George Davey Smith

George Davey Smith

@mendelrandom.bsky.social

Time expired epidemiologist

1.4K followers198 following162 posts

George Davey Smith reposted

Here it is. My manifesto for the 2026 Clacton By-Election. It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Join me, clean up Clacton and let's make 13th August Bin Day! #VoteBinface #VoteyMcVoteface #YesWeTinCan

Looking forward to visiting @humantechnopole.bsky.social to discuss triangulation and meeting some of the fantastic faculty and researchers working there

Human Technopole@humantechnopole.bsky.social

🧭 How can stronger evidence improve medical research? 📊 On 3 September, George Davey Smith @mendelrandom.bsky.social @bristoluni.bsky.social, joins HT’s Connecting Discoveries series to explore triangulation and the variety of evidence. Register by 2 Sep 👉 humantechnopole.it/en/training/...

Does the (live) shingles vaccine protect against dementia? Fergus Hamilton and colleagues provide important evidence in a new preprint using hospital data from the whole of England in a regression discontinuity design from which we *don't* show evidence of a meaningful protective effect /cont

View full thread

15/n a study reflect a choice. In summary, we don't see an effect on hospital coded dementia. we don't think this is because of our data, analytic method, or approach. This does not rule out a small effect (but the effect size would be smaller than that reported as point estimates previously) /cont

Does the (live) shingles vaccine protect against dementia? Fergus Hamilton and colleagues provide important evidence in a new preprint using hospital data from the whole of England in a regression discontinuity design from which we *don't* show evidence of a meaningful protective effect /cont

View full thread

13/n We don't have an easy explanation for these differences. We discuss in the paper a lot more, but one explanation is - that RD designs - like all observational designs - have more analytic choices than RCTs, which means results are often more variable than an ITT RCT /cont

14/n There are *many* ways to do RD - numerous packages; numerous estimators; many other choices. Many of these are very reasonable! However, these seem to make tangible differences, and these are likely larger in smaller studies (because of more sampling variation). The results reported from /cont

Does the (live) shingles vaccine protect against dementia? Fergus Hamilton and colleagues provide important evidence in a new preprint using hospital data from the whole of England in a regression discontinuity design from which we *don't* show evidence of a meaningful protective effect /cont

View full thread

11/n Our result is not entirely consistent with the prior literature. In Wales, Eyting reported a 1.3% absolute risk reduction (95% CI 0.2-2.7), so although our confidence intervals overlap, our point estimate of 0.06 sits outside their CI (as does theirs to ours). However, given /cont

12/n ascertainment issues in hospital data, and sampling variation, these results are plausibly both consistent with a small effect. However, our result is not consistent with the Australian (JAMA, 2025), or Ontario (Lancet Neuro (2026) data, which have *much* larger effects. /cont

Does the (live) shingles vaccine protect against dementia? Fergus Hamilton and colleagues provide important evidence in a new preprint using hospital data from the whole of England in a regression discontinuity design from which we *don't* show evidence of a meaningful protective effect /cont

View full thread

9/n We then tested whether their result would stand if in Wales they only had hospital data, if they had the same study entry as us, etc: essentially we tested many of the biases of HES. Essentially, these decisions have an effect on absolute effects but NOT relative effects /cont

10/n So in summary: none of the candidate biases we tested in our data would manufacture a null result from an effect the scale of which was observed in Wales. We also provide some mathematical discussion of the plausibility of some of these potential biases /cont

Does the (live) shingles vaccine protect against dementia? Fergus Hamilton and colleagues provide important evidence in a new preprint using hospital data from the whole of England in a regression discontinuity design from which we *don't* show evidence of a meaningful protective effect /cont

View full thread

7/n To test this, we limited our analyses to those who were plausibly vaccinated (e.g. only those 79+), and started follow up at 1 year post Sep 2013 (this would give ~6 months for the vaccine to work). This analysis was null /cont

8/n Our outcome is hospital coded dementia. We have no linked mortality or primary care data. Is this an issue? We went back to the Wales data where the protective signal was originally reported (nature.com/articles/s41...) and replicated their key finding on dementia (using their code) /cont

nature.comA natural experiment on the effect of herpes zoster vaccination on dementia - NatureUsing a natural experiment that avoids common bias concerns, this study finds that the live-attenuated shingles vaccine reduced the probability of a new dementia diagnosis within a follow-up period of...

