Stumbled on this paper about a retracted vitamin D study last year, and it is a WILD RIDE

This paper got 100,000s of downloads on SSRN, and changed worldwide policy

It also might have been...entirely fraudulent?

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
You might not remember the paper, but it was a HUGE DEAL back in mid-2020

It claimed that survival of patients in Indonesia was essentially entirely dependent on vitamin D levels
It was also removed (without any notes) from SSRN sometime in June 2020. Disappeared without a trace

All of this is, uh, not great, but these three doctors from Indonesia thought the study was itself suspicious. They'd never heard of the authors, despite the massive international attention

So they had a look to see if any of this was real
To cut a long story short...the authors may not exist, the institution has no record of the study, no ethics application seems to have been filed, and at the time the study was written in the region it supposedly came from there were only 2 confirmed COVID-19 cases
While none of this definitively proves fraud, it is a wild story, especially given the enormous global impact this study had
The global impact wasn't limited to news reports - the paper has been cited ~100 times so far, i.e. this recent narrative review where it's used to argue that vitamin D should be part of the treatment of COVID-19 for people with diabetes
Also it appears that one of the authors of the investigative paper is on twitter @RaymondPranata

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Health Nerd

Health Nerd Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @GidMK

24 May
So, this is still ongoing, but I think there's an important lesson here in how wildly problematic academic debate is as a forum during a pandemic
The bottom line is pretty depressing - we've spent months arguing back and forth, meanwhile this paper has had a HUGE impact and probably impacted policy decisions across the world
Thing is, our debate about this article has been FAST by academic standards

Three letters/responses for a single article published in 6 months? Snappy by many standards
Read 10 tweets
24 May
1/n Some more movement on this study from earlier in the year by Drs Ioannidis, Bhattacharya, Oh, and Bendavid

Along with @lonnibesancon, @FLAHAULT, and others, we've published a series of responses and ongoing critiques of the piece
2/n The newest response is here, and you can have a look at the previous discussion as well:

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ec…
3/n For reference, if you've forgotten, the original article basically argued that "more" restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions (mrNPIs) such as lockdowns didn't work to prevent COVID-19 cases

It is MASSIVELY popular, with an Altmetric of 19k and dozens of citations
Read 14 tweets
22 May
There is now some reasonably strong evidence that non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19 ("lockdowns") were associated with decreased short-term suicides in several locations in the world
In a number of other places, while not associated with a decrease, they were also not associated with an increase either. In fact, best evidence suggests no link between lockdowns and an increased short-term suicide rate
One of the most bizarre things is that whenever you point out the fact that suicide rates have not generally increased during lockdowns or indeed the pandemic, people get very angry at you

Personally, I think it's quite a good thing that there have been fewer suicides
Read 5 tweets
21 May
This story from @liammannix about the quashing of debate within forensic science is one of the most wild things I've ever read ping @RetractionWatch theage.com.au/national/victo…
We often discuss academic "silencing" as a sort of nasty attack on people's credentials, but rarely does that include police detectives investigating people for publishing scientific articles 👀👀👀
And while I have absolutely no expertise in paediatric forensics, I've read Dr. Brook's piece which while retracted is still available as a preprint, and it does not seem like a wild and unscientific document researchgate.net/profile/C-Broo…
Read 4 tweets
18 May
This piece has one of the weirdest uses of data that I've seen in a long time

I think it really shows that Australians are quite keen to get vaccinated! 1/n
2/n The article reports a survey that was run by @smh and @theage talking to adults about whether they were "likely" to be vaccinated "in the months ahead"
3/n According to the article, with nearly a third responding that they were unlikely to be vaccinated, there is a serious reason for concern representing an "alarming level of vaccine hesitancy"

But do the results show this?
Read 14 tweets
16 May
This sort of scientific gatekeeping is bizarre and incomprehensible

As someone who was the victim of a similar effort recently, I find it extensively gross to see senior scientists practising eminence-based science
Graduate students are the backbone of all scientific endeavours, and often do amazing work without which we would all be lost
Perhaps more importantly, it is fundamentally unscientific to argue that someone's publication record makes any difference to the truth of their arguments
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(