This strikes me as a pretty bad take, or at least one that requires more care and more explanation in light of the study just out in The Lancet: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext …, by Mandeep Mehra, Sapan S Desai, Frank Ruschitzka, & Amit N Patel (all MDs).https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1264678273113624577 …
It’s not a “take”, go to the top of my thread and follow the RCT unblinding.https://twitter.com/califf001/status/1264636314504138752 …
-
-
I did read your thread! (In fact, I responded to it in at least one place; so did a lot of others, so I don't blame you for not responding). You claim that there is "no evidence", and you dismiss non-RCT evidence. Maybe that's not a "take", but imho it's mistaken.
-
No don’t read my thread, read the RCT notice that I linked to.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Here's the top of the thread in question (link is https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1264671101587804172 …, and screenshot below to include the quoted reference). Your claim is wrong unless one disregards the Lancet study I described in my own response, which would require good reasons.pic.twitter.com/LhqZaUBui3
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.