11/n Moving on, the outcome measure here is called "excess" deaths Here's how the authors calculated excess deaths. This is, uh, a very idiosyncratic way to make the calculationpic.twitter.com/ASdi03zQxA
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
22/n The other fascinating thing about these graphs is that they appear to completely undercut the entire argument in the study You see, the program that they've used to delineate exposure started at the end of Julypic.twitter.com/NLqIR8srzS
23/n As far as I can tell from the study and news reports, it consisted of first identifying high-risk people for a week or two, then going house-by-house to test them and deliver care packages over the next few weeks/months
24/n This means that the EARLIEST that the program could've been delivering ivermectin is around the second week of August But look at the peaks of excess deaths in those graphspic.twitter.com/QjaXUNrslR
25/n It appears that in most cases, the peak of deaths happened in August ~or earlier~, which means that this program wasn't even started until deaths had already peaked in most places. This is a pretty huge issue for the analysis!
26/n Anyway, at a basic level there's absolutely no way to estimate from the data how many people were actually taking ivermectin in any of these places, so this analysis cannot possibly show that ivermectin is effective or ineffective 
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.