3 ms·
That is such a biased study. They aren't comparing Covid postive + no vaccine with covid negative + vaccine. If that was the comparison 1st group fares better a
by YetAnotherNick 4y ago
That is such a biased study. They aren't comparing Covid postive + no vaccine with covid negative + vaccine. If that was the comparison 1st group fares better as they did not find any covid positive + non vaccinated being diagnosed with myocarditis.
Also their dataset had 13% covid positive rate. So ideally we should multiply the non vaccinated risk by 13%.
[0] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.059970 https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA....
- xracy 4y agoI don't know about the rest of your methodology and I'm suspicious of the concept of "Oh they forgot to multiply by 13%" cause you just don't multiply percentages (with very few exceptions). But more to the point, the group "Covid Positive + No Vaccine" has a high sampling bias built into it. Because you're sampling "People who lived through covid without the vaccine".