Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Peter Kriens's avatar

It's quite intriguing how the more I learn about statistics, the more my trust in medical science seems to waver.

With that in mind, would you mind taking a look at ivmmeta.com? Ivermectin has undoubtedly been contentious during COVID. However, my primary concern is not whether ivermectin works or not, but rather the epistemological issue it raises.

I now find myself in a position where I must choose between a worldview in which the establishment can effectively insulate itself from undesired information, and a distrust in scientific research. If the establishment is correct, then most of the 95+ studies on ivmmeta.com must be fraudulent. Conversely, if the establishment is wrong, then large-scale studies like RECOVERY and ACTIV-6 must be fraudulent. Neither option is very appealing.

I tend to lean towards ivmmeta.com for reasons similar to those you discuss in this blog. (The quality of the establishment's arguments did not help.) I would greatly appreciate it if you could examine the site and share your thoughts on whether it is fraudulent or if their arguments hold merit.

Expand full comment
Jim Jackson's avatar

Refreshingly logical. I would love to see you debate someone like Eric Topol on the utility of personalized medicine.

Expand full comment
8 more comments...

No posts