This is not unexpected. If the authors of the retracted ivermectin study claim that the data was not really the data for their paper, they now need to explain: 1. Why did they upload fake data that quite clearly matched their results?https://twitter.com/PierreKory/status/1416080575442587653 …
-
Show this thread
-
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???
2 replies 8 retweets 160 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @GidMK
You are making one unsubstantiated claim after the other! What is your actual agenda? Why are you so hellbent on discrediting a drug that has clearly been helping and protecting thousands, if not millions? Stop this!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
None of this is unsubstantiated - it is all detailed at length in my article as well as severance other investigations into the issue. I would love it if ivermectin worked, but the evidence does not care what I want
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
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.