pfizer lied, but so did the govt. lol

[Tiny]

Hey texassapper, from your original post:

Since the death total from both study groups, 38, appeared “surprisingly low” to study authors — particularly during a pandemic — they undertook their own analysis based on population mortality expectations at the time.

Assuming that age-adjusted death rates for the study subjects were similar to those of the general population, they estimated that 222 subjects should have died from July 27, 2020, to March 13, 2021. The reported number, 38, is just 18% of the expected number.

Michels explained this by the large number, 4.2% of “discontinued subjects.” The most concerning of these were subjects “lost to follow-up,” which means missing scheduled visits or other required activities.

That may indicate that Pfizer and Michels are both full of shit. The study may be trash. You can't draw any conclusions from the data, because you don't know how many of the drop outs in each group died. If one of the big reasons people dropped out was because they were dead, well...

And yes, you may have a good point about Pfizer. It would be interesting to read their response to the paper.

[69in2it69]

For any that may be able to think and rationalize...


Let’s take a look:

• IJVTPR is not indexed in PubMed. Now, that could be for a number of reasons, but that means this isn’t recognized as a legitimate journal, for now.
• As far as I can tell, it does not have a publisher. It is part of something called “Open Journals System,” which is like WordPress, in that they provide the architecture for the journal, but they do not function as a typical publisher. Seriously, it seems to be no different than self-publishing a book on Amazon Kindle.
• It has no impact factor – in other words, none of their articles are cited by publications outside of the IJVTPR itself.

But here’s where it gets hysterically funny – the editorial board is a who’s who of the anti-vaccine movement:

• John Oller, Editor-in-Chief. Oller is an anti-vaccine crackpot who believes that vaccines cause autism. They do not, and that’s settled science. Oh, and he’s also a Young Earth Creationist, so you know his knowledge of any science, let alone vaccinology, is rather limited. But he makes an excellent pseudoscientist.
• Christopher Shaw, Senior Editor. Well, if you’re going to go for a seriously incompetent anti-vaccine pseudoscientist, none are better than the oft-retracted ophthalmologist from the University of British Columbia. He also pushes the debunked link between vaccines and autism spectrum disorder.
• Gayle DeLong, editor. DeLong is an economics professor who tried to foist one of the most laughably incompetent papers trying to claim that the HPV vaccine reduced fertility – the paper was retracted.
• Stephanie Seneff, editor. I have not written much about Seneff, except to debunk her pseudoscience about GMOs. She is a crackpot “computer scientist,” who wanders into the fields of medicine, especially vaccines, without any knowledge or expertise in the field. She specifically does not understand epidemiology while completing ignoring basic concepts like correlation and causation. To quote Orac, Seneff “demonstrate(s) that, as an antivaxxer, she has zero credibility when it comes to evaluating science.”
• James Lyons-Weiler, editor. Yes, he’s an editor, so this makes it appear to be nothing more than self-publishing.

There are many others in that ragtag group of editors that would be familiar to those of you who follow the anti-vaccine world. But I didn’t want to waste 10,000 words just to tell you how little each of them knows about vaccines, medicine, or science. This is just a circle jerk editorial board that is trying to foist anti-vaccine nonsense onto the world so that your local anti-vaxxer will point to an article and say “see, here’s a peer-reviewed paper.”
Don’t conflate their heaping mounds of dung with real science published in real medical journals.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by 69in2it69

For any that may be able to think and rationalize...


Let’s take a look:

• IJVTPR is not indexed in PubMed. Now, that could be for a number of reasons, but that means this isn’t recognized as a legitimate journal, for now.
• As far as I can tell, it does not have a publisher. It is part of something called “Open Journals System,” which is like WordPress, in that they provide the architecture for the journal, but they do not function as a typical publisher. Seriously, it seems to be no different than self-publishing a book on Amazon Kindle.
• It has no impact factor – in other words, none of their articles are cited by publications outside of the IJVTPR itself.

But here’s where it gets hysterically funny – the editorial board is a who’s who of the anti-vaccine movement:

• John Oller, Editor-in-Chief. Oller is an anti-vaccine crackpot who believes that vaccines cause autism. They do not, and that’s settled science. Oh, and he’s also a Young Earth Creationist, so you know his knowledge of any science, let alone vaccinology, is rather limited. But he makes an excellent pseudoscientist.
• Christopher Shaw, Senior Editor. Well, if you’re going to go for a seriously incompetent anti-vaccine pseudoscientist, none are better than the oft-retracted ophthalmologist from the University of British Columbia. He also pushes the debunked link between vaccines and autism spectrum disorder.
• Gayle DeLong, editor. DeLong is an economics professor who tried to foist one of the most laughably incompetent papers trying to claim that the HPV vaccine reduced fertility – the paper was retracted.
• Stephanie Seneff, editor. I have not written much about Seneff, except to debunk her pseudoscience about GMOs. She is a crackpot “computer scientist,” who wanders into the fields of medicine, especially vaccines, without any knowledge or expertise in the field. She specifically does not understand epidemiology while completing ignoring basic concepts like correlation and causation. To quote Orac, Seneff “demonstrate(s) that, as an antivaxxer, she has zero credibility when it comes to evaluating science.”
• James Lyons-Weiler, editor. Yes, he’s an editor, so this makes it appear to be nothing more than self-publishing.

