It's so disheartening to see the very scientists whom we should be able to trust use information as a weapon. Thanks for being on the lookout for the scammy information and for taking the time to inform us. It is greatly appreciated.
Brilliant analysis, hermano. So why would the authors have performed this fabrication? Makes me wonder if they got the "tap on the shoulder" from someone who said, "You know, it would be great if you and your crew came up with a goal-seeking study that reporters could use to hang a headline on because people need to be led by the nose to the right outcome."
And they forgot to mention, UF Health physicians and practitioners will be more than glad to encourage your hospitalization, treatment, and payment. This reads more like a backhand advertisement than a "study." Our "exxperts" have determined you will need hospitalization, and we're here to help. And you can trust us, we have your best interests at heart. We are pleased to receive an award for this study, and additional grant money for another.
Great article! Speaking of GIGO, have you read the recent article retracted from Vaccine? It caused multiple editors to resign in protest, and the authors stand by their analysis. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it.
"one might be temped to ascribe this to “inoculation” preventing future covid hospitalizations, but this does not appear plausible."
Nah. I can practically guarantee that the fearmongers trying to defend this study would be in no hurry to admit the existence of natural immunity.
It's so disheartening to see the very scientists whom we should be able to trust use information as a weapon. Thanks for being on the lookout for the scammy information and for taking the time to inform us. It is greatly appreciated.
Looks a lot like climate "science."
oh, it's not THAT bad...
at least they didn't make up half the raw data.
Brilliant analysis, hermano. So why would the authors have performed this fabrication? Makes me wonder if they got the "tap on the shoulder" from someone who said, "You know, it would be great if you and your crew came up with a goal-seeking study that reporters could use to hang a headline on because people need to be led by the nose to the right outcome."
It doesn't have to be CORRECT, it just has to be CITABLE.
And they forgot to mention, UF Health physicians and practitioners will be more than glad to encourage your hospitalization, treatment, and payment. This reads more like a backhand advertisement than a "study." Our "exxperts" have determined you will need hospitalization, and we're here to help. And you can trust us, we have your best interests at heart. We are pleased to receive an award for this study, and additional grant money for another.
An excellent breakdown of Public Health England/MRC Biostatistic Unit's multi-layered fraud.
https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/why-we-must-question-vaccine-efficacy-and-safety-claims
Great article! Speaking of GIGO, have you read the recent article retracted from Vaccine? It caused multiple editors to resign in protest, and the authors stand by their analysis. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it.
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/9/7/693/htm
https://retractionwatch.com/2021/07/02/journal-retracts-paper-claiming-two-deaths-from-covid-19-vaccination-for-every-three-prevented-cases/?utm_source=Nature+Briefing&utm_campaign=3808e4fcab-briefing-dy-20210706&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c9dfd39373-3808e4fcab-46506858
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/07/scientists-quit-journal-board-protesting-grossly-irresponsible-study-claiming-covid-19
a covidian science thread..... dogmatic no science! arcane headlines are the object. they are coming door to door to talk to vax hesitants....
Thank you. It's important for me to remember there is also junk science. It's not all just junk humanities.