Scathing Covid-19 book from Lancet editor — rushed but useful

‘Since the coronavirus crisis began, Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of leading medical journal The Lancet, has been tearing across the British public sphere. Here he is on the BBC, the national broadcaster, there in the pages of The Guardian newspaper — taking the government to task for failures that have left the United Kingdom with the world’s second-highest per capita COVID-19 death toll so far (Belgium is top). Horton has never shied away from controversy (his journal published the retracted, fraudulent paper by Andrew Wakefield that alleged a non-existent link between vaccines with autism) or crusades (against the Iraq war and for political action on climate change). In coronavirus, he has found a cause that matches his energy: the Lancet journals are pumping out both the latest research and his pointed critiques of government policy; and last month, he reviewed a new book by the Slovenian Marxist philosopher Slavoj Žižek that imagines economic and social worlds after COVID-19.

‘Now Horton has a book of his own. The COVID-19 Catastrophe is a sort of history, diagnosis and prescription, in real time. It is wide ranging, querying the changing role of international cooperation and the fallout of austerity economics, and taking a deeper dive into China’s scientific and political response to the crisis than most Western media have offered. But the book returns again and again to the catastrophe in both the United Kingdom and the United States. It is haunted by the question: how did two of the richest, most powerful and most scientifically advanced countries in the world get it so wrong, and cause such ongoing pain for their citizens?’

Read here (Nature, June 18, 2020)

The effect of large-scale anti-contagion policies on the Covid-19 pandemic

‘...we compile new data on 1,717 local, regional, and national non-pharmaceutical interventions deployed in the ongoing pandemic across localities in China, South Korea, Italy, Iran, France, and the United States (US)... We estimate that across these six countries, interventions prevented or delayed on the order of 62 million confirmed cases, corresponding to averting roughly 530 million total infections. These findings may help inform whether or when these policies should be deployed, intensified, or lifted, and they can support decision-making in the other 180+ countries where COVID-19 has been reported.

Read here (Nature, June 8, 2020)

How swamped preprint servers are blocking bad coronavirus research

‘Howard Bauchner, the editor-in-chief of JAMA, notes that low-quality submissions are rising. Journals in the JAMA Network have received 53% more submissions in the first quarter of this year than in the same period in 2019. “Many of these are related to COVID-19, but most are of low quality,” Bauchner says.

‘To address the need for rapid review, a group of publishers and scholarly-communication organizations announced an initiative last month to accelerate the publication of COVID-19 papers using measures such as asking people with relevant expertise to join a list of rapid reviewers. The initiative’s members include Outbreak Science Rapid PREreview, a platform where researchers can request or provide swift reviews of outbreak-related preprints.’

Read here (Nature, May 7, 2020)