An incredible piece that is extremely readable, and uncovers the whole mess.
"Oh come on, Alex, this is some prof from Idaho with a 23 h-index. Is this your refutation?"
I've not even gotten started yet.
How about Dr Peter Gøtzsche, over 180 THOUSAND citations, h-index 103 (this means over 100 papers with over 100 citations EACH). Is he credentialed enough?
Oh, yeah, he was also a founder and board member of the Cochrane Collaboration.
Here he is explaining why large pharmaceutical companies meet the definition of organized crime:
Here he is explaining how prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death:
"Ok fine. You found the village idiot. We keep him around because he has a funny accent".
Funny you should say that, because I have another dude with a funny accent for you:
456 THOUSAND citations, by some accounts, the most cited living scientist.
"Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias." journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/a…
Now, keep in mind, Ioannidis and Gøtzsche are two of the authors of the PRISMA statement, which is the consensus standard for how meta-analyses and systematic reviews should be done.
Naturally, all this had been foretold. All the way back in 1998, Charlton and Miles had laid it all out for us. A "science" that is named after the lie that all prior medicine was "not-evidence-based" is a discipline that lives by lies. researchgate.net/profile/Andrew…
The author wrote a retrospective 11 years later (13 years ago), basically explaining to us what would happen during the pandemic, when even the basic guardrails were thrown out because "EMERGENCY!!!"
In fact, this is not a medical, or for that matter, scientific problem at all. Deming had explained the problem of metrics-driven managerial top-down authoritarianism years ago.
PLEASE watch this video to the end. Don't let his deadpan humor fool you:
I hope this thread can serve as a reading list of material for people who have run into the same mess I did a year and a half ago, so they don't have to spend 18 months reconstructing it.
The evidence against evidence-based medicine is as conclusive as it is damning.
I actually consider this an optimistic thread. Whenever I've seen evidence of rot that is *this* clear, this public, the narrative eventually shifts. Maybe it will take a decade. Or maybe it will take longer. But it will shift. The question is "to what?"
The biggest reason I make these threads, and why I post them on Twitter, is all the additional material that comes up in the responses. In particular this video by @p_parry1 is an excellent complement to this thread.
Did you now that the PRINCIPLE trial out of the UK found that IVM was superior to the usual care in practically every subgroup it tested, but it sat on the results for ~600 days? When it finally published, it buried these results in page 346 of the appendix.
The main body of the paper they published is even more bizarre --
1. They claim that "clinically meaningful" meant 1.5 days improvement in median time to recovery. 2. They admit that ivermectin showed >2 days to recovery. 3. Their main conclusion is that ivermectin is unlikely to provide clinically meaningful improvement in recovery.
The secret sauce in their conclusion is that their target metric of HR 1.2 is based on 9 days of recovery needed (after randomization). Even though they had ran many hundreds of patients by the time they started the ivm arm they knew the days needed for recovery were >14.
Let's do a thread doing a close reading of Douglas Murray's article in the NY Post, in which he writes about his encounter with Dave Smith on Joe Rogan's podcast.
If you care about facts and truth and stuff, I promise this will be highly illuminating. 🧵
"Having not spoken to Joe since the wars in Ukraine and Israel started, I had become increasingly irked that the guests he has had on have been almost entirely anti-Ukraine and anti-Israel."
As many have demonstrated, this is false.
Since late 2023, at the very least these guests with strong pro-israel views have appeared at least once on the podcast.
Gad Saad
Mike Baker
Peter Zeihan
Douglas Murray
Coleman Hughes
Konstantin Kisin (3 times)
So, the Ukranian constitution gives the president the power to declare martial law, and explicitly says that parliamentary elections can be delayed until after martial law is lifted. For presidential elections it says they must happen every 5 years with no martial law exception.
Whitney Webb's failure to admit error, (and how to survive the 2025+ infowars without getting blackpilled)
I had a run-in with Whitney Webb this week. This THREAD will try to walk you through the story in excruciating detail.
This will take a while, but I think it's worth it.
It all started when @BretWeinstein thanked @POTUS for withdrawing from the WHO. Bret had fought long and hard against the WHO pandemic treaty that was being pushed, so whoever had followed him knows how important this is.
@BretWeinstein @POTUS Whitney Webb felt the need to point out that "Trump also left the WHO in mid-2020 and then just redirected what was once WHO funding to the Gates-funded GAVI vaccine alliance."
Your favorite blackpill dealer, Whitney Webb, here with more trash data and vague insinuations.
In this episode, she claims Trump "redirected" WHO funding to GAVI. In reality, she is asserting that unrelated funding from USAID to GAVI was made because of the withdrawal from WHO in 2020.
The USAID funding to GAVI was part of a long-term funding stream that USAID had been providing to GAVI since 2001.
Some people are saying that maybe the 1.4B in 2016-2020 was concentrated in 2020. Not true. A billion was pledged for the period of 2015-2018. Then 1.16 billion was pledged for the period between 2020-2023. Taking inflation into account, that is effectively the same amount, for the same duration of time.