No it doesn't. Collating self-selected studies on a website says nothing whatsoever about science. A numerically large number of bad studies is as meaningless as a numerically small number unfortunately
Right. Which brings me back to the question - can you demonstrate that, say, Israel had a higher HCQ use than France? Because if you can't, as I've mentioned, the entire analysis is a waste of time and factually meaningless
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
There's no evidence present on the website. You don't even have the number of doses given in each country, a HUGE confounder that may completely change the direction of the primary analysis
End of conversation
-
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.
