@K_Sheldrick not sure if @BretWeinstein & @HeatherEHeying are talking about you, but I’m gonna go out on a limb and say yes they are :) Kudos to them for finally addressing this
Relevant part starts at 31:18
@GidMK @ydeigin @fullydavid @WisdomRebelhttps://youtu.be/PqjbvBa3XIQ?t=1878 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @paulburrer @BretWeinstein and
Yes, he is talking about me. He reached out to confirm directly what I had said at the time. He indicated to me he would request the data himself at that time. I agree with his interpretation (not proof positive of fraud, but can't give weight to the study).
5 replies 1 retweet 22 likes -
Replying to @K_Sheldrick @paulburrer and
I'm torn here - I genuinely applaud people for admitting that they were incorrect, but also this isn't really an admission of the central mistake here which was ever giving this atrocious study the slightest credence in the first place
7 replies 3 retweets 43 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @K_Sheldrick and
Regardless of whether it is fraud, the study is transparently terrible. As I said, probably the worst cohort study I've ever seen
2 replies 0 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @K_Sheldrick and
Agreed
. But I think it would be extremely impactful to the people that need to hear it the most, to have one (or more of you) on the DH podcast to have a rational discussion about this. Today's episode was the 1st time where I felt they would be open to that dialogue.1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
Well, we've got a fair few more stories of outright fraud coming out soon, so if Bret and Heather are interested in hearing about how astonishingly broken the evidence base is for ivermectin I'm sure Kyle and I would be interested in chatting at some point
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.