Conference season is almost over for me; thanks for your patience. In the meantime, please enjoy this picture of a small mushroom in Saxony, and note also this sequel to the mask replication study I posted about on Sunday:
Why did the @CDCMMWR reject a reanalysis by @TracyBethHoeg and @AChandra_TO of a
mask study it previously published? The reanalysis used more data & same methodology but failed to replicate the original paper.
Publication bias is not usually quite so blatant.
Kyle Lamb @kylamb8
The CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report were totally happy publishing the original paper on Pediatric COVID-19 Cases in Counties With and Without School Mask Requirements, despite serious defects. Yet they refused to publish the much larger replication study, which failed to find any protective effect from masking when using the same methodology on a much larger dataset. Publication bias is a pervasive problem with all Corona research, and it is the major reason why most mask studies are garbage.
Congrats on getting near the finish line. Any superspreaders? Big conference in my field had a huge breakout - despite everyone being v'd of course. Shockingly, none of my colleagues commented on this remarkable turn off events.
“They” are STILL flogging all of the same crap (mask, vax, lockdown, passports) that failed so laughably & damagingly (not sure that’s a legit word) the 1st time around & in the face of REAL scientific evidence. That’s why I’m so worried for what’s to come