Ok, I'm inspired by @MicrobiomDigest to do a bit of actual critical appraisal on this new paper by Raoult et al
There are significant issues that in my opinion make it basically worthless as an estimate of anything 1/nhttps://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1270163967634096128 …
No and yes. You could conceivably have a sub-population where CVD killed 10% of people and another where it killed 90%, so an RR of 9, but still a population death rate of 50%
-
-
Hmm... So, could a large enough cohort account for those variables, i.e. have them randomly distributed, so that the researchers could isolate the effect of the thing they want to study, e.g. sugar or saturated fat?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
Sure thing, I can leave a comment. Will take a while to write tho, the thread is just a summary (there are more issues -_-)