the CDC MCOD data shows NO population benefit effect in an age group. This study just doesn't match reality for the reasons Vinay pointed out. NO BENEFIT
But does the rate of death by automobile accident differ? That’s my favorite improbable vaccine effect.
But all kidding aside, what is the point of this study with this methodology? If we take all the evidence available so far, it seems clear that the vaccine is useful for older adults and others with ‘metabolic syndrome’ type symptoms, not much use for anyone else, and possibly harmful for young males. How could this study have changed those conclusions?
Now the data certainly doesn't show benefit. The best U.S. database is the CDC nursing home data and that data showed that the case fatality rate actually rose right after the vaccines rolled out with the SAME variant. Whoops.
Analysis like this is why I continue to subscribe. Keep it coming!!
"but the Supplement contains data that invalidates the entire paper" Dr. Prasad....I think JAMA printing it invalidated the entire paper.
Thank you!
Shocker!
the CDC MCOD data shows NO population benefit effect in an age group. This study just doesn't match reality for the reasons Vinay pointed out. NO BENEFIT
If the headline claim is preposterous, then probably the rest of the paper is as well.
But does the rate of death by automobile accident differ? That’s my favorite improbable vaccine effect.
But all kidding aside, what is the point of this study with this methodology? If we take all the evidence available so far, it seems clear that the vaccine is useful for older adults and others with ‘metabolic syndrome’ type symptoms, not much use for anyone else, and possibly harmful for young males. How could this study have changed those conclusions?
Now the data certainly doesn't show benefit. The best U.S. database is the CDC nursing home data and that data showed that the case fatality rate actually rose right after the vaccines rolled out with the SAME variant. Whoops.