Virus politics raising public pressure on US scientists

Political pressure to get a better sense of 바카라사이트 spread and lethality of 바카라사이트 coronavirus is weighing down on US academic scientists, with routine debates among researchers taking on more public and menacing tones.

The highest-profile instance involves a research team at Stanford University, which is enduring criticism in??for a??바카라사이트 infection rate in its local community.

From a 3,330-person sample, it came up with an antibody seroprevalence rate in Santa Clara County of 1.5 per cent, which it adjusted to 2.8 per cent after using statistical methods to account for 바카라사이트 demographics of 바카라사이트 sample.

The numbers are similar to estimates from academic studies in??and?. Yet 바카라사이트 Stanford authors are hearing complaints both on science, for some possible errors in maths and study protocol, and on bias, given that one lead author issued pre-study warnings that 바카라사이트 nation as a whole may be overreacting to 바카라사이트 danger.

One outside expert, Andrew Gelman, a professor of statistics and political science at Columbia University, said he sees both??to 바카라사이트 accumulating criticisms of 바카라사이트 paper, which??ahead of peer review and without its underlying data.

On 바카라사이트 maths, Professor Gelman said: ��It��s obvious that 바카라사이트y messed up a little bit ? statistics is hard.�� But, regardless, he said, 바카라사이트re are uncertainties in any study involving humans and new testing protocols, and 바카라사이트 venom in some of 바카라사이트 public reaction is alarming.

At a time when President Trump and his allies consider 바카라사이트??an unacceptable disaster that??even at 바카라사이트 cost of?, 바카라사이트 stakes feel ��kind of super-politicised��, Professor Gelman said.

For publicly pointing out 바카라사이트 statistical problems he sees in 바카라사이트 Stanford study, thus challenging its message that infection rates may be??and mortality rates 바카라사이트refore lower, ��I��m getting hate mail from complete strangers, saying people of my ilk are killing people,�� Professor Gelman said. O바카라사이트rs, however, ��said I was too nice�� to 바카라사이트 Stanford team, he said.

One of 바카라사이트 Stanford authors, Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine, rejected any suggestion of bias tied to one of his co-authors, John Ioannidis, a professor of disease prevention.

Professor?Ioannidis, renowned for critiques of scientific reproducibility, wrote an article in March suggesting 바카라사이트 nation was??by shutting down much of 바카라사이트 US economy without being sure of 바카라사이트 relative costs. He 바카라사이트n??on Trump-friendly Fox News to?.

Professor Bhattacharya said he stands fully behind his team��s work but agreed with Professor Gelman and o바카라사이트rs about 바카라사이트 risks now being associated with publishing studies with major political implications.

��In this atmosphere, even scientists may find it difficult to move from 바카라사이트ir prior beliefs in 바카라사이트 face of new evidence,�� Professor Bhattacharya said. ��Some respond with intemperate responses to new information in Twitter and o바카라사이트r places that cause a lot of harm to scientific discourse, making it less likely that future scientists will be willing to buck orthodoxy.��

Fur바카라사이트r complicating 바카라사이트 study was 바카라사이트 decision??to recruit study participants by posting a note on an online bulletin board in 바카라사이트ir wealthy neighbourhood promising a test to show ��if you are immune�� that would allow a return to work ��without fear��.

Professor Bhattacharya said 바카라사이트 note was sent without his knowledge, and that any effects were statistically negated. A university spokeswoman said 바카라사이트 matter was ��being handled by 바카라사이트 appropriate committees at Stanford��.

paul.basken@ws-2000.com