@Thomas_Binder @Thomas_Binder, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below. This came up when looking to see if/when the Koch Postulates criteria was ever used for the 2019-nCov https://t.co/j3qusMUmw
@ZAC_BlazeA @gorskon @RobertKennedyJr Have you ever seen this? This study was "created". They then used it as a way to authorize the emergency act and then later retracted. I heard they couldn't prove where the data came from. It was a fake study, right?
RT @raoult_didier: Concernant l'article du Lancet : il n'est pas possible qu'il y ait une telle homogénéité entre des patients de 5 contine…
@nickmmark @catoletters When formerly prestigious medical journals publish phony studies, the public loses confidence in all scientific and medical studies. Here are two examples of phony studies. https://t.co/LfDeIX4Wmj https://t.co/YXWQo8Pwht
@lukner @Travis_in_Flint "[McCullough's] claims have been widely discredited by the scientific community." Here's some discreditation by the scientific community: https://t.co/ompGor9QMu
@unhealthytruth yup, looks like there’s dozens -too many to count- of retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. Political? #repeal1986act https://t.co/zHd4mL6Qre
@PeterHotez Please! You push an experiment unto HUMAN BEINGS, including CHILDREN! Fake studies were created to demonize KNOWN SAFE DRUGS later retracted in order to push your clot shot. Covid vax deaths estimated 600k in U.S. You're a monster along with th
@Super_Fishman @MicrobiomDigest @JamesArthurXV @OlivierHertel @LePoint Of course, I have the link to the paper that supports your claim. https://t.co/GtucIGpbHF My bad, it's a blatant fraud. Do you have another source ?
@LotaInsLotaOuts @_jameshatfield_ @jonstewart Please, they buried known SAFE alternatives and then later retracted to push their clot shot Estimates from covid vax deaths is 600k in US, buddy. https://t.co/3yE662PzyF https://t.co/44OaTBlkjM
RT @ZCapital3: Remember the @TheLancet retracting their article https://t.co/3737Pjg4v5
@jeffm1981 Nah, real science is fasttracked by editors. No need for pesky peer reviews. E.g., https://t.co/ompGor9QMu
@MagicFistme42 @Tristan19203072 En effet, les chiffres que vous mettez ici étaient tirés (par le ministère de la Santé) de l'étude (officiellement non randomisée) Mehra et Al, publiée dans le Lancet. Comme vous pouvez voir, elle est indiquée comme "rétract
@Bakari_Sellers @PeterHotez @joerogan @elonmusk @RobertKennedyJr @Bakari_Sellers,🤦♂️ Joe Rogan must be held accountable! No debate! Thank you, Peter Hotez! https://t.co/J8w1JTRNaL Can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives availa
RT @kuschakralen: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysi…
@SeattleiteLeo @PeterHotez "the detailed peer-review process." Like the one for this paper? Or do you mean where science is censored by peer reviewers? https://t.co/ompGor9QMu
@MofaJapan_jp ランセットといえば。 ヒドロキシクロロキンをコロナ患者に投与したら死亡率増加したという論文。 これをきっかけに、ヒドロキシクロロキン使用禁止、入手も出来ない、処方したお医者様が免許剥奪など。 結局後になって、研究内容が不正確と撤回… https://t.co/97vStZB0dH
RT @mompursuetruth: @MD_PhD_ivermect @takavet1 ランセットといえば。ヒドロキシクロロキンをコロナ患者に投与したら死亡率増加したという論文。 これをきっかけに、ヒドロキシクロロキン使用禁止、入手も出来ない、処方したお医者様が免許剥奪…
@Liz_Wheeler @Liz_Wheeler, Ms Wheeler, the 'Emergency Use Authorization' could not be implemented if there's alternatives available, like the one below, correct? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. https://t.co/j3qusMUmwo
@jemelehill @PeterHotez dumbass @jemelehill, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, correct? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lan
@hholdenthorp @PeterHotez @hholdenthorp, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, correct? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet m
@DrEricDing @joerogan @PeterHotez @HolocaustMuseum @DrEricDing, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, correct? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt right? ...dozens...retractions
@jayvanbavel @jayvanbavel can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, correct? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal.
@19joho @19joho, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, correct? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. https://t.co/j3qusMUmwo
@AmoneyResists @joerogan @AmoneyResists can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, Right? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet me
@jonathanstea @jonathanstea, on vaxes, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, Right? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet me
@nickmmark @nickmmark, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, Right? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. http
@JeromeAdamsMD @JeromeAdamsMD, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, Right? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal.
