Since there are no proven therapies for COVID-19 at this time, learning to spot the charlatans coming out of the woodwork will be helpful. Here's a very basic guide on how to differentiate quackery from science. A thread (1/11) #COVID19 #savescience

Confidence: Quacks are often very confident about the <insert drug/supplement here> they are touting. They will say things you will never hear from an honest scientist like "100%" and "definitely works". (2/11)

Buzzwords: These words are designed to tap into primal strong beliefs/fears. These are often also vague and used inaccurately, like "natural", "holistic", and "boosts immunity". (3/11)

Rigidity: Charlatans typically have been touting <insert drug/supplement here> for multiple different conditions for years, often decades. No number of robust RCTs will change their mind. On the other hand, (4/11)

science has changed it's stance several times over the course of history, as new and better evidence presents itself. It has been humble enough to accept that it was wrong. It's an imperfect method, but it's the only honest method we've got. (5/11)

Pseudoscience: A sub-category of "buzzwords" designed to rope in people with some form of formal education. Using words like "quantum", "electromagnetic waves", "frequency", etc, often used in statements that make no sense to the scientifically literate. (6/11)

Side effects: No honest scientist/clinician will ever tell you that something has ZERO side effects. EVER. Not even placebo. (7/11)

Simplicity: Charlatans attempt to reduce complex scientific concepts into favorable simplistic models. They typically claim to understand the intricacies of study design and biostatistics, immunology and microbiology after reading a few online articles. (8/11)

Anecdotes: Arguably, their greatest weapon. Stories spread by word of mouth, often with a strong emotional component. To them, anecdotes supercede robust scientific studies (since the studies often do not agree with them). In closing, (9/11)

scientific concepts are hard to grasp, often taking several years of dedicated study. As a physician who started training 16 years ago, I still do not understand biostatistics enough to be more confident than my research peers. (10/11)

Please stay safe out there and listen to the experts. I will add that if an intervention is proven in robust scientific studies to be beneficial for COVID-19, we should accept it with open arms, no matter what your baseline opinion is. That is what makes science different (11/11)

Is this how threads work? Trying to learn from the likes of @MicrobiomDigest @jpogue1