Thread by @samagreene, BS alert of the day: In this article, the FT tells us [...]

BS alert of the day: In this article, the FT tells us that Western "disbelief that Russian researchers are capable of outdoing western drug companies may be rooted more in geopolitics than science".

Sorry, but no. /1 https://www.ft.com/content/5e320e6b-1182-47a6-993e-0bb7f6c7bc2d">https://www.ft.com/content/5...

West’s response to Russian vaccine owes as much to geopolitics as science

Virus treatment based on internationally approved Ebola inoculation draws criticism

https://www.ft.com/content/5e320e6b-1182-47a6-993e-0bb7f6c7bc2d

Scientists and reasonably well educated officials in the West (and I realize that the latter are increasingly hard to come by, but still) are perfectly aware that there are excellent scientists in Russia. /2

In fact, recognition of Russia& #39;s scientific prowess is just about the only nice thing that Western leaders say about Russia anymore, save for a few cursory words on art and culture. /3

The problem isn& #39;t, as the article suggests, that Russian researchers may have short-circuited the methodological strictures of supposedly hidebound Western researchers. /4

Nor is the problem that the West is skeptical of announcements from a gov& #39;t that still denies it poisoned the Skripals or shot down MH-17. /5

Rather, the problem is that without a randomized controlled trial, no one -- including the people who developed the Russian vaccine -- can possibly know whether it works. To suggest otherwise would be like testing the brakes on a car without turning on the engine. /6

I want to be clear about this: I& #39;m rooting for this vaccine -- and every other vaccine under development -- to work. And so are the scientists who developed it, and who are now (as of yesterday) launching Phase 3 trials. /7

Russia will rightly limit Sputnik 5& #39;s release until Phase 3 trials are completed, which is why mass rollout still isn& #39;t slated until 2021. The Kremlin may do a lot of nefarious things, but is apparently not experimenting on its own subjects. /8

What the Kremlin did do, though, was to take a vaccine that was no further along in its tests than many others -- and, indeed, less further along than several -- and give it legal approval. It did that for PR reasons, rather than medical or scientific reasons. /9

Just as the Kremlin distorted what had actually been achieved, the FT article, unfortunately, distorts the response. The article writes "[US Sec of Health & Human Svcs] Alex Azar sniffed: & #39;It is not a race to be first& #39;".

I& #39;m no fan of the Trump Admin, but & #39;sniffed& #39;? Really? /10

Also, it& #39;s "Gamaleya", not "Gamalaya". /END

PS - I& #39;m criticizing the piece, not its author. Henry is, IMO, generally very good at his job, and it& #39;s an incredibly hard job to do. So Henry, if you& #39;re listening, please take this as constructive post-publication peer review (hidebound Western researcher that I am)!

Latest Threads Unrolled: