@EMcCra2 @thebeekeep3r @Awithonelison @GeoffSchuler This is why you read the study before jumping to the references. 3)
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Vbalance03
@EMcCra2 @thebeekeep3r
@Awithonelison@GeoffSchuler Ofc not. But you have assumed that their choices were arbitrary, which is wrong.2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
@EMcCra2 @thebeekeep3r
@Awithonelison@GeoffSchuler The whole point is that the systematic review eliminates bias if done correctly.2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Vbalance03
@EMcCra2 @thebeekeep3r
@GeoffSchuler No you should read and evaluate their methodology. No faith involved.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Vbalance03
@EMcCra2 @thebeekeep3r
@GeoffSchuler Ofc not, but you seem to be saying that they just picked the studies that they wanted...1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
@EMcCra2 @thebeekeep3r
@GeoffSchuler And you also don't seem to be reading the studies they cited, just the titles.1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
@EMcCra2 @thebeekeep3r @GeoffSchuler That diabetes study you rubbished was directly related to vax safety and chronic disease.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Vbalance03
@EMcCra2 @thebeekeep3r
@GeoffSchuler But my point is that you don't seem to be reading the studies that they referenced here.3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes - 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.