3 ms·

Well, he also decided it was appropriate to insult the physical appearance of grad students on twitter who disagreed with him. He definitely didn't come out of

Well, he also decided it was appropriate to insult the physical appearance of grad students on twitter who disagreed with him. He definitely didn't come out of covid looking fully dispassionate.

anonymouskimmer 4y ago
Passion is fine and great in all endeavors. Not being able to acknowledge when you are wrong in small or large is the problem. And it's a problem for both passionate and dispassionate people. One of the earlier researchers on psychopaths was Hervey M. Cleckley. In his book on the topic The Mask of Sanity one of his vignettes of, I believe, "incomplete manifestation of psychopathology" was of a psychologist who gave public lectures on psychopaths, without apparently recognizing that he was almost one of them. To sum up the parallel, there are two kinds of people who tend to talk the most about any social or personal ill: those who are worried about the ill, and those who are distracting from the fact that they themselves embody it. (Technically this probably overlaps a bit, as ex-alcoholics are often worried about alcoholism, for example.)
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
I have no idea what incident you are talking about but, from the context, I have no doubt that it is something inconsequential that social media made a big deal about just to have some reason to be outraged at Ioannidis, with whom they were already outraged.
- UncleMeat 4y ago
  I didn't say you should be outraged. Feel what you want to feel. I list this example where he definitely did more than "his job as a scientist."
  - YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
    To clarify, I didn't say you said I should be outraged. I said that social media made a big deal of something in order for them (its users) to be outraged. That's what social media is all about, yes?
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago
  The commenting on personal appearance took place in a peer-reviewed article in which he was sole author. Read the link.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
    The linked article is 6,848 words, not counting the embedded tweets. Given the low-level content in the first couple paragraphs, and the constant quoting of tweets, I have no reason to read it. Social media is uniformly bullshit and I'm not in the habit of wasting my time with it. If you would like to send me a link, or other reference, to the "peer reviewed article" in which "the commenting on personal appearance took place" please feel welcome to do so.
    - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
      Search the original article ( https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/what-the-heck-happened-to-john-ioannidis/ https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/what-the-heck-happened-to-j... ) for this text: "This is how Prof. Ioannidis responded in his new paper." From what I can gather from the published journal article it appears that if these paragraphs of ad hominems were in it they did not survive the review process: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13554 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13554 Unfortunately I don't know how to find the pre-publication submission.
      - YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
        So he made a mistake and the corrected it?
        YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
        @anonymouskimmer: I just held my nose and did as you advised, search the article on "sciencebasedmedicine.org" for the phrase you quoted. I think this is what UncleMeat refers to as "insulting the physical appearance" of grad students who disagreed with him on twitter: At that time, the name of the Twitter account owner was not obviously visible (the photo showed an unrecognizable figure with big glasses and a cat), but Meyerowitz-Katz seemed to use the Twitter account prolifically to promote his own work and criticize work contradicting his work. The identity of the Health Nerd Twitter account has become transparent now, since the owner has added a photo of him (wearing a T-shirt that writes “Trust me, I am an epidemiologist”). In summary, what Ioannidis said was that the twitter account showed an image of someone with big glasses and a cat, and that the owner posted a photo of himself wearing a t-shirt with a slogan. I would like to say that I struggle to find how that is insulting, but in truth I don't struggle at all. That's all happening on twitter where anything anyone says is insulting to someone. I mean, if he had said something along the lines of "what stupid glasses" or "what stupid t-shirt", yeah, that would have been insulting in the real world. But "an unrecognizable figure with big glasses and a cat)" is an insult- how? To whom? The unrecognisable figure? The cat? So it's just as I said above, as expected. That whole thing was something inconsequential that social media made a huge todo about because it's social media and people are on it when they have nothing to do. I'm on it right now, I guess, and I actually do have things to do, so ttyl.
lliamander 4y ago
> He definitely didn't come out of covid looking fully dispassionate. No one did. That said, despite the serious amount of professional scrutiny and and public harassment he was subject to, I think he made valuable contributions to the conversation around COVID-19 public policy.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Well, he also decided it was appropriate to insult the physical appearance of grad students on twitter who disagreed with him. He definitely didn't come out of covid looking fully dispassionate.

