An interesting article on COVID research vis a vis trust discussion below.
(no message)
Link: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10089824/
Replies to: “An interesting article on COVID research vis a vis trust discussion below.”
From the article’s Abstract…”…but currently, we are only getting half the data…
…the What butt not the Why.”
Nonetheless, that doesn’t stop Baron from insinuating a vast Left controlled political conspiracy…in spite of clear evidence on this forum that one retraction was the result of American Journal of Epidemiology Editorial Board members apologizing for having published a paper on discredited COVID treatment, HCQ+ authored by one of their own colleagues.
In other words - the information learned by studying C19 the more earlier analysis becomes stale
therefore the older versions are eliminated from the public sphere to be replaced by newer information and methods of combating it and its mutations.
The information isn’t being retracted as if from some misstatement or some incorrect announcement to a reporter. It’s the process of science.
Example, the rockets used to launch the Apollo project are not the same as rockets used today - they have been modified, as science learns different and better ways to send astronauts into space.
You really try too hard to bad mouth anything and anyone who isn’t hard right extremist MAGAcult.
Lol. Let's leave this for those who a) read the article, and b) understood it.
(no message)
On the other hand - you should retract all of your posts.
(no message)
Jim, articles were retracted for their poor quality due to various concerning reasons, not
because they researchers learned more later.
If “stale Information” (ie old info that has been updated by new discovery) were a cause for retraction of articles, most prior research would be be removed from the literature (which, of course, it is not).
Retractions are done for various reasons including poor study design that was overlooked by the journal editors and never should have been published, false data…ie the author fudged results.
You clearly don’t understand this article, and from your many past posts and interactions, I know that you don’t. You simply manage all topics from the lens of your extreme left wing politics.
This will be my last post n this to you because I do not wish to waste any further time in the fruitless endeavor of trying to explain things to you. Just sit this one out.
Now go ahead and get your ad hominem I. So that you can feel like you have saved face.
Very interesting, thanks. But wait for it!
(no message)
Wait for...?
(no message)
Your boy Ty
(no message)
Ah. Google Doc. The fly still buzzes around. He desperately wants to be seen as an expert
So, I am sure he will consult his propaganda AI for a spin option.
After all of this time, to still be stalking me says a lot about how fragile his ego is as well as how badly I bruised it.
He acts like I hit him with all 52 clubs in The Babe’s bag.
Narcissism… and beyond.
(no message)
Consent Management