Birdwatch Note
2023-12-11 16:27:21 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
Both studies cited involved mice, not humans. Mice studies are not known for accurately predicting the reaction of the human body to exposures. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2746847/ https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.14938 Glantz previously had a paper retracted about vaping for being "unreliable." https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/02/20/nyu-scientists-others-call-taxpayer-funded-ucsf-vaping-study-probe/4805323002/
Written by D21D03F43C8B5A259709B778464C3243CBCC9E9AF252DFC3893C1E61CB0C5319
Participant Details
Original Tweet
Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1734245133493882964
Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.
All Information
- ID - 1734248516900319324
- noteId - 1734248516900319324
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - D21D03F43C8B5A259709B778464C3243CBCC9E9AF252DFC3893C1E61CB0C5319 Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1702312041867
- tweetId - 1734245133493882964
- classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 0
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 1
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 1
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 1
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 1
- summary
- Both studies cited involved mice, not humans. Mice studies are not known for accurately predicting the reaction of the human body to exposures. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2746847/ https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.14938 Glantz previously had a paper retracted about vaping for being "unreliable." https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/02/20/nyu-scientists-others-call-taxpayer-funded-ucsf-vaping-study-probe/4805323002/
Note Status History
| createdAt | timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus | firstNonNMRStatus | timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus | currentStatus | timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus | mostRecentNonNMRStatus | participantId |
| 2023-12-11 16:27:21 UTC (1702312041867) |
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
2023-12-12 03:28:18 UTC (1702351698848) |
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2023-12-11 15:51:55 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-12-11 15:28:32 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-12-11 11:59:17 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-12-12 05:37:18 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-12-11 22:11:54 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-03-13 16:30:19 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-04-29 09:31:38 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-08-07 02:57:49 -0500 | Rating Details |