Nate Silver’s ego is beyond out of control. pic.twitter.com/7npgYUEiQz

— chris evans (@notcapnamerica) December 20, 2020

OK. I may get slaughtered here, but there is a kind of pundit who doesn't know what he doesn't know. I'm not talking about ordinary people on @Twitter who shoot the shit on a variety of topics, but people with millions of followers, readers. 1/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

Here I am talking about @NateSilver538 @mattyglesias and @DouthatNYT who have decided they are the arbiters of truth in science and public health. 3/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

All three believe age-based allocation is the only way to triage vaccine delivery and they've been scornful of the deliberation of #ACIP for talking about things like equity, essential workers, etc. 4/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

Don't get me wrong. I am all for criticizing scientists. I did it for years as an AIDS activist but what I think differentiates us from them is that we dug deep into the science, had mentorship from some great researchers, took on problems, analyzed them sometimes for years. 6/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

But now @NateSilver538 and @DouthatNYT are going after "public health," suggesting they know the contours of what is scientific and "para-scientific." Go ahead fellas. Tell us what you really feel. 8/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

I dunno Nate, is that the basic scientists who helped sequence the #SARSCoV2 genome, developed new tests for detecting the disease? 10/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

It's all public health. I see. Yes. Those who've made sure the water you drink is safe, that you don't get food poisoning from your local restaurant, who've kept us from having other epidemics or battled other ones for, I don't know decades? 12/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

One day we should go all Lysistrata on you. See how well you fare if public health went on strike. We would never do that because even if we get paid terribly, work long hours, get shit thrown at us, we do our jobs, from bench to the field, in research and practice. 14/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

Again, dear Ross has no idea what people in public health do, but go ahead just now spray paint fraud, charlatan, all over us. Because that's "para-scientific" is a fancy word for. 16/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

From the politics that make us sick–we call them the social determinants of health (I just heard Ross faint) to the policies we have to fight for to keep people healthy, public health is intertwined with politics, as it is a public not private science. 18/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

So, let's talk epidemiology. There are racial disparities with #COVID19 that have not be articulated with para-science," but a tried and true method called counting the bodies. The risk of death for African-Americans is far greater than that of their white counterparts. 20/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

Yes a strong case can be made for age-based triaging of vaccine allocation. It doesn't take a pundit to see that. 22/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

So if you wanted to frame vaccine allocation around preventing the most deaths, you'd go with age+race/ethnicity. 24/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020

Who is #ACIP? "14 of the members have expertise in vaccinology, immunology, pediatrics, internal medicine, nursing, family medicine, virology, public health, infectious diseases, and/or preventive medicine; one member is a consumer representative." 29/

— Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) December 20, 2020