Ugh. This guy. He's still at it with his crazy bad hot take on that mask study.
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/940254 …
-
-
-
Replying to @ENirenberg
Me too. It's painful to watch, truly cringeworthy.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @gorskon @ENirenberg
We want the same thing—public health. We can agree tho that Science has a trust prob. I think it’s b/c of hubris. IMHO — top journal publishing howlers demean their status->further reducing trust. The message of science is that it’s super hard. Uncertainty prevails
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
So an unanswered questions remains what do you think should be done about blatant misinformation about masks? This will 100% happen with any vaccine too. Some advocate that doctors say nothing, ceding the social media sphere to those who spread lies and misinformation.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
That is an easy question— see the close of my piece. Basically we explain the precautionary principle. But absolutely not use faux empiricism. Like
@RogueRad explains.4 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @drjohnm @JHowardBrainMD and
Here's the thing. You can explain the precautionary principle all you want, but it won't work for a large number of people. That's why a wide variety of weapons against disinformation is needed.
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Precisely. They seem to be acting as though it cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and weeks to do.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JHowardBrainMD @gorskon and
These are fair discussion points. I disagree strongly but thanks for the calm discussion. Seriously.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
-
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.