But it also means they’re out there for others to see, who might see “scientific paper” and think “thing that is true” Surely then, fault then is with people reading documents not understanding the process new scientific thought is developed! As scientists say…they’re not ruling it out, but that it’s far too early to say. (Anybody sensible would read the document with that in mind!) Twitter isn’t exactly the place to go for facts!
johntshea2
4 years ago
Also beware unchecked misuse of loaded terms like “TOUTS”.
But it also means they’re out there for others to see, who might see “scientific paper” and think “thing that is true”
Surely then, fault then is with people reading documents not understanding the process new scientific thought is developed! As scientists say…they’re not ruling it out, but that it’s far too early to say. (Anybody sensible would read the document with that in mind!) Twitter isn’t exactly the place to go for facts!
Also beware unchecked misuse of loaded terms like “TOUTS”.
Good morning,
Thanks Tom for your analyzing paper and totally agree, as a physician and a researcher, about the fact we should be humble and cautious regarding the huge of information about corona virus and covid-19, even these presented as scientific paper.
I have just to tell you that you used one scientific paper, in press (Gattioni and all.)submitted to intensive care medicine which is not going with or against the new famous hemoglobin corona virus induced toxicity and the conclusion about using ventilator. In real life, ventilator are used when there is no other solution and non invasive oxygenation is not working!
Also, you can check this same famous theory, it is not a scientific proved paper up to now (submitted 1 month ago), and it is a computer modélisation by a bioengineer not a physicians. The theory was made around one hypothesis seen in many paper: there frequently anemia reported in papers about sick patients! Anemia is a very common sign in ICU and is present in 99% of ICU patients series elsewhere!