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. Federico Andres Lois‏ @federicolois Aug 8
      Replying to @GidMK

      Tell me how those errors doesn't fuel distrust on novel platforms. They were rushed. That they worked, it was not because of the process. If this is the new standard for medical research, god help us.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    2. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Aug 8
      Replying to @federicolois

      Personally, I find it much more reassuring when people are transparent about their mistakes than when they simply won't admit anything went wrong, ever. That's why I am a bit skeptical of Sputnik, while not at all worried about AZ, Sinovac, Pfizer etc

      1 reply 1 retweet 1 like
    3. Federico Andres Lois‏ @federicolois Aug 8
      Replying to @GidMK

      Transparency is a must. It is a sanity check, not a guarantee of anything. Process is important, and while it was a lucky mistake, shows also the lack of through study of dosing effects. Not a good sign at all.

      1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes
    4. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Aug 8
      Replying to @federicolois

      And yet, these studies have been FAR more transparent than any previous pieces of research, scrutinized far more closely, and the mistakes identified and explained much more quickly. Like I said, some of the best trials ever conducted

      2 replies 1 retweet 1 like
    5. Michael Simonson‏ @msimonson19 Aug 8
      Replying to @GidMK @federicolois

      Is there any sort of list, article, or other reference point showing or suggesting that the vaccine trials were the best ever conducted? I’d lean towards them being middle of the road in terms of quality (blind broken, didn’t enroll most vulnerable) but open to hearing otherwise.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    6. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Aug 8
      Replying to @msimonson19 @federicolois

      Those are elements of higher quality actually - the enrolment criteria were quite strict to reduce bias, and the blinding being broken was adjudicated by an independent committee

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    7. Michael Simonson‏ @msimonson19 Aug 8
      Replying to @GidMK @federicolois

      Got it. As far as the trials being best ever, was there other information you could share that shows that?

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Aug 8
      Replying to @msimonson19 @federicolois

      Tbh, that's more of a subjective assessment - they were some of the biggest ever, but 'best' is just my opinion. Given how many variables are involved in high-quality trials (literally 100s of pages of protocol), comparing them is a very time-consuming process

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    9. Michael Simonson‏ @msimonson19 Aug 8
      Replying to @GidMK @federicolois

      Understood. What do you mean they had strict enrollment criteria to reduce bias? Doesn’t it make the trial more biased if you are only testing a narrow segment of the population?

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Aug 8
      Replying to @msimonson19 @federicolois

      Nope, it makes it potentially less generalisable. Bias is issues that effect the results, generalisability is whether the results can be applied to populations outside of your trial

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
      Health Nerd‏Verified account @GidMK Aug 8
      Replying to @GidMK @msimonson19 @federicolois

      So we know with a great deal of certainty that AZ works for the types of people included in their study, but it's possible it works less well for other groups (ofc by now we've got evidence from other groups as well, this was just the case in ~Nov 2020)

      7:36 PM - 8 Aug 2021
      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Michael Simonson‏ @msimonson19 Aug 9
          Replying to @GidMK @federicolois

          If AZ intentionally limited the types of people included in their study in the hopes that the post-study evidence from other groups would be positive, that seems reckless. Isn’t the point of a study to test the drug on a small group of people *before* it’s distributed widely?

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Federico Andres Lois‏ @federicolois Aug 9
          Replying to @msimonson19 @GidMK

          This is a common very poorly understood problem, we deal with this every single day in Artificial Intelligence. The ability of generalization is among the most important ones, because distributional shift happens. A trial without generalization capabilities is limited. Correct.

          1 reply 3 retweets 1 like
        4. Show replies

      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