This nakedly political intervention to delay vaccine approval, along with Fauci’s refusal to support an obviously superior first dose vaccine strategy have cost WAY more lives than all the “denialism” and “5G antivax” sentiment put together.
-
-
Replying to @rfsquared @JHowardBrainMD and
I haven’t seen Topol saying he was wrong. And that letter was politically motivated to its core. It’s ok. We live in a double standard world; nothing new there. Enjoy your Saturday everyone.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chadinabhan @rfsquared and
He wasn't wrong (I hate to admit this).
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mikejohansenmd @chadinabhan and
Wait, are saying Topol’s letter was not wrong? Or something else in the thread?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AngryCardio @chadinabhan and
The letter was clearly a silly political stunt. I disagreed w/the concept of the letter at the time. In retrospect, probably better for the trial to accrue more unless it slowed manufacturing capacity.
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @mikejohansenmd @chadinabhan and
I will not comment on the motives of the writer or signatories. What I will say is that their demands were non-standard & nonsensical. As it turned out, safety & efficacy were better than nearly anyone predicted. Of course, it could have been different…
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AngryCardio @mikejohansenmd and
However, even if the safety was not as clear, the demands of the letter would not have uncovered much. Longer-term safety would require *much* more time, based on historical examples. Rare events would need *much* more numbers.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AngryCardio @mikejohansenmd and
The letter asked that *standard* practice for vaccine trials be applied, which is two months after the 2nd dose. There was nothing there about long term safety. Or maybe point out to me what I missed. Maybe if Clinton won this wouldn’t have happened.pic.twitter.com/TKSSRqObeO
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @JHowardBrainMD @mikejohansenmd and
Many trial participants would have already achieved that milestone. Their concerns were made up. Topol had already tried to sandbag the Pfizer DSMB in tweets leading up to the letter. Outlined in my blog post.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AngryCardio @JHowardBrainMD and
“Many” is not standard practice in such a clinical trial.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Perusing his timeline and his RTs tells me where he’s coming from. Kuldorff is one of the three scientists behind @aier’s “let #COVID19 rip” #GreatBarringtonDeclaration, and praising Kuldorff tells me his bias, even if I agree that Ding doesn’t deserve to be considered an expert.pic.twitter.com/aiNpYJ0YLU
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.