IMO his conclusions suggest bad faith. Although it is possible that the combination between his bias and the lack of rigor lead him to notice only what confirms by his beliefs.
Your own evidence that you cited indicates it was mass and widespread. As I've said, 30% of the entire population of a mid-sized country taking a drug in 8 months is a HUGE proportion
-
-
I agree, 30% it's a lot of people but it isn't the right people and at the right time. Only 8% used it as a treatment, and the prevalence at the end of 2020 was ~40%.
-
Most of them used it as a prophylactic I.e. taking it entirely out of sync with your paper's hypothesis. But again, the problem is that you simply do not know who was taking ivermectin, how much, and when, so there's no measure of exposure in the paper
- Show replies
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.
