Antivaxxers are weaponizing an abstract by Goop doctor Dr. Steven Gundry claiming that COVID-19 vaccines hugely increase the risk of heart attacks. Same as it ever was.
Category: Clinical trials
The BMJ recently published an “exposé” by Paul Thacker alleging patient unblinding, data falsification, and other wrongdoing by a subcontractor. It was a highly biased story embraced by antivaxxers, with a deceptively framed narrative and claims not placed into proper context, leading me to look into the broader question: WTF happened to The BMJ? (Updated and revised from a week ago.)
Share this:
Ivermectin is the new hydroxychloroquine, a drug repurposed for COVID-19 that almost certainly doesn’t work but is still being touted as a “miracle cure” by quacks, grifters, and political ideologues. Are the data supporting it all fraudulent and/or biased? The answer, increasingly, appears to be yes.
Share this:
A longtime favorite technique of antivaxxers has been to do bad ecological studies to imply that vaccines cause harm. Why is a Harvard investigator inadvertently using the ecological fallacy the same way antivaxxers used to do before COVID-19?
Share this:
Ivermectin has been hyped without good evidence as a highly effective treatment for COVID-19. One major “positive” ivermectin study was shown to be likely fraudulent. Now others are looking dicey.
