Hey Mycobacterial research community. We need to do better in restraining ourselves and not amplify bad science, because it suits our narrative. This new preprint is potentially even worse than the last one. https://twitter.com/StabellBenn/status/1248143789513936896

The only data it contains is this table. They compared the left line with those on the right. Yes... that's what they did. That is all. A t-test. No confounder analysis.

OK, not important, but had to share my peer-review-in-paint feedback on the discussion. I may be available to review your manuscripts.

Detailed criticism on the Miller paper can be found here. This new paper doesn't merit such an honour IMO: https://naturemicrobiologycommunity.nature.com/users/36050-emily-maclean/posts/64892-universal-bcg-vaccination-and-protection-against-covid-19-critique-of-an-ecological-study

Once again, BCG revaccination may be efficacious. Trained immunity is a plausible hypothesis. Trials ongoing. Follow @MarcBonten and @MihaiNetea for trial in NL. But don't amplify these bad studies that wouldn't even pass in an epidemiology 101 course.

So please. Colleagues. We have to slightly adjust our behaviour in these times. Journalists and the public follow scientists for reliable info. When you think "oooh interesting hypothesis" wait with RT untill you have read source and verified if it merits amplification