I'm still quite surprised at the complete and utter lack of basic integrity that has some ivermectin proponents arguing that the literature is fine because there is an "expected" rate of fraud and misconduct which has not been exceeded
This bizarre narrative states that the fraud in the ivermectin space isn't an issue because every scientific area has fraud and therefore we're just seeing exactly what we'd anticipate for any treatment
This is just genuinely nonsensical. Most of the fraudulent studies have been the most hugely positive, and there are serious concerns with many of the other papers
If all you care about is some vague concept of academic honesty, sure ivermectin might not be drastically worse than some other areas of the literature. But if you care about WHETHER IVERMECTIN WORKS FOR COVID-19...well. The fraud is a problem
Anyway, as I've said before the fraud in the literature is a significant concern that has made the outcome very hard to assess. We don't know if ivermectin works, largely because many of the studies are terribly low-quality or fake 🤷♂️
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
