Separate from the need to retract the study, please also look into why the poor quality of review #1 wasn't caught. It seems to have been written by an LLM, and if it's not then it's someone totally unqualified to review. Either way, not something you want the Springer-Nature brand associated with.

Looking forward to seeing some action on it. The one good thing about this example is that there really is no way to justify how unserious it is. Particularly as the misinformation is a direct danger to human health, there's significant public interest in a thorough review and urgent retraction.

Hi, I have an important article out tomorrow, please stay tuned. Just getting my profile going on blue sky. Can you help amplify? @mark-ungrin.bsky.social @amandalhu.bsky.social @realnosferatu.bsky.social @dfisman.bsky.social @davidjoffe64.bsky.social @jvipondmd.bsky.social @barryhunt008.bsky.social

its-airborne.org/2020/March was updated to refer to the Petri dish visualizaion of droplet transmission of bacterial infections (@1goodtern.bsky.social insight)

Yep, it is annoying that the A or B narrative today EXCLUDES keep schools open but urgently do improvised fresh air and air cleaning/filtration tricks until more permanent installations can make them safe long term.

I asked claude.ai to come up with an reality tree for Tern's insightful understanding as to how pandemic handling went wrong and got this mermaid.live/edit#pako:eN...

The Central Error of the Pandemic… Is that of running pandemic management by laissez-faire socioeconomic principles. If you grasp this, all the other errors fall into place as the inevitable consequence of following that line of thought. 🧵 1/x

Grok2 on why the WHO lied

I asked grok2 about billionaire motivations for not doing ventilation and air-filter work

Any formula for average per infection QALY losses yet? Say, 1.5% loss at age 20 per infection rising to 8% at age 70? Is it QALYs or DALYS of something that conveys the message to ordinatly people? - including earlier death for some.

ChatGPT doesn't think there are polarized positions around C19's mechanism of transmission, only severity/risk, public health measures, vaccination, trust in sci & authorities, and origin.

Anyone interested in helping build NotMild.org. I was told the idea was to be able to: 1. verbally say "Not mild dot org has the details" 2. or print a card, telling a person to go to it 3. or link to it from social media. Cos social media should be all that we do.

How far away is a treatment for active covid that's ubiquitous and wholly preventative of a) serious cardiovascular and cerebrovascular damage, b) hindering CD4/CD8 function for months, c) the 300 or so long covid symptoms? 1-5 years 5-10 10 +

OK, v7. Groups #3 and #4 need snappy names. I need MD and medical science collaborators here. The reason this is important is that 'the unaware' think their risk of #1 and #2 is minimal. They've been persuaded their fitness will make their C19 infection mild and firmly in their past.

Version 6. Groups #3 and #4 need names

UK Health Lead: The Next Time We Have A Pandemic, We’re Just Going To Let Everyone Die.

So good…

Version 5 with new column "As it appears to others"

An attempt to group Covid19 outcomes. Version 4, as it happens.