I always find that attitude striking. HCQ was recommended on the same basis, and with arguably much better evidence, and now we know it doesn't work at all and we've wasted vast sums and potentially harmed millions. It is not such an easy either/or, I think
If you run dozens of studies that are all flawed, most of them in the same ways, then you haven't gotten any closer to an answer to your original question. It's a pretty foundational fact of research
-
-
If the flaws are uncorrelated then the probability that all the results are due to flaws approach zero as you add studies.
-
That's simply not true, and a misunderstanding of how scientific evidence works. I'd suggest reading the Cochrane handbook to get a better handle on evidence appraisal (it is, unfortunately, very dense)
- Show replies
New 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.