Of course, the research letter that this is about, because it suggested that Swedish schoolchildren/teachers were totally safe from COVID-19, has been in dozens of news articles and has an Altmetric of 6,500 
-
Show this thread
-
It sounds like the only reasonable course of action for
@NEJM at this point is to place a notification of concern on the paper and investigate themselves2 replies 20 retweets 156 likesShow this thread -
I mean, seriously, based on that correspondence the lead author knew that schoolchildren had excess mortality of 68% (unless combined with preschool kids), but this is what they concludedpic.twitter.com/h7j3LK9pAv
4 replies 36 retweets 144 likesShow this thread -
Oh, forgot to mention that this lead author was also an original signatory/author on the Great Barrington Declarationpic.twitter.com/WYp8a6tqAw
6 replies 19 retweets 158 likesShow this thread -
Health Nerd Retweeted Galina Esther Shubina, my coffee is my own
Reading the emails is incredibly stark. I cannot see any avenue but retracting this paper asaphttps://twitter.com/galinash/status/1367052448381210628?s=19 …
Health Nerd added,
Galina Esther Shubina, my coffee is my own @galinashLudvigsson om how kids don't get sick much. But wait, there is definitely something related to them dying more. Could be an accident but oops. This is in none of his papers... https://twitter.com/GostaBroholmer/status/1367050397932793858 … pic.twitter.com/9y1DCSF8NfShow this thread4 replies 31 retweets 112 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @GidMK
The entire letter isn't translated there. This is the entire letter where I have added the last parts in the english translation. The respons from Ludvigsson in NEJM also claims that he actually did check the cause of death https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2101280?query=recirc_curatedRelated_article …pic.twitter.com/sz6qa1qAZ1
6 replies 16 retweets 128 likes -
Replying to @JacobGudiol
I'm not sure I understand what difference this makes. It's well-established that COVID-19 testing was low in Sweden at the time, no? At absolute minimum this was a one-sentence explanation that should've been in the original letter
1 reply 1 retweet 18 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
If you needed hospital care you were tested even from the start. When you think you find something in a subanalysis for your data, check it out and it turns out to be nothing. Would you include that in your published articles? Especially with the character limits of letters?
2 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @JacobGudiol
I mean, they could've easily not published a research letter in NEJM, there are many other journals with longer limits. It's very pertinent information that they had on hand at the time, I can't see why it's not included especially given that the mortality for 1-16 yo is
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
If he had included it then he would also have had to include an explanation as to why the excess deaths are not due to covid-19 To me that is just a detour not giving anybody any useful information about the impact from covid-19
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes
Nah that doesn't really make sense. It's clearly a pertinent point that is quite obviously important to the argument, spending a sentence or 2 (or even just using the supplementary materials) to explain would've been trivial
-
-
Replying to @GidMK @JacobGudiol
Also, part of the issue for me is that what is described in the email seems to be p-hacking. If you redo your analysis until you get the result you want, but don't publish this, it's not great
2 replies 0 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
You can complain about the methodology. But the article you shared and the partial mail that you shared painted the picture of Ludwigsson finding the anomaly and then deciding to bury it Instead the mail shows that he started to investigate it to find a cause
2 replies 1 retweet 19 likes - 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.