4 ms·

Fully got it now, thanks. edit: As I wrote you the above, and explored the subject further, this just dropped into pre-print, which might be of interest, as it

by pbak 5y ago

Fully got it now, thanks. edit: As I wrote you the above, and explored the subject further, this just dropped into pre-print, which might be of interest, as it seemingly gives a number to the risk difference : https://res.mdpi.com/d_attachment/vaccines/vaccines-09-00693/article_deploy/vaccines-09-00693-v2.pdf https://res.mdpi.com/d_attachment/vaccines/vaccines-09-00693... Key conclusion from the abstract : "For three deaths prevented by vaccination we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination".

detaro 5y ago
"Seemingly". 3 authors that are not from the field (a psychologist studying/teaching various esoteric topics, a radiation physicist and an "independent data scientist" I can't find much about) weirdly mixing cherry-picked data to come to a conclusion that means that a 5-digit number of people have already died from covid vaccines. E.g. they calculate some estimation of how many people need to be vaccinated to prevent 1 death based on data for not-fully-vaccinated people, and then take events reported in side-effect databases (which by design collect as many reports as possible, without establishing a causal link between treatment and side-effect), cherry-picked for the country with the largest number of reports, as "deaths caused by vaccine" and extrapolate that. At least one member of the journals editorial board has already quit over the decision to publish this: https://twitter.com/florian_krammer/status/1408762002512789509 https://twitter.com/florian_krammer/status/14087620025127895...
- manwe150 5y ago
  What seems amazing to me, is that after all of that data manipulation attempting to support their anti-vaxx premise, they still manage to prove the vaccine is the most logical choice for absolutely everyone, reducing deaths by over 30%. (Despite that a tiny minority of people need to discuss with their PCP first due to underlying medical reasons)

by pbak 5y ago

detaro 5y ago

"Seemingly". 3 authors that are not from the field (a psychologist studying/teaching various esoteric topics, a radiation physicist and an "independent data scientist" I can't find much about) weirdly mixing cherry-picked data to come to a conclusion that means that a 5-digit number of people have already died from covid vaccines. E.g. they calculate some estimation of how many people need to be vaccinated to prevent 1 death based on data for not-fully-vaccinated people, and then take events reported in side-effect databases (which by design collect as many reports as possible, without establishing a causal link between treatment and side-effect), cherry-picked for the country with the largest number of reports, as "deaths caused by vaccine" and extrapolate that. At least one member of the journals editorial board has already quit over the decision to publish this: https://twitter.com/florian_krammer/status/1408762002512789509 https://twitter.com/florian_krammer/status/14087620025127895...

manwe150 5y ago
What seems amazing to me, is that after all of that data manipulation attempting to support their anti-vaxx premise, they still manage to prove the vaccine is the most logical choice for absolutely everyone, reducing deaths by over 30%. (Despite that a tiny minority of people need to discuss with their PCP first due to underlying medical reasons)