Scrutable

Maybe the problem with Prof. Ioannidis was there all along, and I just didn’t see it until the pandemic amplified it for all to see. He seems, dating back at least to 2012, have had the belief that conventional science is too “safe” and “conformist,” perhaps with a bit of a self-image of himself as being the “brave maverick doctor” or iconoclast. Maybe that’s why, during the pandemic, he was so easily drawn to being a “rebel” or a “contrarian,” whose findings bucked the existing consensus, and maybe that’s why he can’t give that up. After all, it’s happened to greater scientists than he. Moreover, Prof. Ioannidis seems to be an excellent cautionary tale at how being a critic doesn’t necessarily mean that you can do what’s being criticized that well. He’s very good at finding the flaws in studies, but his studies during the pandemic demonstrate that, when designing studies of his own, he’s prone to every bias and flaw that he criticizes in others.

Overall average IFR may be ~0.3-0.4% in Europe and the Americas (~0.2% among community-dwelling non-institutionalized people)

bob sterman wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 29, 2021 9:16 am

Look at Appendix 1 in this new paper from Ioannidis (Pages 38-40)...

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epd ... /eci.13554

How did this get published in a journal?

Just a personal attack on a junior scientist????

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:46 am

His paper also concludes:

Overall average IFR may be ~0.3-0.4% in Europe and the Americas (~0.2% among community-dwelling non-institutionalized people)

So far there have been 148 125 UK deaths with Covid on the death certificate and the population is 66.8 million. About 0.22% of the Uk population has already died. Ioannidis' estimate would only make sense if almost everyone had been infected already. Which they haven't.

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:46 am

His paper also concludes:

Overall average IFR may be ~0.3-0.4% in Europe and the Americas (~0.2% among community-dwelling non-institutionalized people)

So far there have been 148 125 UK deaths with Covid on the death certificate and the population is 66.8 million. About 0.22% of the Uk population has already died. Ioannidis' estimate would only make sense if almost everyone had been infected already. Which they haven't.

sTeamTraen wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:42 pm

I talked to Ioannidis briefly at a conference once. I discovered that he wears white suits.

bob sterman wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:45 am

sTeamTraen wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:42 pm

I talked to Ioannidis briefly at a conference once. I discovered that he wears white suits.

Supposedly...

"A man in white is often searching for something: dirt, or life, or love, money or blood, fame or notoriety. A white suit attracts what you don’t have or what you want more of."

The enduring mystique of the white suit
https://slate.com/culture/2005/05/the-e ... -suit.html

sTeamTraen wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:08 pm

The offending sections appear to have been excised "during typesetting". <Dr_Evil_Air_Quotes.gif>

Note added by the author in proof: An earlier pre-proof version of the paper contained an additional supplementary appendix that I have asked the journal to remove. The appendix was an earnest effort to explore in more depth whether technical competence issues or confirmation biases could explain why two overviews had strong, unidirectional biases that differentiated them from the other 4 overviews. I am grateful to commentators who suggested that this effort might be misinterpreted here. Dispassionate discussion of these technical and bias issues may be pursued in other fora. The notion that other people’s feelings may be hurt causes me more regret than the vilification that I have suffered, because my priority as a physician and epidemiologist has always been to care for other people, even more so in a time of major crisis. Commotion shifts the discussion away from the scientific essence of the main paper, effectively silencing scientific debate. I particularly applaud students who have offered me their wisdom and critique in this occasion, as I consider myself the least knowledgeable student of all.

bob sterman wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 11, 2021 9:25 pm

sTeamTraen wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:08 pm

The offending sections appear to have been excised "during typesetting". <Dr_Evil_Air_Quotes.gif>

Ioannidis has added a note to the new appendix - about his "earnest efforts" and his "vilification"...

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/ ... dices.docx

Note added by the author in proof: An earlier pre-proof version of the paper contained an additional supplementary appendix that I have asked the journal to remove. The appendix was an earnest effort to explore in more depth whether technical competence issues or confirmation biases could explain why two overviews had strong, unidirectional biases that differentiated them from the other 4 overviews. I am grateful to commentators who suggested that this effort might be misinterpreted here. Dispassionate discussion of these technical and bias issues may be pursued in other fora. The notion that other people’s feelings may be hurt causes me more regret than the vilification that I have suffered, because my priority as a physician and epidemiologist has always been to care for other people, even more so in a time of major crisis. Commotion shifts the discussion away from the scientific essence of the main paper, effectively silencing scientific debate. I particularly applaud students who have offered me their wisdom and critique in this occasion, as I consider myself the least knowledgeable student of all.