Oh no, I used a colloquialism on social media, how dare I. If you're looking for a more academic bent: It is not merely ivermectin which appears to be subject to a large volume of academic fraud, and this is worrisome for the scientific literature more broadly
-
-
Replying to @GidMK
Still ludicrous exaggeration, but somehow less ludicrous. Congrats, you're getting there.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @alexandrosM
Lol Alex, you can be as patronizing as you like, it will not reduce the volume of fraud in the ivermectin literature. Check back soon, it's very depressing
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GidMK
Fraud is a word implying intent. "large volume" is a term that could mean anything from 5% to 50% of all studies done, and knowing how careful you are with words, I must conclude you're being a little... fraudy.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @alexandrosM
To be fair, it could be people faking trials accidentally, but that is...somewhat unlikely. And I never even specified how many studies, that's you going for a straw man argument again my friend
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
How is one to read "large volume"? What were you trying to convey exactly? Surely you can be far clearer than casting aspersions on hundreds of scientists. You just don't want to.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @alexandrosM
Read it however you like, if you're here to police my language you've come to the wrong platform. You tend to completely misinterpret things that I say, so I can only assume you'll do that just as much if I start speaking in a more academic tone
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Ah, yes, blaming the reader. Classic. You can't even say what people are supposed to take away from your vaguetweets. Not the behavior of someone interested in sharing information.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @alexandrosM
Lol buddy, everyone else understood that this was a question that I was being asked, but you decided it was a firm statement that I was making about the specific number of studies that are fraudulent. As I said, you like to misinterpret things to get into arguments
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Yep. Quite a few people actually
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
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.