Share this page!

Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』 Profile picture
@ToshiAkima
Apr 1 • 4 tweets • 3 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
“Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a paradigmatic thromboinflammatory disease. Thromboinflammation is a pathophysiological mechanism coupling inflammation and thrombosis, which contributes to the pathophysiology of cardiovascular disease.” #immunothrombosis @isth
There has also been some suggestion that aPL antibodies may be pathogenic rather than just a transient secondary response to infection. #TeamClots #LongCovid sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/…
From the @JTHjournal article: “Dysregulation of protective immunothrombosis may have detrimental effects, eg in severe COVID-19. This is termed thromboinflammation and can lead to collateral damage to local tissues. The existence of a systemic proinflammatory and prothrombotic… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
A previous study in @RPTHjournal suggested a pathogenic role for aPL antibodies in COVID. However, while thromboinflammation occurs in antiphospholipid syndrome + acute or #longCOVID, I doubt COVID immunothrombosis can be explained as a form of APS alone. bit.ly/3IhZzxs

• • •

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

Keep Current with Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』

Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』 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 @ToshiAkima

Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』 Profile picture
Mar 25
“Death in Hamburg” by @RichardEvans36. A book written in 1987for our COVID age. The title, a reference to Thomas Mann's Death in Venice, this is a review of one of the best books I've ever read. 5/5 stars. 🧵 penguinrandomhouse.com/books/294784/d…
From legendary Cambridge historian, Sir Richard J Evans comes a historical epic that unfolds in a grand Dickensian narrative, set in a Victorian-era bleak house of indescribable inequities on the backdrop of the satanic mills of a post-industrial revolution German landscape.
It reads like it was written for the COVID age, but was surprisingly first published in 1987, at the height of the HIV pandemic. The book is equally a commentary on the rise of neoliberal Thatcherism in Britain and its adoption of decentralised laissez-faire economics.
Read 31 tweets
Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』 Profile picture
Mar 24
Searching the @cochranecollab database, I found more examples of reviews of physical protections in areas where running an RCT would be unethical—because they have no ethics guidelines in their Handbook. training.cochrane.org/handbook/curre… 🧵
No “evidence” that hats prevent skin cancer (need to show reduced skin cancer mortality in a placebo-blinded trial). cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.10…
3. No “evidence” that sunscreen prevents skin cancer (need to show reduced skin cancer mortality in a placebo-blinded trial). Do your own search here cochranelibrary.com/search
Read 7 tweets
Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』 Profile picture
Mar 18
An explanatory thread, expanding on this previous thread about the meaning of "predictive validity" and why RCTs are unethical where predictive validity of direct mechanistic modelling is retained. Let's explain this in easy terms.🧵
Do we need an RCT of high-velocity intracranial lead therapy for the treatment of severe depression? *One* reason this mightn't get ethics approval is that you can use physics and the science of forensic ballistics to predict the adverse clinical impact of a bullet to the head.
Forensic ballistics uses lab models to predict the impact of a bullet. Its mechanistic modelling retains "predictive validity" outside of the lab because it is based on physics. You can use a model skull, an animal skull etc, and it still retains "predictive validity" Image
Read 13 tweets
Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』 Profile picture
Mar 13
I've been doing some further research on troll bots using @BotSentinel, and what I've found is disturbing. 🧵
I found this anti-vaxx account trolling @KarenCutter4. It exhibits a mix of human and automated behaviours leading to a modest yet still suspiciously high @BotSentinel rating.
If you look at who likes these troll tweets, you find a large proportion of dubious-looking bots among them with high @BotSentinel ratings. Run individual user checks on those with “unknown” ratings, and they all turn out to be bots.
Read 9 tweets
Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』 Profile picture
Mar 11
Corrected headline: @cochranecollab admit they are mouthpieces of Koch brothers-funded anarchistic capitalist think tanks. Masks are public health measures, therefore useless—like every other state intervention. thestar.com/news/canada/20… via @torontostar
@CochraneLibrary reviews are the perfect instrument for the merchants of doubt. It helps them question the earth's rotundity, the heliocentric solar system, climate change science or almost anything else as it suits them politically.
If you ran a Cochrane review asking what the evidence is that CO2 emission reduction mitigates adverse health impacts from climate change, the foregone conclusion would be that there is no such “evidence”. That’s why you’d run the study. Ditto for masks.
Read 5 tweets
Dr Satoshi Akima FRACP 『秋間聰』 Profile picture
Mar 10
@cochranecollab so when will we get a Cochrane review of whether CO2 emissions reduction will prevent the adverse health impacts of climate change? It will state: “not a shred of evidence”. Maybe let Conly lead it with Heneghan as an unlisted author.🧵
While you're at it, let's have Conly and Heneghan lead a @cochranecollab review on evidence for the earth's rotundity. It's a foregone conclusion: “not a shred of so-called evidence”. The Cochrane method is perfect for flat earthers.
It is time the @cochranecollab admitted there are epistemological limitations to what scientific questions the RCT/meta-analysis model of science can be legitimately applied to. Either that or run that review rejecting the earth's rotundity.
Read 7 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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Send Email!

:(