Birdwatch Note
2024-07-20 17:39:10 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
NOTE: The CAN deliberately include garbage studies to create the results they want to promote a narrative, in this one they include case reports, a survey, high bias and preprint studies, multiple intervention studies, retrospective studies etc. https://blackswanmd.medium.com/problems-with-meta-analysis-on-ivermectin-and-other-treatments-5cf7dc0c1942 https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/09/the-anonymous-meta-analysis-thats-convincing-people-to-use-ivermectin/ Proper studies: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163445324000641 https://www.zotero.org/groups/5006109/covidstudies/collections/G68JYA7Y/item-list
Written by 306C6CF8917365FDEC354FA39009BEBB0B3D6440D7E7766D7C38CFB0C7C4E93E
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/1814100057248993577
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 - 1814716696038678705
- noteId - 1814716696038678705
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - 306C6CF8917365FDEC354FA39009BEBB0B3D6440D7E7766D7C38CFB0C7C4E93E Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1721497150799
- tweetId - 1814100057248993577
- classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 1
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 1
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 1
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 1
- summary
- NOTE: The CAN deliberately include garbage studies to create the results they want to promote a narrative, in this one they include case reports, a survey, high bias and preprint studies, multiple intervention studies, retrospective studies etc. https://blackswanmd.medium.com/problems-with-meta-analysis-on-ivermectin-and-other-treatments-5cf7dc0c1942 https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/09/the-anonymous-meta-analysis-thats-convincing-people-to-use-ivermectin/ Proper studies: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163445324000641 https://www.zotero.org/groups/5006109/covidstudies/collections/G68JYA7Y/item-list