This information has been released by @BillyBostickson in response to Yuri announcing a new website for DRASTIC, listing only 12 members. The old website is still there, listing 23 members. I'll try to find out more and update this thread as I figure out what's going on.
Each of the above pieces on its own can be possibly explained away, but when both are put together, they form a pretty telling pattern. As such, I expect more information to come out now that this is in the public. We shall see.
Someone asked why I wrote this thread so it may help to provide some rationale and background.
For those following the events around DRASTIC, here's @billybostickson's side. Make your own conclusions on how you read this, but in my interactions with him, Billy has been honorable, and when we had a misunderstanding, he reached out and we resolved it.
Let's walk through @jamesheathers latest article in The Atlantic to see if he and his collaborators have been paying attention to the criticism of their work.
The subtitle is already setting the stage: "Claims about the drug are based on shoddy science—but that science is entirely unremarkable in its shoddiness."
If I am reading correctly, this is saying that both "the science behind ivermectin is shoddy" and "that's pretty typical".
Does that mean that he'll come out and just say "don't trust most/any medical science"? I find that hard to believe, but let's see what we see.
More recently, I've come to understand that the dream of an objective truth teller is just that: A dream. Counterintuitively, the epistemology of journalism must embrace humility and wear its bias on its sleeve if it wants to regain some trust.
You are entering a complex, multilayered situation you need to understand and resolve. No other details available. You can choose any 5 people for your sensemaking dream team. Who do you bring?
Take this opportunity to improve your Twitter by blocking the idiots responding to this with sneers.
Alternatively, if you want to get blocked, here's your chance. Write something about how my list is stupid or silly, and I'll relieve you of the burden of ever reading my tweets.
But first, what is a corporation, anyway? Put simply, it's a legal abstraction allowing many people, with a defined relationship between them, to appear as one, in the eyes of the law (and other humans). Perhaps a better way to think of it is as a "composite person".
However, as always, the devil is in the details. The character of that composition is what ultimately gives rise to corporatism, the reduction to the lowest-common-denominator.