and the University of Arizona who serves on FAS’s COVID-19 Rapid Response Task Force, a separate arm of the organization from Feigl-Ding’s work.

Tara Smith, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at Kent State University, suggested that Feigl-Ding’s reach means his tweets have the power to be hugely influential. “With as large of a following as he has, when he says something that’s really wrong or misleading, it reverberates throughout the Twittersphere,” she said.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90581545/eric-feigl-ding-covid-19-twitter

[stopdiggin]

4. thanks. that bears keeping in mind

good article. The guy pushes the envelope (apparently with some frequency) - and more or less admits to that fact. 'In the service of a greater good' seems to be the theme - from himself, and his supporters.

[chia]

5. Thanks, it's a good read, and I thought it was fair. And I say that as someone who started following

him at some point during Covid, I've lost track of exactly when. The more I read of him, the more he seemed to be kind of a science version of Seth Abramson, also someone I followed before I didn't, because Abramson was just too much, these long, long threads that he wanted everyone to retweet. It's not that Feigl-Ding is all wrong, it's just that he's not alway exactly right, and rings lots of alarm bells and sirens while being not always exactly right. So I just take his information with a grain of salt and see what other, quieter epidemiologists are saying.