Thread by @plaforscience

I'm surprised about the persistence of two covid myths:

We know very little on CV.
There's a scientifical consensus.

Well, 84K papers in the issue deny both of them.

We know A HUGE DAMN LOT, about this virus; and there are MANY interpretations on it.

biorxiv.org/content/10.110…

There's NOT such a thing as a consensus ,but a very complex net of fractional insights. We only see aired the few undisputable supporting the fear narrative, even its quality is null, as Imperial College stuff.

They always come at appropriate political moment, and are models.

In the other hand there's a cloud of side studies, never as spectacular as the previous, but strongly scientifical; usually analysis rather than modelling; that points consistently AGAINST the exceptionality of this virus and the horrible mistake and disproportion of restrictions

Those serious science is being silenced, mocked or even censored, but can't be denied

Or duty, now, and until necessary, is to unveil the truth

Against the myth, we know almost everything about CV19 by now; nothing changes on what we knew on virus epidemic

Let's back to sanity