Lol you're the fourth person to tag me in it. Paper isn't up online last I checked so no word from me yet, but it sounds extremely dodgy at face value
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @GidMK @nevertoocurious
Health Nerd Retweeted RelativelyRisky
Health Nerd added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @nevertoocurious
I have the paper here if you'd like to check it out (about to read it myself).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tribalscientist @nevertoocurious
Yes please! gidmk.healthnerd@gmail.com
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Ok, so thoughts: - no good correction for SES (issue) - very vague correlations here. No biological gradient, various 'significant' interactions but...meh - even in this high-risk cohort, absolute risk increase for the HIGHEST group was 0.05%
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Also, exposure was ascertained from a SINGLE QUESTIONNAIRE given once at the start of the study Hair dyeing behaviour is almost certain to vary, making this a pretty pointless study imo
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Oh, also, the p-value for any hair dye was 0.05, because honestly that relationship was anything but certain. I find even the analyses pretty unconvincing
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I'll probably write something about this, it's a pretty weak correlation that's been blown totally out of proportion
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
- Show replies
-
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.