There was a comprehensive literature review posted on /r/coronavirus some two months ago that strong (and statistically robust in my opinion as a professional data scientist) indicating that smokers were less likely to be infected with the virus, with possible mechanisms from previous viruses like SARS and MERS.
In fact that was one of the earliest common sources to mention ACE2 receptors. A month or so later there is at least one study looking at nicotine patches as prophylactic and/or treatment for covid. I'm having trouble finding the reddit thread, standby.
I opened the first link and went to the post exactly from a month ago to see what it said. This part was strangely fitting considering your original complaint:
>Having said all that, I am also dismayed that laymen put such pressure on epidemiologists to make forecasts. Imagine if it was your job when you see a leaf falling from a tree 40 feet overhead to place your foot on the exact spot where you “forecast” that the leaf will land.
> This part was strangely fitting considering your original complaint
I don't think I made any complaint, did I?
This forum is becoming more inexplicably unusual every day - provide objectively quality responses to a specific request, and get downvoted, with a side order of insult to boot.
Sorry, my fault. I mixed up usernames. It was a different person who was criticizing experts and then you came in to back up their point with examples of good amateur work, but you made no direct complaint.
So what if you did? What if I had made a criticism of experts, do you then downvote every other comment I make, regardless of its quality?
I would very much like to hear your justification.
EDIT: It might be a good idea for you to subscribe to the two blogs I mentioned above. It sounds like criticism of experts is something you haven't had a lot of exposure to.