@HomeopathicDana @KlaVeld @rsbrown550 The OR is small, and given the large number of previous systematic reviews showing no effect 1)
-
-
Replying to @GidMK
@HomeopathicDana@KlaVeld@rsbrown550 And the biological implausibility of the proposed treatment it is reasonable to assume 2)2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GidMK
@HomeopathicDana@KlaVeld@rsbrown550 That the very modest risk reduction they found is an artefact of statistical processes. 3)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
@HomeopathicDana@KlaVeld@rsbrown550 And from the equivocation in their conclusion, it seems the authors agree with my interpretation. 4)1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GidMK
@GidMK@KlaVeld@rsbrown550 Medical science is FULL of equivocation...at least the honest researchers1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HomeopathicDana
@HomeopathicDana@KlaVeld@rsbrown550 So do you disagree with the authors that the results are inconclusive?3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
@GidMK@KlaVeld@rsbrown550 U have shown extreme bias. I plan to block u if u continue to do so4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HomeopathicDana
@HomeopathicDana@KlaVeld@rsbrown550 How so?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
@HomeopathicDana@KlaVeld@rsbrown550 Do you not think focusing on a single positive review is biased when there are many negative ones?3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GidMK
@GidMK@KlaVeld@rsbrown550 The Australian govt's review was not peer-review and was garbage. GIGO.3 replies 1 retweet 1 like
@HomeopathicDana @KlaVeld @rsbrown550 Did you have any problems with their methods as submitted?
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.