anonymouskimmer 4y ago

Passion is fine and great in all endeavors. Not being able to acknowledge when you are wrong in small or large is the problem. And it's a problem for both passionate and dispassionate people. One of the earlier researchers on psychopaths was Hervey M. Cleckley. In his book on the topic The Mask of Sanity one of his vignettes of, I believe, "incomplete manifestation of psychopathology" was of a psychologist who gave public lectures on psychopaths, without apparently recognizing that he was almost one of them. To sum up the parallel, there are two kinds of people who tend to talk the most about any social or personal ill: those who are worried about the ill, and those who are distracting from the fact that they themselves embody it. (Technically this probably overlaps a bit, as ex-alcoholics are often worried about alcoholism, for example.)

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago

I have no idea what incident you are talking about but, from the context, I have no doubt that it is something inconsequential that social media made a big deal about just to have some reason to be outraged at Ioannidis, with whom they were already outraged.

UncleMeat 4y ago
I didn't say you should be outraged. Feel what you want to feel. I list this example where he definitely did more than "his job as a scientist."
- YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
  To clarify, I didn't say you said I should be outraged. I said that social media made a big deal of something in order for them (its users) to be outraged. That's what social media is all about, yes?
anonymouskimmer 4y ago
The commenting on personal appearance took place in a peer-reviewed article in which he was sole author. Read the link.
- YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
  The linked article is 6,848 words, not counting the embedded tweets. Given the low-level content in the first couple paragraphs, and the constant quoting of tweets, I have no reason to read it. Social media is uniformly bullshit and I'm not in the habit of wasting my time with it. If you would like to send me a link, or other reference, to the "peer reviewed article" in which "the commenting on personal appearance took place" please feel welcome to do so.
  - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
    Search the original article ( https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/what-the-heck-happened-to-john-ioannidis/ https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/what-the-heck-happened-to-j... ) for this text: "This is how Prof. Ioannidis responded in his new paper." From what I can gather from the published journal article it appears that if these paragraphs of ad hominems were in it they did not survive the review process: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13554 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13554 Unfortunately I don't know how to find the pre-publication submission.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
      So he made a mistake and the corrected it?
      - YeGoblynQueenne 4y ago
        @anonymouskimmer: I just held my nose and did as you advised, search the article on "sciencebasedmedicine.org" for the phrase you quoted. I think this is what UncleMeat refers to as "insulting the physical appearance" of grad students who disagreed with him on twitter: At that time, the name of the Twitter account owner was not obviously visible (the photo showed an unrecognizable figure with big glasses and a cat), but Meyerowitz-Katz seemed to use the Twitter account prolifically to promote his own work and criticize work contradicting his work. The identity of the Health Nerd Twitter account has become transparent now, since the owner has added a photo of him (wearing a T-shirt that writes “Trust me, I am an epidemiologist”). In summary, what Ioannidis said was that the twitter account showed an image of someone with big glasses and a cat, and that the owner posted a photo of himself wearing a t-shirt with a slogan. I would like to say that I struggle to find how that is insulting, but in truth I don't struggle at all. That's all happening on twitter where anything anyone says is insulting to someone. I mean, if he had said something along the lines of "what stupid glasses" or "what stupid t-shirt", yeah, that would have been insulting in the real world. But "an unrecognizable figure with big glasses and a cat)" is an insult- how? To whom? The unrecognisable figure? The cat? So it's just as I said above, as expected. That whole thing was something inconsequential that social media made a huge todo about because it's social media and people are on it when they have nothing to do. I'm on it right now, I guess, and I actually do have things to do, so ttyl.

lliamander 4y ago

> He definitely didn't come out of covid looking fully dispassionate. No one did. That said, despite the serious amount of professional scrutiny and and public harassment he was subject to, I think he made valuable contributions to the conversation around COVID-19 public policy.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]