Sure, but the problem is that dozens of terrible studies are as useless for the purposes of evidence collection as a single terrible study
Not at all. HCQ had a slew of awful observational evidence and a number of worthless positive RCTs at the start of the pandemic. This is actually precisely what you'd expect given publication bias and imprecise, poorly done research
-
-
I was not referring at all to observational studies. I clearly stated RCTs. Moreover, I wrote "as monotherapy." If you looked closely, you may have noticed that the only successful [H]CQ RCTs have been as an add-on to combination antiviral therapy.
-
That is not correct. There were a number of small but terrible studies of HCQ as a monotherapy way back in April/May that were nevertheless "positive" in the same way as the ivermectin studies are
- 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.