Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
GidMK's profile
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Verified account
@GidMK

Tweets

Health NerdVerified account

@GidMK

Epidemiologist. Writer (Guardian, Observer etc). "Well known research trouble-maker". PhDing at @UoW Host of @senscipod Email gidmk.healthnerd@gmail.com he/him

Sydney, New South Wales
theguardian.com/profile/gideon…
Joined November 2015

Tweets

  • © 2021 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Alieshia Cross‏ @AlieshiaCross 15 Sep 2019
      Replying to @RuthAnnHarpur @_breastfeeding and

      Could you explain that for me please @RuthAnnHarpur for those like me who might be rusty when it comes to interpreting data? I think it's good to be transparent about what the data is or isn't demonstrating.

      1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
    2. Dr Ruth Ann Harpur‏ @RuthAnnHarpur 15 Sep 2019
      Replying to @AlieshiaCross @_breastfeeding and

      Ok... let’s see if I can. So this graph is looking at relative risk of leukaemia if BF. 1 equals no effect of being BF. Less than one is a reduction in relative risk and more than one is an increase in relative risk.

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    3. Dr Ruth Ann Harpur‏ @RuthAnnHarpur 15 Sep 2019
      Replying to @RuthAnnHarpur @_breastfeeding and

      But also note these are associations and causality is uncertain.

      2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
    4. Dr Ruth Ann Harpur‏ @RuthAnnHarpur 15 Sep 2019
      Replying to @RuthAnnHarpur @_breastfeeding and

      So on the graph the dots are the relative risk (RR) found in the study. The long lines are 95% confidence intervals so we are 95% that the true RR is between these 2 numbers. A statistically significant association needs to have both CIs on the same side of 1.

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    5. Dr Ruth Ann Harpur‏ @RuthAnnHarpur 15 Sep 2019
      Replying to @RuthAnnHarpur @_breastfeeding and

      5 studies out of 17 meet this criteria First figure in each set of brackets is the RR, next ones are 95% CIs Bener (0.34, 0.18-0.64) Altinkaynak (0.36, 0.18-0.73) Perrillat (0.49, 0.24-0.97) Smulevich (0.64, 0.44-0.93) Shu (0.75, 0.65-0.86)

      2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
    6. Global Breastfeeding‏ @_breastfeeding 15 Sep 2019
      Replying to @RuthAnnHarpur @MariaTeresaEs and

      The OR is less than 1 in 13. The whole point of doing a metanalysis is that CI's don't tell you much when the sample size is too small. So either you deal with each study alone or the entire analysis. In the latter case, there is an impact, as I pointed out in an earlier tweet.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    7. Dr Ruth Ann Harpur‏ @RuthAnnHarpur 16 Sep 2019
      Replying to @_breastfeeding @MariaTeresaEs and

      You claimed nearly all studies found an effect... (the majority did not). The OR in the meta-analysis was .80 (95% CIs 0.72-0.90) which is an association between breastfeeding and lower leukaemia but this is insufficient to determine causality.

      7 replies 0 retweets 1 like
    8. Phyll Buchanan‏ @PhyllBuc 16 Sep 2019
      Replying to @RuthAnnHarpur @_breastfeeding and

      Meta-analysis gives the cumulative impact - and a 20% reduction with 95% CI 0.72-0.90 is important.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    9. Dr Ruth Ann Harpur‏ @RuthAnnHarpur 16 Sep 2019
      Replying to @PhyllBuc @_breastfeeding and

      I disagree... this is a small effect on something rare is not demonstrated to be causal. How important that is is down to individuals to decide based on what is most important to them.

      2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
    10. Dr Ruth Ann Harpur‏ @RuthAnnHarpur 16 Sep 2019
      Replying to @RuthAnnHarpur @PhyllBuc and

      Would also be helpful to see absolute risks here @justsaysrisks

      1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
      Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 17 Sep 2019
      Replying to @RuthAnnHarpur @PhyllBuc and

      Challenging to calculate absolute risks directly from the study, because it's a meta analysis of case-control studies. That being said, pediatric leukemia is very rare, a relative risk reduction of 20% would equate to an absolute reduction of about 0.001%

      10:38 PM - 17 Sep 2019
      • 1 Retweet
      • 6 Likes
      • Pamela Burn Emma Veitch Phyll Buchanan Dr MariaTeresa Esposito Alieshia Cross Dr Ruth Ann Harpur
      2 replies 1 retweet 6 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK 17 Sep 2019
          Replying to @GidMK @RuthAnnHarpur and

          Also worth noting that this study doesn't really speak to causation, especially considering the wide variance in rigor of the included studies

          1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes
        3. Alieshia Cross‏ @AlieshiaCross 17 Sep 2019
          Replying to @GidMK @RuthAnnHarpur and

          Thank you for your input Health Nerd. For some reason @_breastfeeding has blocked me. I can only think it's because I called him out over a tweet alluding to not breastfeeding causing higher leukaemia rates. Parents deserve to be given accurate information to make feeding choices

          1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
        4. Show replies
        1. Dr Ruth Ann Harpur‏ @RuthAnnHarpur 17 Sep 2019
          Replying to @GidMK @PhyllBuc and

          Thanks @GidMK 👌

          0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
          Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo
          Undo

      Loading seems to be taking a while.

      Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2021 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info