2. The plagiarism. Lengthy, extensive plagiarism 3. The implausible/impossible values remaining in the text 4. The incorrect and bizarre statistical tests 5. Why it is only NOW that we're told the data us fake. Was it a joke? A prank???
-
-
Show this thread
-
5. (cont.) Seriously, how do the authors explain the fact that they uploaded a dataset, said it was the data of their study, and now claim it wasn't? How do we reconcile that with what they claim now?
Show this thread -
6. It is also worth noting that this is not actually a public statement by the authors, but rather a tweet supposedly on their behalf by someone else. I await them actually speaking because it's possible this isn't actually Professor Elgazzar
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Gideon don’t waste your precious time - your skills have made an important contribution and surely are needed to uncover many other issues around - thanks for your service bro !
-
I’d say this also. However I’ve witnessed the harms come to people with
#LongCovid taking animal ivermectin & we’ve all heard of the hospitalisations of ppl harming themselves doing just this. Gid is shining light on what’s been going on in the dark for too long. Important work - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I knew this take was going to pop up within 24hrs.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The reaction by the study author speaks volumes…. Reminds me of a certain HCQ proponent
-
St. Didier?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Bonjour, you can read it here: This is not unexpected. If the authors of the retracted ivermectin… https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1416143473762258954.html … Enjoy :)
End of conversation
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.