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 Jun 10

      Health Nerd Retweeted Health Nerd

      Remember this problematic study from February? After questions were raised about the paper, it was pulled by the Lancet and disappeared off the preprint server it was on This week IT WAS PUBLISHED 👀👀 1/nhttps://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1361063430745022467 …

      Health Nerd added,

      Health NerdVerified account @GidMK
      This vitamin D/COVID-19 study has gone viral, because the results appear to be impressive and people love promoting vitamin D Unfortunately, the study itself is...problematic Some peer-review on twitter 1/n https://twitter.com/DavidDavisMP/status/1360647462197878791 …
      Show this thread
      5 replies 56 retweets 173 likes
      Show this thread
    2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

      2/n The paper is here. The authors and ethics approval are essentially identical, and the text is very similar. There are, however, some really odd differences between the publication and preprinthttps://academic.oup.com/jcem/advance-article/doi/10.1210/clinem/dgab405/6294179 …

      1 reply 3 retweets 21 likes
      Show this thread
    3. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

      3/n First off, the published version doesn't mention that this study was preprinted then retracted as far as I can tell That's, um, not great. Less than ideal

      1 reply 3 retweets 32 likes
      Show this thread
    4. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

      4/n Secondly, the study type has changed. The preprint claimed to be "randomized", the published study identifies itself as an observational trialpic.twitter.com/Rtoq9lb2AN

      1 reply 2 retweets 26 likes
      Show this thread
    5. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

      5/n This is a pretty big issue, because being a randomized trial was what made this study go viral in the first place As an observational paper, it's really not very strong

      1 reply 1 retweet 41 likes
      Show this thread
    6. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

      6/n In essence, people who were assigned to different wards in a hospital were either given or not given calcifediol based on which ward they were sent to. People sent to the calcifediol wards had a lower chance of going to ICUpic.twitter.com/DFryN6ez0A

      1 reply 1 retweet 20 likes
      Show this thread
    7. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

      7/n The authors controlled for some comorbidities and a few other things in their analysis, but at a basic level there are many potential confounding factors in this sort of trial design that make it hard to draw conclusions from the resultspic.twitter.com/CBLNf8LLcj

      1 reply 1 retweet 21 likes
      Show this thread
    8. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

      8/n So as an observational trial, it was fine but not particularly conclusive But then you start looking at the numbers, and things get weird

      1 reply 2 retweets 20 likes
      Show this thread
    9. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

      9/n Firstly, the authors changed the sample between the preprint and publication. They report excluding 10% of their total sample because they'd received treatment before the study, which was not true in the preprintpic.twitter.com/kRDJCVq1Km

      1 reply 2 retweets 18 likes
      Show this thread
      Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

      10/n Now, it's a bit weird to exclude people who've taken vitamin D supplements 3 months ago from this sample anyway - most of the people were deficient in vitamin D despite the supplements - but there's also more that's strange here

      5:10 PM - 10 Jun 2021
      • 1 Retweet
      • 15 Likes
      • Mathematiker plädiert für Ruhe und Rationalität Helen Hiebert-Bergen Noam Leviatan נעם לויתן James 💙 Neill - 😷 🇪🇺🇮🇪🇬🇧🔶 Stephen Griffin I'm a big 💩💩💩 #COYS Ben FX lee prew Carlo Mascolo 🐧🐧🐧
      1 reply 1 retweet 15 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

          11/n For one thing, even though people have been EXCLUDED from the trial, the control group has...increased? 379 in the preprint, 391 in the publicationpic.twitter.com/HRwuUjeP5Z

          1 reply 2 retweets 19 likes
          Show this thread
        3. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

          12/n This is not explained - the only thing mentioned is that 92 people were excluded ~prior to the trial~ Were people moved from treatment to control? How does that happen in a prospective cohort study?pic.twitter.com/zhmbGrsZhq

          1 reply 2 retweets 18 likes
          Show this thread
        4. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

          13/n Table 1 also has some mistakes. For example, the obesity numbers and percentages have been copied in wrongpic.twitter.com/E04Q7JY91Q

          1 reply 1 retweet 19 likes
          Show this thread
        5. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

          14/n The figures in Table 1 are also just a bit...odd? 20% diabetes, 30% dyslipidemia, but only 9% of people with BMI>30? Are those obesity values just an error perhaps?

          1 reply 1 retweet 19 likes
          Show this thread
        6. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

          15/n There are also tons of strange small differences between the preprint and the published study. 80/379 died in the control group in the preprint, but 82/391 died in the publication None of this is explained 🤔

          2 replies 1 retweet 21 likes
          Show this thread
        7. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

          16/n At this point I just honestly don't know what to make of the research. As an observational study, it's not very meaningful (if nothing else, there's no control for or discussion of how patients were allocated to the wards)

          1 reply 1 retweet 28 likes
          Show this thread
        8. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 10

          17/n As a randomized study that was retracted from SSRN after being rejected from the Lancet, it is pretty problematic that the preprint isn't mentioned at all in the published work, and that the differences aren't really explained

          5 replies 2 retweets 38 likes
          Show this thread
        9. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jun 16

          Health Nerd Retweeted Covid19Crusher

          18/n If anyone was wondering, this study is being touted as proof that vitamin D is a miracle cure for COVID-19 despite the innumerable weaknesses, because of course it is!https://twitter.com/Covid19Crusher/status/1402320259626016772?s=20 …

          Health Nerd added,

          Covid19Crusher @Covid19Crusher
          Peer-reviewed, quasi-randomized propective trial (n=838) of fast acting Vitamin D (Calcifediol) in Spain reveals a massive mortality benefit. It is a tragedy not to have this as Standard of Care. https://academic.oup.com/jcem/advance-article/doi/10.1210/clinem/dgab405/6294179 … pic.twitter.com/5IDHOzYxUd
          2 replies 0 retweets 22 likes
          Show this thread
        10. 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