Let's hear scientists with different Covid-19 views, not attack them
Views still need to be backed by solid data and in this case, the Stanford study the article is highlight has a number of issues with its data:<p>"I think the authors of the above-linked paper owe us all an apology. We wasted time and effort discussing this paper whose main selling point was some numbers that were essentially the product of a statistical error."<p>"I’m serious about the apology. Everyone makes mistakes. I don’t think they authors need to apologize just because they screwed up. I think they need to apologize because these were avoidable screw-ups. They’re the kind of screw-ups that happen if you want to leap out with an exciting finding and you don’t look too carefully at what you might have done wrong."<p>source: <a href="https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/04/19/fatal-flaws-in-stanford-study-of-coronavirus-prevalence/" rel="nofollow">https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/04/19/fatal-flaw...</a>