Wow this paper is a joke. I see multiple conclusions drawn from insignificant statistical tests (if you can’t reject the null you can only say “i can’t see it”,

Wow this paper is a joke. I see multiple conclusions drawn from insignificant statistical tests (if you can’t reject the null you can only say “i can’t see it”, not “its not there”). That alone should be enough to stop reading. There appears to be other elementary mistakes made as well. Also, you can’t draw conclusions about vaccination and covid prevalence from country level data. Different countries report their statistics differently, the prevalence of covid depends on attitudes to testing which varies at the local scale let alone at the scale of countries. Do you think poor people want to get tested when they have to self isolate? A country’s wealth matters a lot for measurements of covid prevalence. As far as I can tell there’s no effort to account for this bias, and even if there was, their data is so noisy it’s all non-significant and thus useless anyway. EDIT: This is bad science and it might be better if it wasn’t on HN.