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
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @c19analysis
So many references and not a single answer as to whether people in France actually received less HCQ than the so-called intervention group, which is a FUNDAMENTAL question without which the entire analysis is a total waste of time Bit of wasted effort there
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @c19analysis
I looked through the references for different countries that are supposedly about control vs treatment allocation. Most of them are 1-2 news reports or a single tweet, and I couldn't find one for any country that gave anything even vaguely approaching actual number of doses
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @c19analysis
Because without some idea of doses by day, whatever is in those news reports or tweets could simply be wrong. The media and twitter are not perfectly reliable, after all. It's a basic, simple sense-check, without which the analysis is meaningless
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @c19analysis
And yet, still no actual data on how many people in each country got HCQ. So your 'intervention' and 'control' groups may be entirely wrong and you wouldn't even know As I said, makes the analysis meaningless. Literally. No meaning
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Lol. As I said, the evidence you've cited is manifestly inadequate to verify that any country used more/less HCQ. This is a really simple point
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.