"Demonizing"? Says the guy who's called @doritmi and me "despicable" more times than I can remember, as well as calling me "devoid of reason," a "disgrace" to the MD and PhD, etc., etc., while telling us contemptuously to "stay in our lane." https://twitter.com/noorchashm/status/1366567058000015361 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread
-
Yes. When you floridly downplay and ignore patient safety, and only work to demonize those who take the position of safety. When you ignore the possibility of minority harm in an unprecedented mass scale treatment in a complex situation, those characterization are correct.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @gorskon
A. Not accepting your claim is not ignoring safety. Nobody is infallible, and I have yet to see you directly respond to the arguments why you may be wrong. Safety is important. Not every claim about safety is correct.
3 replies 4 retweets 31 likes -
B. Note that our iniyial and continuing criticism was not on your hypothesis. It was about misusing unrelated deaths and collaborating with antivaccine activists. Neither advances safety. Both can increase hesitancy and harm others. You have yet to correct either.
2 replies 5 retweets 33 likes -
Replying to @doritmi @noorchashm
Correct, and he’s still playing the role of useful idiot for antivaxxers, helping them, wittingly or unwittingly, to spread fear of
#CovidVaccine. He’s promoting a narrative that will kill people, and it’s being amplified by@RobertKennedyJr!https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/screenb4vaccine-could-protect-covid-vaccine-injuries/ …2 replies 2 retweets 12 likes -
Here goes the master of the gutter again. It’s only about power - not about science or ethics with Gorski and his posse.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
I think speaking up for protecting people reflects ethics. And challenging science deniers involves speaking up for science.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I speak up for science. If anyone denies the efficacy of vaccines, I will correct them….including RFK Jr. I know vaccines well. And I understand the power of mRNA technology.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
And yet, you rejected a 1.2 million people study without pointing to real problems with it.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Insufficient power.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
You’re not a statistician; so I’m tempted to tell you to “stay in your damned lane.” Instead, I’ll simply say this: Show us the power calculation. Prove to me this study is “underpowered.”
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @noorchashm and
So here’s your chance, Dr. N. Put up or shut up. PROVE the study was “underpowered” to detect a safety signal predicted by your hypothesis.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @gorskon @noorchashm and
You can repeat your claim that the study was “underpowered” as much as you like. Just don’t expect me to take you seriously if you can’t or won’t back up your claim with at least a rough power calculation, along with the assumptions behind that calculation.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New 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.