Fascinating thread. It's wrong in numerous ways - the methodology is pretty trivially incorrect, many of the statements are wrong based even on a quick google

But it's face-plausible so people jump on board. Very interesting
Taking one basic error in the thread as an example, the tables only work if you assume that the proportions in each age group are identical across these countries, which is very trivially wrong
Another basic mistake - the US had patchy lockdowns that weren't all in place for most of the year, so it's boringly incorrect to compare to Sweden in this way
And this claim is just bizarre. You can quite easily google age-specific excess deaths for each of these countries, it takes seconds to find the data

• • •

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!


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

8 Jun
@jamesheathers and I have an important new piece out in STAT today talking about science during The Plague

Bottom line - academic science has not come out of the pandemic looking good

The simple fact is that our current system for generating and correcting evidence has not handled the incredibly tight timeframes of Covid in any reasonable way
I think this story about a paper in Scientific Reports exemplifies the issue

The authors and editors did everything RIGHT as far as traditional academia goes. And yet, it was a massive failure in many ways
Read 6 tweets
8 Jun
Headlines: vegetarian diets prevent severe COVID!

Study: cross-sectional survey-based investigation of an online sample of healthcare workers shows some interesting associations

The headlines are wildly silly 1/n
2/n The study is here, and fun for a quick read. Basically, a group of researchers surveyed healthcare workers in July-Sept 2020 and asked them stuff about their diet and COVID nutrition.bmj.com/content/early/…
3/n This appears to be the 3rd or 4th study published from that survey. The authors basically found that, after controlling for a couple of confounders, there was an association between self-reported diet and risk of severe COVID-19
Read 14 tweets
4 Jun
If you want to consider the travesty of medical advice vs evidence during COVID-19, vitamin D is an amazing example

100s of millions of people have self-medicated/been treated with vit D for COVID. The evidence base is trash
A living Cochrane systematic review last updated May 2021 gives you an idea of this - as of 14 months into the global pandemic, there are 3 published RCTs on vitamin D

<400 total patients

And look, it's never been tremendously likely that vitamin D was the key ingredient to banishing COVID-19, but it is wild that so many people have taken it for the disease and we still don't even know if there are harms to that or not
Read 5 tweets
2 Jun
This is one of my favourite things of the year

People on Tiktok are drinking lettuce water because of a rumour it helps you sleep

This is all apparently based on a 2013 study that looked at lettuce leaf/seed extracts IN MICE @justsaysinmice Image
Now, I should say that the original rumour that started on Tiktok may not be entirely due to this study. The Pedestrian article says that this is the research backing up the claim, but there's no evidence that's true Image
Nevertheless, this study is BRILLIANT:

- extracted substances from lettuce leaf/seeds
- gave extract to mice
- sedated mice
- measured sleep times (slight difference)
Read 8 tweets
30 May
A "new study" has hit the headlines that apparently proves that SARS-CoV-2 was lab-grown

I am QUITE SKEPTICAL for a number of reasons, would love your thoughts...
First massive red flag🚩: the paper is NOT PUBLISHED YET

Science journalists know you NEVER report on a paper that is unpublished (because it might be shit)
Second 🚩🚩🚩: the abstract is...kind of weird

I'm not a virologist, but talking about some previous experiments that "reverse the burden of proof" is...not really logical
Read 7 tweets
27 May
An interesting new study - systematic review and meta-analysis for ivermectin. Found:

- no benefit for all-cause mortality
- no benefit for length of stay

Both very low-quality evidence
I haven't had time to read it in extreme detail yet, but a quick skim seems to show that it is a fairly good piece of research that the authors have already improved in the 24 hours since it went online
Arguably the most important point of the study - the vast majority of evidence on ivermectin for COVID-19 appears to be of extremely poor quality even when you limit the results only to the best studies
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!