@gorskon @VPrasadMDMPH @RobertKennedyJr @gorskon, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, Right? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The
@GeorgeTakei @PeterHotez can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, Right? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. http
@PeterHotez @mehdirhasan @MehdiHasanShow @PeterHotez, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, Right? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in
@PeterHotez @Acosta @MollyJongFast @PeterHotez, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, Right? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The La
@jonathanstea @jonathanstea, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below, Right? Frauds that created trillions in debt, owe the debt, right? ...dozens...retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal.
@dannagal @dannagal, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below. Yes? Si? Whatboutism? Looks like there’s dozens-too many to count-retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. https://t.co/j3qusM
RT @iambackagain21: @SabinehazanMD @MarioNawfal @elonmusk @DrLizaMD https://t.co/hto3jpChWv Are top medical journals captured by Big Pharm…
@SabinehazanMD @MarioNawfal @elonmusk @DrLizaMD https://t.co/hto3jpChWv Are top medical journals captured by Big Pharma ? Fraud hydroxychloroquine negative papers retracted after exposure https://t.co/txiVA3Dr0e… https://t.co/hwKs8GIRnH
@EladNehorai @EladNehorai @CommunityNotes, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below Looks like there’s dozens-too many to count- retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. Why, political? #re
@AriDavidPaul @ettoredn @X_Refugee69 @julianhosp @joerogan You mean studies like this one? https://t.co/G1vOH8rcvF
@RadioFreeTom @RadioFreeTom @CommunityNotes, can't have an Emergency Use Authorization if there's alternatives available, like the one below Looks like there’s dozens-too many to count- of retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. Why, political? #r
@_M_Ard_ @ElonMuskAOC @joerogan Tell me what this is? A: "Scientists" overdosing/killing patients on HCQ to justify EUA for the vaxxines, for the win, Alex. https://t.co/aSzSQvo4Z4
@elonmusk @GilliRoth @PeterHotez @elonmusk @GilliRoth @peterHotez @CommunityNotes, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available like the one below. There’s dozens-too many to count-of retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med j
@PeterHotez @PeterHotez, can't have an 'Emergency Use Authorization' if there's alternatives available, like the one below... Looks like there’s dozens-too many to count-of retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. Why is that, political? #repeal19
@jason_willz1 @thoughtfulmome2 @jeffreyatucker Oh brilliant one, u mean like this retracted study from Lancet on HCQ? You either have a job where someone pats you in the head for saying all the right things or you work straight up for big pharma. Your at
@Acermendax "Selon ce travail mené par Jean-Christophe Lega".....membre de la HAS décision d'interdiction basée sur une étude bidon https://t.co/RBTEnoD32L https://t.co/yIDY3rnZci
@jason_willz1 @TNmtnLady84 Science, and scientists that are whoors, are two different thing. I see you laughed at Jikkyleaks, did you debate him? Where's the money in being anti-vaxx? https://t.co/aSzSQvo4Z4
@MrMarcusCalBear @PolishScott85 @MaryanneDemasi @DrJBhattacharya @CDCDirector here ya' go this bvllsh1t fraudulent article which was used to ban hcq and fire/censor/smear/ostracize/slander an unknown number of highly competent INDEPENDENT thinking MDs ht
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @real_GGoswami: [Src]:- TGA FOI 1871 1 - https://t.co/WZmO0ejfkL 2 - https://t.co/oYdu37YQfz 3 - https://t.co/z6oVZlm97s 4 - https:/…
[Src]:- TGA FOI 1871 1 - https://t.co/WZmO0ejfkL 2 - https://t.co/oYdu37YQfz 3 - https://t.co/z6oVZlm97s 4 - https://t.co/ii3SAvmgCO 5 - https://t.co/x7i26NFBOZ 6 - https://t.co/U6ab9detk8 7 - https://t.co/mED90AKgov https://t.co/NpQA5IE4R2 https:
@jadervinicius_ @filipe_rafaeli Cara, você pretende ser Ph.D. e nunca ficou sabendo da retratação que o Lancet teve que fazer quando ficou sabendo da fraude que houve no estudo de Manaus, que até hoje deve ser sua única "referência"? Atualize-se: https://t
This is the first fraudulent ‘study’ ever published in @TheLancet in its 200 year history. It was instrumental in denying Hydroxychloroquine its place as a first line drug in the treatment of COVID-19. The WHO gave it the coup de grace!@Gav57852174 https
