Health NerdVerified account

Can confirm, it is a very boring, obvious lie to say that hospitals in Australia are overwhelmed by vaccine injurieshttps://twitter.com/bealelab/status/1457484933765677060 …

Monday night, wife is stuck doing surgery and I'm finishing the bottle of sav blanc from Saturday Tell me your favourite weird science fact I wanna hear them all

Given that we've been >50% vaccinated for a while now, the fact that vaccines are working so well is very good news!

Very encouraging data. Of note, NSW is one of the few places where you can directly compare vaccinated with unvaccinated people without previous infection confounding the relationship (b/c very low rates of prior infection)https://twitter.com/latikambourke/status/1457605082535583749 …

It's one of the reasons that the GBD is such nonsense - they were arguing for things that were already mostly in place and then pretending that this would somehow reduce the impact of COVID-19

We know from a great deal of serological and other evidence that older people were less likely to be infected in most developed countries. This was true even when the GBD was written!

It's worth noting that, contrary to the nonsense statements in the Great Barrington Declaration, most rich countries actually DID implement focused protection to a great degreehttps://twitter.com/JamesSurowiecki/status/1457459961332748292 …

And then they fall back to the old charlatans argument, that RCTs can't answer the question There are questions RCTs can't answer, but a drug for an infectious disease isn't one of them!

Instead, people argue that it's fine because there's a "baseline" of fraud in other research, or because there are still (mostly null) trials which are not fraudulent

Most of the time, having the single biggest and most positive study looking at a topic withdrawn due to research misconduct would be enough for any researcher to reassess their position, but not with ivermectin!

One of the weirdest things about the ivermectin discussion has been watching people go from "the evidence is good quality" to "it's just one fraud" to "lots of fraud isn't an issue" as the story has progressed

Also, and I cannot stress this enough, even if I'm perfect with a password manager or similar and never forget a login, there are literally 1,000s of journals and you have to create an account with EVERY SINGLE ONE. So much effort for no reward

"Use your ORCID to login!" *tries ORCID* "Looks like you don't have an account. Create one today!" *Creates account* "Looks like you DO have an account. Forgotten your username?"

Oh, I forgot the specific, unique username you assigned to me 5 years ago? WHAT A SURPRISE GUESS I'LL RESET THAT

Agreeing to do free work (reviewing papers) should not require more free work (creating 100s of logins on editorial management systems)