Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.279 [SLACK_000493] · slack_pm:msg:02905

Date: 2020-11-24 23:38
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes
speaker: Andrew Rambaut

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

So arrogant too - I emailed the first author originally but he sent a really patronising reply, CC'ing in all of his coauthors, that they were 'aware of the issue' but had controlled for it by doing a Sao Paulo only analysis. I replied toexplain how that didn't fix the non-independence but certainly revealed it. Then no reply before the BioRxiv came out. Hopefully editors and reviewers will have seen the twitter thread.

In context

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

2020-11-24 23:13 Andrew Rambaut open

That twitter thread was literally what I emailed them when their preprint was on Researchsquare. But they still submitted it to biorxiv. It is also pretty much the review they got reject from Nature with. They are suckers forpunishment. Next step is Harvard puts out a press release.
2020-11-24 23:38 Andrew Rambaut

So arrogant too - I emailed the first author originally but he sent a really patronising reply, CC'ing in all of his coauthors, that they were 'aware of the issue' but had controlled for it by doing a Sao Paulo only analysis. I replied toexplain how that didn't fix the non-independence but certainly revealed it. Then no reply before the BioRxiv came out. Hopefully editors and reviewers will have seen the twitter thread.

Full conversation →