Does the (live) shingles vaccine protect against dementia? Fergus Hamilton and colleagues provide important evidence in a new preprint using hospital data from the whole of England in a regression discontinuity design from which we *don't* show evidence of a meaningful protective effect /cont

View full thread

5/n Importantly, we replicated this in an *independent* extract from the same dataset, analysed by a different team at Imperial College London, with a different data granularity (week vs month) and with a different inclusion lookback period. This is reassuring! /cont

6/n We don't see any sex-specific effects for either shingles or dementia, unlike what has been previously reported for dementia. The *only* signal we saw was a very early signal at 1 year. This signal is probably implausible, because shingles vaccination doesn't happen instantly /cont

Does the (live) shingles vaccine protect against dementia? Fergus Hamilton and colleagues provide important evidence in a new preprint using hospital data from the whole of England in a regression discontinuity design from which we *don't* show evidence of a meaningful protective effect /cont

View full thread

3/n First, we show a robust effect on shingles diagnoses using this date of birth cut off - this accumulates over and is about the same relative effect as reported in the trials. Importantly, this is *hospital* coded shingles - which is ~10% of all shingles, so the outcome is rare. / cont

4/n But we find *no* effect on dementia hospitalisations: −0.06 percentage points, 95% CI −0.40 to 0.27; p=0.72. The confidence intervals are reasonably tight on the absolute scale; and visually ⬇️ one cannot see any discontinuity. This was robust in many sensitivity analyses /cont

Does the (live) shingles vaccine protect against dementia? Fergus Hamilton and colleagues provide important evidence in a new preprint using hospital data from the whole of England in a regression discontinuity design from which we *don't* show evidence of a meaningful protective effect /cont

George Davey Smith reposted

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and this essay by Johnson and VanderWeele is no exception. Just like I'm entitled to my opinion that this is one of the dumbest fucking things I've ever read. ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/epdf/10....

ajph.aphapublications.orgAJPHAmerican Journal of Public Health (AJPH) from the American Public Health Association (APHA)
adam whalen, mph 🐳@awhale.bsky.social

lol. lmao. of course it's vanderweele. full of obfuscation, cherry picked examples, and deliberately avoiding the harms of conservatism (the trump admin isn't conservative?) mostly just insane that such a blatant piece of propaganda gets published in AJPH ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2...

George Davey Smith reposted

Replying to @beenwrekt.bsky.social

Link to a great talk by @mendelrandom.bsky.social presenting new work that finds no effect.

George Davey Smith@mendelrandom.bsky.social

How strong is the evidence that live shingles vaccination prevents the risk of dementia? A talk yesterday @oxprimarycare.bsky.social on this available here youtu.be/qlTnnQytOJ0

George Davey Smith reposted

.... although in truth when there isn't a photographer about some of us push our bikes slowly up the hills ...

Katie Mack@astrokatie.com

Impressed by the number of bikes and bike lanes in Bristol. The city could have said, look, we are made entirely of hills, biking is madness, maybe we could have a funicular or something. Instead they said no, we are strong, we can do it, we will have the finest quads in all the kingdom 🚴‍♂️🚴‍♀️🚴

George Davey Smith reposted

Should be good. It seems that July will be randomisation month this year. rss.org.uk/training-eve... 100 years ago Fisher wrote this: repository.rothamsted.ac.uk/id/eprint/20...

rss.org.ukDiscussion paper meetings
George Davey Smith@mendelrandom.bsky.social

If you're interested in the history and philosophy of randomization in all its forms I'm co-organising a *FREE* conference in glorious Bristol 2-3rd July wth the legendary Samir Okasha, registration is here www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/randomizat... If you think it looks interesting please advertise

If you're interested in the history and philosophy of randomization in all its forms I'm co-organising a *FREE* conference in glorious Bristol 2-3rd July wth the legendary Samir Okasha, registration is here www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/randomizat... If you think it looks interesting please advertise

eventbrite.co.ukRandomization in Science, Society and NatureExploring the role of randomization across decision theory, clinical trials, politics, evolutionary biology and genetics

Yet another spurious non-linear Mendelian randomization paper has been retracted by a journal academic.oup.com/jpubhealth/a... Kudos to the editors of the Journal of Public Health for following through and retracting spurious publications. What is shocking is that many other journals /cont

academic.oup.comRetraction of: Association between Vitamin D and mortality risk in gout patientsThis is a retraction of: Xinyu Fang, Jie Zhang, Zixing Zhang, Dongqing Ye. Association between Vitamin D and mortality risk in gout patients, Journal of Pu

