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 Jul 26

      4/n Now, I cannot stress enough how big of a finding that would be if true. Yes, it's observational, but it's also a disparity that's heretofore unknown in medical science. You just don't see 100% benefit for ~anything~

      7 replies 24 retweets 355 likes
      Show this thread
    2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      5/n But even at the most casual of glances, this study has endless issues. First problem - it was received, accepted, and published in 7 days. That's, uh, not usual in academia, even during the pandemicpic.twitter.com/5E80HZfhE8

      4 replies 27 retweets 399 likes
      Show this thread
    3. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      6/n The journal itself looks...less than reputable - there's only 1 "issue", 7 papers total, and one paper published online in August 2020 is still "in press" Also, just look at the "about us" page!pic.twitter.com/jnYjjgX8G6

      8 replies 20 retweets 315 likes
      Show this thread
    4. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      7/n The parent company, Medical Press Open Access, wants to associate "with scientific researchers to excel their discoveries that make the difference". If you're interested, you can contact their editororial board OA fees - $1950 USD, no refundspic.twitter.com/zmzKDkiJvf

      10 replies 13 retweets 268 likes
      Show this thread
    5. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      8/n So none of that's great. What about this paper? Even without ANY DIGGING WHATSOEVER it looks incredibly low-quality

      1 reply 14 retweets 260 likes
      Show this thread
    6. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      9/n This is apparently an observational trial where people were allocated by a non-random method to take ivermectin or not, but there's no data on what that method was, no information on any potential confounders, and really just no information at allpic.twitter.com/fZuAJd4qVH

      3 replies 19 retweets 335 likes
      Show this thread
    7. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      10/n The first table of results, purportedly reporting the first experiment, is incorrect - both totals are wrongpic.twitter.com/0JeritZW7W

      4 replies 18 retweets 333 likes
      Show this thread
    8. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      11/n The graphs reporting the second experiment appear to have been made in Excel, and frankly are not adequate for a scientific paper. The legend is particularly weirdpic.twitter.com/rPTnB7qi1z

      9 replies 13 retweets 315 likes
      Show this thread
    9. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      12/n So all that's bad. As far as interventional observational trials go, this is probably the worst one I've ever seen. When the authors don't even report how they divided people into intervention and control, that's not a good sign!

      2 replies 13 retweets 337 likes
      Show this thread
    10. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      13/n But looking at the results, some things immediately spring out that are even worse For one thing, the authors pre-registered the trial The pre-registration has results as well They DO NOT MATCH the results in the publication 😬😬😬

      2 replies 17 retweets 378 likes
      Show this thread
      Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

      14/n For example, the pre-reg reports the study had 72 women in the control arm. Table 1 reports 51 womenpic.twitter.com/xja85XiQam

      12:18 AM - 26 Jul 2021
      • 15 Retweets
      • 289 Likes
      • tim s #Finally Chris Brangers Social Seer NURGLE'S OSHA OMBUDSMAN krista Walking Air Quotes Lela_Jeanne Ciara Voy Core de
      3 replies 15 retweets 289 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

          15/n The pre-reg has a median age of 42 for the intervention arm. According to table 1, 70% of the intervention arm had an age below 40 years This is impossiblepic.twitter.com/doDsLdWR0u

          2 replies 14 retweets 294 likes
          Show this thread
        3. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

          16/n Worse still, the graphs from the results contradict the text in the study itself (H/T @K_Sheldrick) Here the results say that 120/130 people tested positive, but the graph implies that 105/110 people didpic.twitter.com/La08f5HeXy

          8 replies 13 retweets 238 likes
          Show this thread
        4. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

          17/n (Note: I saw implies, but frankly since the graph is so terrible it technically says that out of a control group of 215 people 105 got infected. I'm being generous and assuming that's not what the authors meant)

          3 replies 10 retweets 198 likes
          Show this thread
        5. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

          18/n On top of all of this, the numbers from table 1 look very strange. Here's the histogram of numbers, note that six appears 10 times, three numbers appear 7 times, and numbers over six appear only oncepic.twitter.com/l9utp7H64x

          2 replies 11 retweets 184 likes
          Show this thread
        6. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

          19/n What does this all mean? In essence - this trial is about as untrustworthy as they get. No one should be using it for evidence of anything

          1 reply 25 retweets 365 likes
          Show this thread
        7. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

          20/n Given that the graphical and written representations of the primary outcome of the study appear to conflict, and the results tables differ between the pre-registration and the publication, it is worth asking whether this study even took place at all

          1 reply 14 retweets 265 likes
          Show this thread
        8. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

          20.5/n If this study did occur, which record is right - the graphs? The pre-registration? Are none of the numbers correct?

          1 reply 9 retweets 219 likes
          Show this thread
        9. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

          21/n This adds to the long and growing list of concerns about ivermectin literature. It is extremely worrisome that studies like this have been cited multiple times and referenced as evidence for benefit

          5 replies 22 retweets 320 likes
          Show this thread
        10. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Jul 26

          22/n I'm not saying that this research was fraudulent, but what I will say is that I do not see how anyone who read this paper could've cited it as a resource for anything because the issues are...numerous According to Google Scholar, cited 22 times

          28 replies 23 retweets 436 likes
          Show this thread
        11. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Aug 1

          Health Nerd Retweeted Kyle Sheldrick

          23/n update. This is a very bad sign. Authors refusing to communicate and share data is a very common feature of scientific fraud (i.e. Surgisphere)https://twitter.com/K_Sheldrick/status/1421795122291777537?s=19 …

          Health Nerd added,

          Kyle Sheldrick @K_Sheldrick
          The first author of this study, Dr Carvallo, has now refused to release any data until "the pandemic is over" and indicated that I should not contact him again. https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1419557553894137857 …
          Show this thread
          5 replies 32 retweets 233 likes
          Show this thread
        12. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Aug 1

          24/n it is often impossible to know if a study is fraudulent or not, but regardless until the lead author shares anonymised patient data we are forced to treat this study as if it was Hopefully we get the data 🤷‍♂️

          6 replies 9 retweets 128 likes
          Show this thread
        13. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Sep 2

          Health Nerd Retweeted Health Nerd

          25/n The full story on this paper is now out, and it's extremely concerninghttps://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1433555208211079171?s=20 …

          Health Nerd added,

          Health NerdVerified account @GidMK
          BIG NEWS - the 100% benefit people have been claiming for ivermectin as a prophylactic for COVID-19 is built on dodgy data and very questionable research https://gidmk.medium.com/is-ivermectin-for-covid-19-based-on-fraudulent-research-part-3-5066aa6819b3 …
          Show this thread
          3 replies 7 retweets 51 likes
          Show this thread
        14. 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