Good advice. I also did it a few times to myself with preliminary results... 
-
-
-
Confirmation bias is strong and powerful, even in those of us who know how to recognize it in ourselves and try to be objective.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
And ALWAYS review the methods section. Their methods were ridiculous. Pure speculation. The exact numbers are known and they are less than 300. As in computing, garbage in garbage out
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It’s a fair critique so I reposted as well, but I don’t think the study is wrong any more than any model is wrong. All models are wrong. The question is is it useful? This model plausibly uses cell aggregation data and diff in diff to show increases relative to expected.
-
The critique is “we would see this in national numbers” but that’s not a perfect critique. After all, the model is using existing cases right? It’s saying how much more of the existing cases were likely unnecessary compared to the difference states.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I thought that it seemed unlikely that extensive amount of reliable contact tracing was actually happening in the US (all things considered, but obviously I could be working from a faulty impression and incorrect).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
My BS detector sounded loudly on this one. I was hoping the media wouldn't pick it up, unfortunately it did.
Thanks. 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.