A brief timeline from the piece: 17 March - Ioannidis writes anti-lockdown piece in STAT 23 March - Ioannidis corrals scientists to talk to White House Mid-April - Santa Clara study (estimating low IFR) preprinted Early-May - Ioannidis' low IFR study preprinted
-
-
Show this thread
-
And to recap, what John Ioannidis wrote about bias in scientific research himself:pic.twitter.com/uxEUZmChWy
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Would not be surprising at all.
-
Not only wouldn't be surprising, wouldn't most scientists do it if they truly believed they had scientific information that could avert what they saw as a national catastrophe? I'm not saying their advice was right, but don't climate scientists try to get White House meetings?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Wait... What?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What aren't his 15 minutes of fame already over?



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.
