"Curves should be superimposable the first month or so for ...death from covid, and they would [if ] randomized trial." No! It's just super, super, super and more super, effective; unlike anything we have ever seen before, because! We said it was. Just the most effective, you don't even have to brush your teeth again, ever.
But, you probably willl need our fifth booster as soon as we snuggle up again with the US admin, and pry loose some more tax-payer money.
They probably letting the interns write these papers. But, why not? The Israelis did it (and it failed). I'd be willing to put down $1000 that this will be green lighted. Expect the medical apartheid to return later this year.
I reread this post today after the FDA authorized a second boostered based upon scant data. It seems to me we need another round of risk benefit analysis of the effectiveness of these “legacy” vaccines within our current viral stew. This analysis must take into account the increased likelihood of collider bias mitigation measures have on vaccine results. The science is missing here. It’s agency capture at its worst.
Thanks for dismantling some of the BS in this paper that many of us wouldn't have spotted. Could you explain what "original antigenic sin" is, and how it operates? It's easy to understand why a 4th dose of the Old Wuhan variant would be useless for building resistance to the viruses circulating now. But apparently some experts believe it could be worse than useless -- actually doing harm by decreasing immune response. Why is that?
"Curves should be superimposable the first month or so for ...death from covid, and they would [if ] randomized trial." No! It's just super, super, super and more super, effective; unlike anything we have ever seen before, because! We said it was. Just the most effective, you don't even have to brush your teeth again, ever.
But, you probably willl need our fifth booster as soon as we snuggle up again with the US admin, and pry loose some more tax-payer money.
Dr. Prasad, are you following Ed Dowd's excess mortality rate research? I summed up his latest findings/theory here:
https://etana.substack.com/p/the-rate-of-change-is-the-signal?s=w
They probably letting the interns write these papers. But, why not? The Israelis did it (and it failed). I'd be willing to put down $1000 that this will be green lighted. Expect the medical apartheid to return later this year.
The y axis bothers me in this study. The units used look like a means to make a small difference look bigger.
I reread this post today after the FDA authorized a second boostered based upon scant data. It seems to me we need another round of risk benefit analysis of the effectiveness of these “legacy” vaccines within our current viral stew. This analysis must take into account the increased likelihood of collider bias mitigation measures have on vaccine results. The science is missing here. It’s agency capture at its worst.
Thanks for dismantling some of the BS in this paper that many of us wouldn't have spotted. Could you explain what "original antigenic sin" is, and how it operates? It's easy to understand why a 4th dose of the Old Wuhan variant would be useless for building resistance to the viruses circulating now. But apparently some experts believe it could be worse than useless -- actually doing harm by decreasing immune response. Why is that?