Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-11-08 23:35:52 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 050D645532DCC406A11A69CDA10E716E25E8256B52ABD17A27069F75AB64EBCF
Participant Details

Original Note:

Il est faux de dire que Didier Raoult avait raison. Les études scientifiques et les faits lui ont donné tort sur chacune de ses hypothèses. - HCQ inefficace et dangereuse (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22446-z) - mesures non Pharma efficaces (https://academic.oup.com/jtm/article/29/3/taac055/6577267?login=false) - et un scandale éthique et légal avec 20+ études rétractées (https://x.com/search?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.science.org%2Fcontent%2Farticle%2Ffailure-every-level-how-science-sleuths-exposed-massive-ethics-violations-famed-french&src=typed_query&f=live & https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-023-00134-4)

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1855022695236145541
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 050D645532DCC406A11A69CDA10E716E25E8256B52ABD17A27069F75AB64EBCF
  • createdAtMillis - 1731108952197
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1855022695236145541050D645532DCC406A11A69CDA10E716E25E8256B52ABD17A27069F75AB64EBCF