Subtweet to media, especially science writers. When WHO says "there is no evidence", they don't mean something is false. There is no evidence either way. It could just as well be true. Also, "correlation doesn't imply causation" is wrong and stupid, and doesn't debunk anything.
-
-
Coverage has already gotten into the horse-race framing! Instead of political polls or sports betting, we now have model tracking etc. It's not productive or healthy, nor will it help guide us out of here. It's misleading. We aren't getting what we need.https://twitter.com/eadhed/status/1257337806009044993 …
Show this thread -
Yes! There are many types of evidence besides randomized-trials. Sometimes it's not even possible to have randomized trials but that doesn't mean we should act like all the other types of evidence don't exist or are meaningless.https://twitter.com/jeremyphoward/status/1257346654409285635 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Agreed. However, I'll add this is _STILL_ WHO's stance. Per their situation report I cite in April. I haven't seen anything to the contrary. Is it defensible from a strict scientific perspective? Sure? But again, I think it's conservative beyond reason. Just my layman opinion.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, this has been a (perhaps the) ‘killer assumption’ end January/early February. Even when there was reason to at least suspect a- or pre-symptomatic transmission, and knowing ‘mildly symptomatic’ is highly subjective.
-
Sweden went on a crusade against this in February. Debunked NEJM letter but didn't listen to any other evidence. Still does not believe in asymptomatic transmission and cannot figure out how virus spread to nursing homes. Must be the employees' fault for working while sick.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Correction: The WHO did not say there was no asymptomatic spread. They said: “Asymptomatic infection has been reported... but appears to be relatively rare and does not appear to be a major driver of transmission.” Feb 2020 Report, Pg13: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf …
-
They were still wrong in that statement, but given the early state of investigations, it wasn’t an egregious error.
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.