3 ms·
A systematic review of autopsy findings in deaths after Covid-19 vaccination
- typeofhuman 2y ago[flagged]
- johng 2y agoHow legitimate is this publication? If this is for real, this is absolutely huge...
- johng 2y agoFound this publication and it does seem legitimate and at least the names I searched for and verified, seemed to be real.... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38221509/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38221509/
- curious_curios 2y agoThe names are verified, but are also verified to have been spreading misinformation about COVID as well as operating a fairly shady medical supply company capitalizing on that misinformation during COVID as well as other disasters like the East Palestine train derailment.
- johng 2y agoIt's hard to judge misinformation at this point since it is quite clear that the government and mainstream media tried to censor any opposing views and withheld plenty of information that might have helped people make a more informed decision. Today's misinformation, as we have found can turn out to be tomorrow's facts.
- allears 2y agoMaybe not so hard, as the parent post illustrates. A little judicious checking of sources goes a long way.
- typeofhuman 2y agoExactly. Misinformation is just a dog whistle for "conflicts with my preconceived notions". We now know we were lied to again by the people that always lie to us.
- EdwardCoffin 2y agoFive of the nine authors are apparently employed by The Wellness Company, which is in the business of holistic mail-order supplements. Of the other four, one is an independent physician, one is at a cancer clinic, one apparently retired. The remaining author, (the corresponding author), is cited as being at the University of Michigan School of Public Health, but I cannot find him listed in their faculty. The paper was apparently submitted last year though, so perhaps he has since left. I should also note that the corresponding author provides a gmail address for correspondence, not his university email address.
- threecheese 2y ago“REVIEW” is capitalized in the published article title as well. What is the use case for calling it out in this way? (aside from the fact that it is a review of other findings)
- threecheese 2y agoA quick check of the Wellness Company and their chief scientist puts some doubt on these claims, for me: https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/scicheck-review-article-by-misinformation-spreaders-misleads-about-mrna-covid-19-vaccines/ https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/scicheck-review-article-by... As another commenter said, who even knows what’s real these days, who is fact checking the fact checkers? There are multiple instances of paper retraction noted, which I suppose is a good enough proxy for truthiness
- aekotra 2y ago[flagged]
- typeofhuman 2y ago[flagged]
- carlstarus 2y ago[dead]
- carlstarus 2y ago[dead]