2/2 which are often high ranking ones - have published papers they must know are complete nonsense, but neither the journals, nor the authors or methods promoters are actively helping in stemming the tide of this rubbish. For more on this see academic.oup.com/ije/article/...

academic.oup.comErroneous epidemiological findings on vitamins: coming full circle after two decades of Mendelian randomization?Our editorial responsibility for the International Journal of Epidemiology (IJE) started at the dawn of the current millennium, and we marked the occasion

George Davey Smith reposted

G-EE A very much needed (and brilliant) reflection for Mendelian randomization

George Davey Smith@mendelrandom.bsky.social

Failure to understand that the fundamental principle of Mendelian randomization (MR) is of gene-environment equivalence contributes to the flood of nonsense MR papers that are appearing; Shah Ebrahim, Gib Hemani and I explain why in this short commentary. journals.plos.org/plosmedicine...

Have seen thousands of Velvets covers and also saw the Velvet Underground be their own tribute band on two unforgettable nights at Edinburgh playhouse June 1993, but think Waldo’s Gift at Ritual Union 2026 Bristol got closer to the VU spirit than any others I’ve seen

A comprehensive new tool for exploring how genetic variation influences outcomes, of relevance to everything driven by phenotypes, which encapsulates many domains, from how drugs work to how natural selection works ... / cont

Andrew Elmore@elmorea.bsky.social

Excited to announce the release of The Human Genotype-Phenotype Map! * We processed 16k complex traits & 2.7M QTLs * Turned 49.3M significant colocalizations into 97k distinct groups * Upload your own GWAS to compare against all data Website: gpmap.opengwas.io Preprint: tinyurl.com/3ktsr9hw

George Davey Smith reposted

Failure to understand that the fundamental principle of Mendelian randomization (MR) is of gene-environment equivalence contributes to the flood of nonsense MR papers that are appearing; Shah Ebrahim, Gib Hemani and I explain why in this short commentary. journals.plos.org/plosmedicine...

journals.plos.orgGene-environment equivalence: The fundamental principle of Mendelian randomizationIn this Perspective, George Davey Smith and colleagues outline how and why gene-environment equivalence, the fundamental principle of Mendelian Randomization (MR), must be properly applied and critica...

George Davey Smith reposted

🤓There's an open 2 yr postdoc position in my group 🏘️ On interactions between area-level socioeconomic position and environmental factors in weight trajectories in children 📈 Using multilevel models; applying the target trial framework 📆 Apply before April 7th! international.au.dk/about/profil...

international.au.dkPostdoc in Epidemiology - Vacancy at Aarhus UniversityVacancy at Department of Public Health - Department of Epidemiology, Aarhus University

Embarrasing correcton required for this - it was intended to say "gene-environment equivalence" not interaction is the fundamental principle of MR ..

George Davey Smith@mendelrandom.bsky.social

Failure to understand that the fundamental principle of Mendelian randomization (MR) is that of gene-environment interaction contributes to the flood of nonsense MR papers that are appearing; Shah Ebrahim, Gib Hemani and I explain why in this short commentary. Responses welcome!

Failure to understand that the fundamental principle of Mendelian randomization (MR) is of gene-environment equivalence contributes to the flood of nonsense MR papers that are appearing; Shah Ebrahim, Gib Hemani and I explain why in this short commentary. journals.plos.org/plosmedicine...

journals.plos.orgGene-environment equivalence: The fundamental principle of Mendelian randomizationIn this Perspective, George Davey Smith and colleagues outline how and why gene-environment equivalence, the fundamental principle of Mendelian Randomization (MR), must be properly applied and critica...

Failure to understand that the fundamental principle of Mendelian randomization (MR) is that of gene-environment interaction contributes to the flood of nonsense MR papers that are appearing; Shah Ebrahim, Gib Hemani and I explain why in this short commentary. Responses welcome!

PLOS Medicine@plosmedicine.org

In this Perspective, George Davey Smith (@mendelrandom.bsky.social) and colleagues outline how and why gene-environment equivalence, the fundamental principle of Mendelian Randomization (MR), must be properly applied and critically considered in MR studies 🧪 plos.io/3NGAxNU

George Davey Smith reposted