Culture Intelligent Design Medicine Peer review Science

Ioannidis, the opponent of bad science studies, risks Unpersonhood

Spread the love

On account of stuff he said that is mostly correct and even obvious but exposes the cult of the science expert:

MANY MEASURES, John Ioannidis is a lion of medical science. The Stanford University professor is the author of some of the most cited journal articles in medical history. His research in statistics and biomedicine has arguably changed the practice of medicine. A 2010 article in The Atlantic said “Ioannidis may be one of the most influential scientists alive.” And you would never know any of this from reading comments about him today.

It started on March 17, when Ioannidis published an opinion essay in STAT saying that the data on Covid-19 were not sufficient to know the disease’s true prevalence and fatality rate. He also argued that scientists were in the dark with respect to which distancing and lockdown measures work, which don’t, and what the measures’ downstream harms might be. All of which was true — even if his very early estimate that as few as 10,000 might die in the U.S. turned out to be wrong. Ioannidis went on to say that preventing people from working or leaving their homes could cause more harm than the virus itself.

It was this last bit that set off the firestorm of criticism.

Jeanne Lenzer and Shannon Brownlee, “Opinion: John Ioannidis and Medical Tribalism in the Era of Covid-19” at Undark

Looking at the ruin inflicted by the COVID-19 crazy on people who were not really at great risk, it is hard not to conclude that “science” is becoming one of the most dangerous cults on the planet.

8 Replies to “Ioannidis, the opponent of bad science studies, risks Unpersonhood

  1. 1
    BobRyan says:

    What has been the result of shutting down businesses deemed non-essential and using fear to keep people in their homes? An increase in suicide, overdose, obesity from a lack of getting out of the house, not calling for help when a stroke our heart attack hits out of fear of going to a hospital due to COVID-19 and dying alone in their homes, domestic violence, people being kicked out of their homes due to loss of job and joining the ranks of the homeless. I’m sure I’m missing quite a few negatives in the knee-jerk reaction to saving the elderly and ensuring more elderly die in the process.

  2. 2
    polistra says:

    I think the censorship is also overalarmed. Ioannidis still has his job, and keeps publishing solid REAL science. His latest piece was joined by two co-authors, also currently employed and highly credentialed.

    It’s true that some opinions are ‘demonetized’, but dissidents shouldn’t expect to BE PAID for using the enemy’s printing presses and broadcast studios. There are plenty of other presses and studios now, and dissidents should expect to pay for service just like anyone else.

  3. 3
    MatSpirit says:

    Ioannidis in the his original STAT article:

    “Some worry that the 68 deaths from Covid-19 in the U.S. as of March 16 will increase exponentially to 680, 6,800, 68,000, 680,000 … along with similar catastrophic patterns around the globe. Is that a realistic scenario, or bad science fiction? How can we tell at what point such a curve might stop?”

    Well, we now know that the people who were worried that deaths might rise to 680, 6,800 and 68,000 were right and the Professor was wrong. Is anybody worried that we’ll make it to 680,000?

    Is anybody going to stream Trump’s Tulsa rally tonight?

  4. 4
    Retired Physicist says:

    Did I read somewhere that to get tickets to that thing you had to sign a waiver that you wouldn’t sue Trump if you got the Rona? These are probably the same type of people who forked over money for “Trump University”.

  5. 5
    MatSpirit says:

    Yes. They can’t sue the Trump reelection organization, the BOK stadium or the owners of the stadium.

    Watching it now, amazed, but this is all off topic.

  6. 6
    MatSpirit says:

    So, back to Ioannidis. How many here think we’ll make it to 680,000 deaths? That’s a pretty big order, but we’re currently at 115,729. That’s about 1/6 of the goal. (I think we might’ve been at this level a month ago when Barry started soliciting bets on 100,000.) Does anybody think we can multiply current covid deaths by 6 in time for the elections? Remember, you’ve got the President working for you.

    P. S. I won’t make bets on this because I don’t want to profit from other people’s demise. But if you’re conservative, go ahead. You’ll have the backing of the entire Republican Party.

  7. 7
    MatSpirit says:

    July 1: We’re up to 130,123 from 115729 on June 21. We’re almost 1/5 of the way to 680,000 with big numbers soon to come in from the states foolish enough to follow Trump and reopen their states when the US is saturated with Covid-19.

  8. 8
    ET says:

    Except they did NOT follow Trump’s guidelines. MatSpirit is just another willfully ignorant and insipid troll.

    Trump did NOT order the mass protests, riots and lootings. The age group being hit now is 20-44- all at the protests, riots and lootings. All gathered without social distancing and without masks. ALL as willfully ignorant as MatSpirit.

Leave a Reply