its remarkable how frequently garret gets shit wrong even by the low standards of science journalismhttps://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1359225865939406857 …
-
-
Replying to @halvorz
I muted her and EFD back in the days of snakes and HIV inserts. They at least don't have some weird committed ideology like the GBD folks but...very low signal:noise
2 replies 0 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @iskander
she's easily as bad as dingle but doesn't get one tenth the shit for it
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Fascinating sociology to this, if I may. Most his attacks are "you're a nutritional epi"—making fun of that. One, it's not the source of the problem. Two, it comes off like people making fun of Trump for liking burgers—makes the victim look sympathetic against the smug crowd.+
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
hmm I see value in this analysis but I do think the nutritional epi thing is a problem, or at least might be
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I often see folks with expertise/credentials in one field making strong unfounded claims about *adjacent* fields, just close enough that they can talk the talk convincingly which makes it much harder for non-experts to correctly weight their opinions
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
I remember the first time I saw EFD, I saw "epidemiologist" and I was deeply confused because what he was saying seemed so wildly off then I did a bit of googling, saw nutritional epi, and all was explained most people are not going to do that kind of due diligence
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
idk anybody has the right to spout off about anything imo but it does seem to me that if you spout a lot the responsible thing to do is to be clear about what relevant expertise you do have
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
a nutritional epi expert talking about covid is fine; doing so while touting your mostly irrelevant epi expertise and harvard affiliation is bad but maybe this is just my bias as an anon who has a horror of anyone taking anything I say too seriously
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes
Touting credentials, yes. That's a problem. But the source of the misrepresentations isn't lack of expertise because he's not getting complicated things wrong. It's take news/preprint -> don't really read -> add the most alarmist spin. Occasionally lands on correct square, too.
-
-
But that's why I think the "you don't have the right PhD" vs "But I'm Harvard" war is non only non-winnable (it just makes the accusers look like they're smug or credentialist plus he's got a deep enough moat, heh) it's not even the right battle.
0 replies 0 retweets 5 likesThanks. 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.