Defective scientific treatises that contribute to false alarms in COVID-19

Scientific research with inadequate methodologies and inaccurate discoveries has discouraged vaccination and exacerbated the risk of life-threatening COVID-19 false alarms.

The strong public interest in the pandemic and divisive debate in the United States over how to deal with it promotes the dissemination of defective research papers online, including those by vaccine opponents. And even if the study is withdrawn, it’s too late.

“one time paper Emerson Brooking, a resident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensics Institute, focused on identifying and disinformation disinformation, said:

The flawed treatise “has sparked COVID-19 skeptics and conspiracy theorists. They are often the subject of viral online activities. Their findings are further enhanced by sneaky and misleading articles from the Agence website. It will be filtered, “Brooking told AFP.

Inaccurate information about vaccines is especially dangerous when taking injections late in the United States. Health authorities Almost all recent COVID-19 deaths occur among non-immunized people.

“Take off your socks”

Medicine journal Vaccine published a peer-reviewed treatise in late June entitled “Safety of COVID-19 Vaccine-Policies Need to Reconsider”. It was concluded that the firing of COVID-19 killed two out of every three preserved. This discovery quickly spread. Social media..

Tweets from scientists and COVID-19 vaccination Critic Robert Malone, who summarized the treatise, collected thousands of retweets. A video of conservative expert Liz Wheeler discussing the study (she said “it will shock socks”) has been watched more than 250,000 times on Facebook.

However, the vaccine subsequently withdrew the treatise, stating that it contained “some errors that fundamentally affect the interpretation of the findings.”

At least four members of the Vaccine Commission have resigned as a result of their research presentations, including Katie Ewer, an associate professor and senior immunologist at the Jenner Institute at Oxford University.

“It should have been recognized that this treatise would have a significant impact,” said Ewer, who was not involved in the publication. “It’s very worrisome that no one in the journal has covered it … especially for journals that specialize in vaccines.”

Malone’s tweet about this treatise is no longer available, but Wheeler’s video was still on Facebook a few weeks later.

Gateway Pundit, a website that frequently publishes inaccurate claims, found that wearing a mask recommended by US health officials to slow the spread of COVID-19 was “ineffective” and harmful in a Stanford University study. I reported that it turned out to be.

“Do a better job”

The study “Face Masks in the COVID-19 Era: Health Hypothesis” was subsequently withdrawn by the journal. Medical hypothesisSelectively cited published papers and stated that they contained “unconfirmed” data.

The Gateway Pundit article, which has been shared tens of thousands of times as a link or screenshot on social media, was updated with the author of the study being unrelated to Stanford, but did not mention the withdrawal.

Some of the largest scientific journals, including Lancet And that New England Journal of Medicine, Withdrew a treatise related to the coronavirus crisis, and even a limited number of false studies can cause widespread damage online.

Because scientific treatises are gaining public attention in an “unprecedented way,” experts explain their work to the general public, who may lack the skills to evaluate, “do a better job.” “Do”, Harvard Medical School.

“Not all studies created and widely shared during a pandemic are scientifically robust,” Majumda said.

“This is particularly troublesome, because poorly performed studies have proven to be able to influence individual-level decision-making during pandemics, including those related to vaccination. ”

© 2021 AFP