Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
GidMK's profile
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Health Nerd
Verified account
@GidMK

Tweets

Health NerdVerified account

@GidMK

Epidemiologist. Writer (Guardian, Observer etc). "Well known research trouble-maker". PhDing at @UoW Host of @senscipod Email gidmk.healthnerd@gmail.com he/him

Sydney, New South Wales
theguardian.com/profile/gideon…
Joined November 2015

Tweets

  • © 2021 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

      Health Nerd Retweeted Health Nerd

      One thing I haven't really mentioned in this whole debacle is that, while Prof Ioannidis felt comfortable attacking myself and my co-authors personally, he hasn't actually responded to any elements of my scientific critiquehttps://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1376304539897237508 …

      Health Nerd added,

      Health NerdVerified account @GidMK
      Recently, Professor John Ioannidis, most famous for his meta-science and more recently COVID-19 work, published this article in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation It included, among other things, a lengthy personal attack on me Some thoughts 1/n pic.twitter.com/JGfUrpJXh2
      Show this thread
      14 replies 34 retweets 282 likes
      Show this thread
      Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

      Health Nerd Retweeted Health Nerd

      I've written several twitter threads on Prof Ioannidis' papers on IFR, recently herehttps://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1316511734115385344?s=20 …

      Health Nerd added,

      Health NerdVerified account @GidMK
      John Ioannidis, of "Most Published Research Findings Are False" fame, has now had his paper on IFR published Let's do one, final, twitter peer-review on the study 1/n pic.twitter.com/D24ut4zGJj
      Show this thread
      10:48 PM - 12 Apr 2021
      • 1 Retweet
      • 34 Likes
      • Dr. The Frog Mela Eckenfels Γιώργος Κυλάφας 💉💉 Rory the sailing science shill ⛵️ Krista Tee Samir Kayande Plague Doctor Monkey Claire Damaia
      1 reply 1 retweet 34 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          While there are many areas in which we disagree, I think the biggest error remains including studies that are clearly inappropriate to determine population estimates of infection rates

          1 reply 1 retweet 36 likes
          Show this thread
        3. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          One example of this is the IFR for Wuhan. There are 4 estimates of seroprevalence that you could use to calculated an IFR for Wuhan in early 2020 In the paper, 3 of them are usedpic.twitter.com/02a4XQVtTA

          1 reply 1 retweet 28 likes
          Show this thread
        4. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          The samples are: 1. Blood donor study 2. Single hospital study 3. Single hospital study 4. Massive, random, province/city-wide studypic.twitter.com/Y11cAz0cJV

          1 reply 0 retweets 29 likes
          Show this thread
        5. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          Now, leaving aside some of the other issues with using these studies, let's look at the simple fact that only one was even remotely representative of the population of Wuhan

          1 reply 0 retweets 27 likes
          Show this thread
        6. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          The blood donor study is enormously unrepresentative. The population is (as with most blood donors) MUCH younger than the general poppic.twitter.com/Kk4E5y2JCM

          1 reply 0 retweets 29 likes
          Show this thread
        7. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          The larger single-site study literally says at the start that a major limitation is the biased samplepic.twitter.com/d834C8m5gT

          1 reply 0 retweets 30 likes
          Show this thread
        8. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          The smaller single-site study includes hospitalized patients as well as people returning to work at a single location in a city of 11 million. Not even remotely representative of the populationpic.twitter.com/spWByih9lW

          1 reply 0 retweets 26 likes
          Show this thread
        9. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          The final study was a large, carefully designed serosurvey that was representative not just of the city of Wuhan but also surrounding regionspic.twitter.com/g9bsNGFGWH

          1 reply 0 retweets 31 likes
          Show this thread
        10. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          For the four serosurveys, using Professor Ioannidis' methodology, the inferred IFRs are: 1. 0.45% 2. 0.35% 3. 0.42% 4. 0.82% So the representative sample implies an IFR double that of the biased samples

          1 reply 1 retweet 38 likes
          Show this thread
        11. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          Health Nerd Retweeted Health Nerd

          This actually accords with published data. There is some fairly strong evidence that selection bias can double your estimate of seroprevalence (thus halving the estimate of IFR)https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1381391856773197824?s=20 …

          Health Nerd added,

          Health NerdVerified account @GidMK
          Fascinating study demonstrating the issues with selection bias in seroprevalence estimates Using a selected sample of participants, the estimated prevalence of past COVID-19 infection doubled (!) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22351-5#Sec2 … pic.twitter.com/pqN5l1SA41
          Show this thread
          1 reply 0 retweets 33 likes
          Show this thread
        12. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          Now, the fourth seroprevalence sample was not published until after Prof Ioannidis' paper came out, but the point here is that the three samples included in the paper are not sufficient to infer infections in the population

          1 reply 0 retweets 31 likes
          Show this thread
        13. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          Health Nerd Retweeted Atomsk's Sanakan

          All 3 estimates of the IFR that use biased sampling and survey methodology are half the more rigorous data. This inclusion of inappropriate estimates is repeated numerous times in the IFR review @AtomsksSanakan covered this in detailhttps://twitter.com/AtomsksSanakan/status/1341183815176364038?s=20 …

          Health Nerd added,

          Atomsk's Sanakan @AtomsksSanakan
          1/ Many COVID-19 contrarians, including those behind the Great Barrington Declaration, *still* cite John Ioannidis' inaccurate estimate of SARS-CoV-2's fatality rate. So let's go over how atrocious Ioannidis' paper is. https://twitter.com/gbdeclaration/status/1340921089023733761 … https://web.archive.org/web/20201118093302/https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf … pic.twitter.com/MlCAJImkRb
          Show this thread
          2 replies 1 retweet 46 likes
          Show this thread
        14. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          Anyway, I always think it's quite telling when people choose to attack the qualifications of their critics rather than discussing the critique itself

          2 replies 4 retweets 86 likes
          Show this thread
        15. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Apr 12

          Apologies! Another sample has been recently published that I was not aware of. This is also a random citywide estimate that implies an IFR of 0.5% So a reasonable range might be 0.5-0.8% for the IFR of Wuhanhttps://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00238-5/fulltext …

          1 reply 1 retweet 47 likes
          Show this thread
        16. 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.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2021 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info