John Ioannidis is a weird case. His work on the replication crisis across many domains was seminal and important. His contrarian, even conspiratorial take on COVID-19 not so much.
He made a famous career, to being a professor and a director in Stanford University, about meta-research on the quality of other people's research, and critiquing the methodology of other people's studies. Then during Covid he tried to do a bit of original empirical research of his own, and his own methods and statistical data analysis were even worse than what he has critiqued in other people's work.
Ugh, wow, somehow I missed all this. I guess he joins the ranks of the scientists who made important contributions and then leveraged that recognition into a platform for unhinged diatribes.