Honestly, you seem intent on sowing discord and discontent.
I have repeatedly praised folks like @MedCrisis and @drjohnm who focus on excellence in science communication as well as folks like @ProfDFrancis and @VPrasadMDMPH who are both great scientists and great communicators.
-
-
Let's turn this around
@gorskon, how do you prioritize your efforts? -
Stay tuned. That’s too big a question for Twitter (for me at least, given Twitter’s lack of nuance); so I might very well have to write a post about it sometime in the next week or two.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I respect all of you, but wish
#medtwitter can reach a consensus that there is upper limit for what science can prove, and proving a no-effect is way harder than is-effect. Most nonsenses are exaggerating a no-effect, which requires tremendous resource to debunk. 1/ -
debunking verbally and debunking scientifically are different dimensions. While we can always argument something is a bs, we can't spend endless time actively finding nonsense then debunking because resource doesn't permit. All we can do is debunking w retrospective evidence. 2/
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
He seems to be also clueless about the harm that it causes
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.