There are many others in that ragtag group of editors that would be familiar to those of you who follow the anti-vaccine world. But I didn’t want to waste 10,000 words just to tell you how little each of them knows about vaccines, medicine, or science. This is just a circle jerk editorial board that is trying to foist anti-vaccine nonsense onto the world so that your local anti-vaxxer will point to an article and say “see, here’s a peer-reviewed paper.”
Don’t conflate their heaping mounds of dung with real science published in real medical journals.

Hilarious, that an anti-vax linguist would go to that kind of trouble to create a respectable looking anti-vax journal.

I got sucked in after looking at the CV's of Corinne A. Michels and a couple of the other authors. She's a "distinguished professor of biology" at CUNY, which is not a shabby university, and got her PhD from Columbia, which also is not a shabby university.

Good catch 69in2it69. My humiliation in this thread is now complete. I learned my lesson. I will no longer go on snipe hunts, trying to debunk anti vax literature. Well, maybe I won't.

[69in2it69]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Hilarious, that an anti-vax linguist would go to that kind of trouble to create a respectable looking anti-vax journal.

I got sucked in after looking at the CV's of Corinne A. Michels and a couple of the other authors. She's a "distinguished professor of biology" at CUNY, which is not a shabby university, and got her PhD from Columbia, which also is not a shabby university.

Good catch 69in2it69. My humiliation in this thread is now complete. I learned my lesson. I will no longer go on snipe hunts, trying to debunk anti vax literature. Well, maybe I won't.

You took an honest look at the small sample group and correctly came to the conclusion that even the data presented wasn't solid. That's light years beyond: But you know, Science, it's what YOU THINK... not what the math says.


I just looked at the jacked up domain the link pointed to and thought, that seems odd and did a little research.

[Levianon17]

The truth is coming out about the Pandemic and everything that went with it. Those that have taken the Vaccine and all of the subsequent boosters did themselves no favor. Researchers from around the world have done extensive research on every aspect of the Pandemic, the origin of the virus, the PCR swab and the vaccine.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/GjEgSnACO93V/

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by texassapper

No, there is no debate the lockdowns were a mistake, as I said at the time. They neither slowed the spread of COVID or kept anyone alive that wasn't already going to die from COVID since we know that the vaxx jabs didn't stop or prevent death either.

The detrimental effects of the lockdowns was entirely preventable and it didn't save anyone life.

It did make a lot of democratic donors wealthy so there is that....

Your statement thqt the lockdowns did not help slow the spread of Covid is incorrect based on the opinion of health officials. But, yes, the lockdowns did have a negative impact on the GDP and education. It is opinion as to whether or not the lockdowns overall helped or harmed. The fact is that governors in both red and blue states shut things down.

"The lockdowns at the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic reduced the spread of infection by an estimated 56%, a recent study has found. If all governors did not issue any lockdowns until April 23, 2020, the number of cases would have been five times higher by April 30, 2020, the study asserts.

But the lockdowns came with economic costs.

Specifically, the U.S. lockdowns reduced gross domestic product, or GDP (−5.4%); employment (−2%); customer satisfaction (−2%), and consumer spending (−7.5%) for the next quarter. These impacts, on average, translated to a cost of $27,567 in lower GDP, according to “Lockdown Without Loss? A Natural Experiment of Net Payoffs from COVID-19 Lockdowns,” which is forthcoming in the Journal of Public Policy and Marketing."

https://business.ucr.edu/news/2023/0...educed-disease

And you are totally wrong when you say "vaxx jabs didn't stop or prevent death either."

I doubt you will be able to find any article supporting that statement. I can supply you with literally thousands of articles that state otherwise, all from legitimate sources around the world.

[Yssup Rider]

I don’t understand why the cons are public health deniers. But it dovetails with other popular conservative denials.

As long as there are “news sources” to misinterpret and cling to, they’ll keep fighting to deny COVID, climate change, the 2020 election, January 6, even the moon landing and inexplicably the Holocaust.

Nothing will convince them otherwise.

Yet, as this thread implies, there is real outrage by them over being lied to. Yet they pledge fealty to the biggest liar in history.

Sad.

[Precious_b]

Originally Posted by texassapper

The math says you're wrong... but that's not the part that should bother you. It's the hiding of the deaths. Where I come from that's called fraud because altering the data was used to call the experimental drugs "Safe".

But you know, Science, it's what YOU THINK... not what the math says.

Originally Posted by Tiny

Not counting two traffic accidents, a suicide and an overdose, there were 18 deaths in the vaccinated group and 16 in the placebo group. Out of 44,000 people. It doesn’t appear that the vaccinated were keeling over dead from the vaccine.

The naysayers seem to be overlooking the small mortality rate from the sample.

Originally Posted by texassapper

LOL.. then why were Pfizer obscuring the deaths in the vaccinated group?

And since you pointed it out... what does the fact there were 18 deaths in the jabbed group and 16 in the placebo group indicate?

C'on, you're not stupid... what does it tell you about the efficacy of the jab?

Seeing the statistically insignificant number of deaths in the sample, I wouldn't care if they obscured it. Ain't worth mentioning. *NOW* if mortality was 2 standard deviations, you'd have my attention.

Originally Posted by Levianon17

The truth is coming out about the Pandemic and everything that went with it. ...

https://www.bitchute.com/video/GjEgSnACO93V/

I just love it when they use "truth" with the supplied link.

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by Tiny

It doesn’t appear that the vaccinated were keeling over dead from the vaccine.

+1


Good post Tiny. It was the unvaccinated that did not survive a CoVid infection. For the most part the message in the M-RNA kept people safe by teaching the immunity system to make the Antibody to SARS_CoV2.