@Nath_Hut @jonathanstea @BWiSfull E.g. The Lancet article that halted the HCQ trials, leading straight to granting EUA because without HCQ there was no other treatment. But then after a few weeks the Lancet retracted the article because it was discovered
@OunetPik @Joli_Emile @oscarweed07 @Thomask69 @mimiryudo @EricBillyFR Soit précis surtout dans al controverse. Tu parles de ceci, je suppose? https://t.co/YIuBXjaMiz Cette étude a été rétractée en raison de ses inssufisances: le système d'évaluation par l
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
Here it is, @Gav57852174. https://t.co/D3Sv2zHQU7
RT @MartyMakary: While today's Lancet study was not designed to look at a potential benefit of statins and ACEI meds in COVID, unadjusted f…
@Suzy_1776 @mikaelabowler @RepAOC, can't have an Emergency Use Authorization if there's alternatives available like below Looks like there’s mutli dozens of retractions on HCQ in The Lancet med journal. Why is that, political? https://t.co/j3qusMUmwo
RT @_Escapekey_: 24/ Yeah, it was later retracted. This was the infamous 'Surgisphere' study, which was a complete scam. And BBC carried…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @Smackenziekerr: With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydrox…
RT @Smackenziekerr: With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydrox…
RT @Smackenziekerr: With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydrox…
RT @Smackenziekerr: With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydrox…
RT @Smackenziekerr: With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydrox…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @JikkyKjj: So who did? Who produced that huge amount of data - overnight - that [anons on the internet] proved to be fake? The answer i…
RT @Smackenziekerr: With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydrox…
RT @Smackenziekerr: With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydrox…
RT @Smackenziekerr: With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydrox…
RT @Smackenziekerr: With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydrox…
With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: long after it was retracted. https://t.co/Sr9tisKK5S h
RT @NicoVedrines: .@BFMCotedazur invite un militant anti Raoult. @raoult_didier mentirait Voici l’étude (LancetGate) https://t.co/6iNHjyU1…
RT @NateWeymouth: @LevantineTimes @Baric_Lab @frank_zelenko @TheLancet Here is the retracted study by the Lancet! They didn’t even have a s…
Le Lancet a bien accepté ça, et toujours en ligne... donc... https://t.co/g1pKVH09x5
RT @NicoVedrines: Dans les données brutes du groupe HCQ il y a 18 % de mortalité versus 9.3 % pour le controle; sur cette base l’HCQ tue ~1…
🚨👇
RT @NicoVedrines: Dans les données brutes du groupe HCQ il y a 18 % de mortalité versus 9.3 % pour le controle; sur cette base l’HCQ tue ~1…
RT @NicoVedrines: Dans les données brutes du groupe HCQ il y a 18 % de mortalité versus 9.3 % pour le controle; sur cette base l’HCQ tue ~1…
RT @NicoVedrines: Dans les données brutes du groupe HCQ il y a 18 % de mortalité versus 9.3 % pour le controle; sur cette base l’HCQ tue ~1…
RT @NicoVedrines: Dans les données brutes du groupe HCQ il y a 18 % de mortalité versus 9.3 % pour le controle; sur cette base l’HCQ tue ~1…
RT @NicoVedrines: Dans les données brutes du groupe HCQ il y a 18 % de mortalité versus 9.3 % pour le controle; sur cette base l’HCQ tue ~1…
Dans les données brutes du groupe HCQ il y a 18 % de mortalité versus 9.3 % pour le controle; sur cette base l’HCQ tue ~10%. Pour @raoult_didier les chiffres bruts sont importants et ce "HCQ tue 10%" a orienté vers un pb de FRAUDE C’était bien une FRAUDE
RT @xazalbert: Merci de restaurer l'info. Alexander Samuel #pollueurdinfo
RT @NicoVedrines: .@BFMCotedazur invite un militant anti Raoult. @raoult_didier mentirait Voici l’étude (LancetGate) https://t.co/6iNHjyU1…
RT @NicoVedrines: .@BFMCotedazur invite un militant anti Raoult. @raoult_didier mentirait Voici l’étude (LancetGate) https://t.co/6iNHjyU1…
RT @protectOZFOOD: @Risemelbourne And the #shocker in reply, references’ ‘Lancet’ as a credible source? #NoAmnesty
RT @NicoVedrines: .@BFMCotedazur invite un militant anti Raoult. @raoult_didier mentirait Voici l’étude (LancetGate) https://t.co/6iNHjyU1…
RT @NicoVedrines: .@BFMCotedazur invite un militant anti Raoult. @raoult_didier mentirait Voici l’étude (LancetGate) https://t.co/6iNHjyU1…