Read on Twitter
this is from the study that CDC head robert redfield showcased the other night to "prove masks work"
it it the epidemiological equivalent of doing a sun dance at 5.30 AM and claiming you made that ball of fire in the sky appear
it's assumptive, lacks a control, & proves nothing
it it the epidemiological equivalent of doing a sun dance at 5.30 AM and claiming you made that ball of fire in the sky appear
it's assumptive, lacks a control, & proves nothing
it purports to be a study from mass general on positivity rate among HCW's.
it actually refutes the premise more than it aids it and is a bit of a master class in lying with weird, made up curves and lack of control group.
i added the red lines to make this clear.
it actually refutes the premise more than it aids it and is a bit of a master class in lying with weird, made up curves and lack of control group.
i added the red lines to make this clear.
the idea that the "downslope" begins apr 13th, anchored to that one outlier datapoint is just bad trend measurement. why not use the super low one on 4/9? oh, because it's counter to narrative?
this is cherry picking of the first order. the real trend looks different.
this is cherry picking of the first order. the real trend looks different.
it seems to peak about apr 20. you could argue 4/17-18
hey, what else peaked then? yup, cases in massachusetts!
and this is date of report, not of test (unlike the study) so it probably has a 3-5 day lag
so all we're seeing here is that the hospital looks like the public
hey, what else peaked then? yup, cases in massachusetts!
and this is date of report, not of test (unlike the study) so it probably has a 3-5 day lag
so all we're seeing here is that the hospital looks like the public
compared to overall massachusetts cases, the study shows no real divergence.
it's the same curve, same peak. so where is this purported efficacy?
this is why i referred to this as a "sun dance"
it's just taking credit for a thing that was happening anyway.
it's the same curve, same peak. so where is this purported efficacy?
this is why i referred to this as a "sun dance"
it's just taking credit for a thing that was happening anyway.
it is flat out medically ignorant to compare positivty rates in late april to early march after so many people have had a chance to develop resistance.
it's a wildly inapt comparison that is not controlled for in any way. they just presume "masks" and draw some badly fit lines
it's a wildly inapt comparison that is not controlled for in any way. they just presume "masks" and draw some badly fit lines
this is not a real study nor is it a real conclusion.
the fact that the head of the CDC mistook this for evidence can only mean that he's medically illiterate or engaging in propaganda.
no first year statistician would fall for this. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768533
the fact that the head of the CDC mistook this for evidence can only mean that he's medically illiterate or engaging in propaganda.
no first year statistician would fall for this. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768533
from the CDC it's just embarrassing.
this is junk science, pure and simple and to assign a p value to this baseless conclusion from an unfixably poor study design is literal gibberish.
officials wonder why no one trusts them anymore.
this is why.
#DemandBetter
this is junk science, pure and simple and to assign a p value to this baseless conclusion from an unfixably poor study design is literal gibberish.
officials wonder why no one trusts them anymore.
this is why.
#DemandBetter
