Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.91 [SLACK_000305] · slack_pm:msg:00927

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

And counts are just numbers of sequences in gisaid?

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2020-07-01 13:57 Kristian G. Andersen open

From Bette's paper "A two-sided Fisher's exact test compares the counts in the pre-onset period to the counts after the two-week delay period and provides a p- value against the null hypothesis that the fraction of D614 vs G614sequences did not change". Really? This got through peer review? @Eddie Holmes, I'm pretty darn sure you must have flagged this - that's not how that test works. Or is she just using this as an inclusion criteria?
2020-07-01 14:01 Andrew Rambaut

And counts are just numbers of sequences in gisaid?
2020-07-01 14:01 Kristian G. Andersen open

Yes. Solid stuff.
2020-07-01 14:12 Edward C. Holmes open

I said the whole analysis was crap and needed to be redone. I never saw any response to this.
2020-07-01 14:17 Edward C. Holmes open

I submitted my review on June 12th (I only reviewed the revision). Given the speed of all this - and they wanted totake a look in 48 hours - it was clear that Cell were going to take it whatever I said. I've not looked at the paper - Ican't stand to - but I assume they've not made any of the revisions I suggested.
2020-07-01 14:17 Kristian G. Andersen open

Okay, finally managed to read the full (updated) paper. The analyses are fucking crap and the statistics a completejoke. I'm really surprised this is going through - no way it passed the Eddie smell test