Gøtzsche was ousted from Cochrane due to a pattern of seriously poor behaviour which goes back many years. His current behaviour, here on social media, is extremely poor. Perhaps check before you share?
-
-
I don't know about ousting from Cochrane or what was behind that. I can take ur word about 'poor behavior' but it seems like I would have to do quite a lot of digging and investigation to formulate my own impression. Do you think the content of the editorial I shared is wrong?
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Brian, if you do a cursory check on Gøtzsche you’ll find information regarding him? Did you not even find the Go Fund Me?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
No, I had no knowledge of GoFundMe. I'm confused about ur perspective. If I read an article whose content seems sensible, your view is I should first investigate the author of the article to see if, in some other context, they have said things other experts object to?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Gøtzsche is promoting his “Institute for Scientific Freedom”, did you not even do a basic check on what it is and why he formed it?
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Here was my thought process: the BMJ is a pretty respectable source. Here is an article expressing values about science, and concerns about problems in science, that I think are good values and reasonable concerns. I will share this expression of values/concerns.
3 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
There’s your mistake. BMJ has become rather dodgy in a number of ways, not the least of which that there’s an antivaxer (Peter Doshi) as one of its associate editors.
4 replies 6 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @Rosewind2007 and
This was quite obvious when I had a look. But how on earth does this quack end up being an associate editor?
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @skepteis @Rosewind2007 and
I wish I knew. He has no medical training. His training is, as I recall, as an anthropologist. Yet he pontificates on vaccines, in particular the flu vaccine, all the time, parroting antivaccine misinformation and distortions of science. He has no business as an editor of BMJ.
2 replies 3 retweets 11 likes -
I think he came in having done some good work on issues with clinical trials and bad behavior by pharmaceutical companies. His
#vaccines work, however, has consistently been highly problematic.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I don’t recall him ever having done good work.
-
-
I don’t know him. But that’s the explanation I received, I think from Editor Godlee.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.