Methodology for one situation? Yeah, that sure sounds like a top 1% analysis. You definitely scored some originality points right there. Haven't heard anything that retarded out of someone else's mouth for a long, long time.
Anyway, just let it go dude, you got owned, take it on the chin. Take some comfort in knowing that you're part of the top 1% of analysts. Boast yourself some more in other threads for example. Perhaps one of your 3 languages can finally teach you the basics of logic and common sense.
Find another place and time to drop your red herrings, mental gymnastics, digressions and dichotomies.
Bye now.
There are probably more factors involved but interpretation is the biggest one afaik.
Another big factor could be the test kits. I read about big differences in false positives & negatives from different manufacturers. Especially some Chinese kits are supposedly highly unreliable(surprise) but are still included in the stats.
Other corona-virus types could also yield a positive result as most, if not all, test kits can't differentiate between different corona strains. It's a giant clusterfuck.
Imho, opening the economy and shielding the vulnerable ones in society(elderly, sick) from social interactions and potential hotbeds looks like the least evil option.
Nah, mostly has to do with record keeping and data interpretation. Demographics play a role too of course.
Just look at the difference in death rate between Italy and Germany. Italy counts every positive deceased case as a Covid death. Germany makes a distinction between Covid death and died with Covid. Died with Covid cases don't get added to the death rate. Still, rarely anyone dies without underlying health issues. Rarely anyone under age 65 dies, also in Italy.
US' numbers seem way off. Too much meddling with the data going on for political reasons. US citizens are the duped ones.
Not denying he has bias against Trump, he does, it's not a secret. But facts just don't lie.
The sad part is that once more proper studies are being released, which is soon, it will be obvious that HCQ is nearly useless against COVID-19. The left is going to milk that argument dry against us.
There kinda is now https://twitter.com/jpogue1/status/1288871272261328902
Yawn, ad hominems. Yawn "Big Pharma". Yawn "shill".
Hur dur, gonna establish my own version of reality and anyone who disagrees is obviously retarded. Cuz I'm so much smarter than the scientific world.
Hur dur, fuck proven methodology that has saved millions of lives. I speak 3 languages you know, I'm super smart.
Don't tell me you're actually defending the Raoult study?? Hahaha. That one has been incinerated into oblivion by almost any respectable doctor. What's next, demon sperm and alien dna exist too? The black lady doctor in favor of HCQ thinks so, might just fit in your altered world of reality.
Trying to sound smart but making an absolute fool of yourself. Priceless kek.
"But muh 3 languages bruh"
"He goes on to talk about the lacking methodologies in the supporting studies, which is a point Risch has already adressed; compared to the risks involved, the evidence is still strong enough to err on the side of action, even after considering the lack of control groups etc."
Yeah, Risch did, and it's such a bogus argument that it boggles the mind as to why he would even go there in the first place, being a Phd & epidimiologist and all.
As Gorski quoted: "an abomination of science".
It's like saying you can safely throw bricks from skyscrapers into a busy street because a few of them missed and cause no injury at all, but all the ones that did hit someone weren't lethal. Bogus logic.
Confounding factors are much more prevalent and usually more severe in determining outcomes in observational/anecdotal studies vs randomized/double blinds.
Hence conclusions drawn from double blinds outweigh conclusions drawn from observations several times over.
Try again.
You're right, so I adjusted my first post already. Read my edit.
Forgot to mention: I'm not appealing to authority because I'm citing someone else. Dr. Risch's narrative is carefully being dismantled using facts, evidence, logic and established science.
If I was saying that Dr. Gorski has been writing blogs about vaccines & viruses forever and therefore knows better than Dr. Risch, that would be an appeal to authority.
But I'm not, so get your facts straight.
Unpopular opinion: Harvey Risch is being a clown here.
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2020/07/24/harvey-risch-defends-hydroxychloroquine/
General consensus in the medical world is that HQC(+Zinc) is looking very weak thus far. Most of the studies done that had positive results are subpar.
Not me saying that, evidence based science is. And no, I'm not a lefty. This HQC charade is making us look dumb.
Edit: changed from "is a clown" to "being a clown here" as fairly pointed out by user mathman.
Seeing conflicting messages:
https://nypost.com/2020/07/29/judge-agrees-to-postpone-release-of-secret-ghislaine-maxwell-files/
The good bits have been delayed till 22nd of September, dammit.
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1289304744503123970