Re: Dr John Campbell: Viral Vaccine paper - we need a more measured review Archived Message
Posted by dan on July 17, 2023, 11:47 pm, in reply to "Re: Dr John Campbell: Viral Vaccine paper - we need a more measured review"
As you say a suspected adverse incident is not a causal link. It's an event that followed the vaccination which might be linked, but might not be. The time the batches were used is potentially a major confounder given that we were in the largest wave of COVID as the earliest batches were being administered. A risk of 1 in 1000 of a suspected adverse incident is equivalent to or below most medicines. However, he states that had he known of this 1:1000 risk in advance he wouldn't have had the vaccine. He must know of medicines risk so it's theatre. There is no chance that the yellow batches had zero harms accruing. The yellow data are unsupportable and suggest a problem with the method and or analysis. He mentions timing here as a confounder but not for the blue group. As a result, there is no equipoise here, no summation or discussion of the potential balancing factors that should be taken into consideration when understanding the data. The guy is an academic medical educator which means he must know how to read and present a paper to include the doubt. He regularly omits important balance which is why he's a grifter. He's not doing his job and as Pinter says when a writer lies they stop being a writer and become a politician. Casting doubt on the peer review process with no evidence just innuendo is completely suss and on it's own renders all output from this man worthless. Preaching to the choir and getting paid.
|
|