Wow. I’m totally impressed with the critical thinking. I hope this young person will continue to study and impact the future of medicine. It’s so nice to see a glimpse of hope for the future. Medicine is science. Let’s try to get some of that back. Please.
Really, until I know how many of the children were hospitalized because of covid illness vs hospitalized *with* covid, this study is irrelevant. Also the relative risk is meaningless, the actual risk more important for decision making. Pfizer pulled this statistical trick as well.
It’s vital to include in any discussion of supposed benefits (e.g., reduced hospitalization, severe disease, etc) the risks (potential and evident) that are being recorded by pharmacovigilence systems and other studies which point to a myriad of adverse effects from the shots. We can’t really speak about presumed benefits without weighing them against costs, risk, and harms. Respectfully, that seems like a really important piece missing from this important critique.
Early treatments (ivermectin, famotidine, cetirizine, HCQ) were ignored. How many of those hospitalizations in the unvaccinated were avoidable using early treatment?
Still there is this underlying problem with all the observational studies from the hospitals: Those who died at home or on the street or at work (typical for vaccine induced heart issues) were not even admitted to the hospital. This makes the data look good when the reality is grim.
What a bright young man! Well documented. Would love to have him explore the VAERS system for vaccine adverse effects! It might influence his oppion that the Pfizer jab has saved many lives!
Too late to the party. Meanwhile Rome is burning. Friends and family suffering severe adverse events and deaths. Everyone witnessing the same thing without having to read a study. We know the truth. Perhaps highly trained doctors will one day admit they are witnessing the exact same carnage.
Given the capture of nearly every major journal, this study from NEJM has the same issue of promoting a pHarma vaccine without any attention to the risk balance. Their own data show marginal results that our brave writer rightly observes.
A brave young (future?) doctor willing to speak? We need more of this.
"Pfizer’s vaccine has saved many lives, and they deserve our gratitude for the rapid development and rollout they were able to pull off."
really?
Wow. I’m totally impressed with the critical thinking. I hope this young person will continue to study and impact the future of medicine. It’s so nice to see a glimpse of hope for the future. Medicine is science. Let’s try to get some of that back. Please.
They teach research analytics at Mt. Sinai a lot better by far than I was taught. Their grads need to go immediately to the CDC and NIH.
Really, until I know how many of the children were hospitalized because of covid illness vs hospitalized *with* covid, this study is irrelevant. Also the relative risk is meaningless, the actual risk more important for decision making. Pfizer pulled this statistical trick as well.
Question? What about the potential of this injectable to damage a young child’s innate immune system?
It’s vital to include in any discussion of supposed benefits (e.g., reduced hospitalization, severe disease, etc) the risks (potential and evident) that are being recorded by pharmacovigilence systems and other studies which point to a myriad of adverse effects from the shots. We can’t really speak about presumed benefits without weighing them against costs, risk, and harms. Respectfully, that seems like a really important piece missing from this important critique.
Superbly detailed analysis, Mr. Allely. Very much appreciated. I am surprised that NEJM published this article. It truly is lacking detailed evidence.
Well, looks like the future of medicine isn't as bleak as Ashish Jha would suggest!
Every child who received the vaccine at least suffered subclinical cardiac injury. How can any useful conclusion be drawn when that is ignored?
Abstract 10712: Observational Findings of PULS Cardiac Test Findings for Inflammatory Markers in Patients Receiving mRNA Vaccines
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712?cookieSet=1
mRNA vaccines will kill 3800 children by causing cardiac injury, to prevent 14 COVID-19 deaths in the US
https://vinuarumugham.substack.com/p/mrna-vaccines-will-kill-3800-children
Early treatments (ivermectin, famotidine, cetirizine, HCQ) were ignored. How many of those hospitalizations in the unvaccinated were avoidable using early treatment?
"Pfizer’s vaccine has saved many lives, and they deserve our gratitude for the rapid development and rollout they were able to pull off."
Where is the proof of this? Is there an RTC that proves this? You know. That gold standard of studies everyone seems to want?
Still there is this underlying problem with all the observational studies from the hospitals: Those who died at home or on the street or at work (typical for vaccine induced heart issues) were not even admitted to the hospital. This makes the data look good when the reality is grim.
What a bright young man! Well documented. Would love to have him explore the VAERS system for vaccine adverse effects! It might influence his oppion that the Pfizer jab has saved many lives!
Too late to the party. Meanwhile Rome is burning. Friends and family suffering severe adverse events and deaths. Everyone witnessing the same thing without having to read a study. We know the truth. Perhaps highly trained doctors will one day admit they are witnessing the exact same carnage.
Who are the NEJM's biggest advertisers?
Given the capture of nearly every major journal, this study from NEJM has the same issue of promoting a pHarma vaccine without any attention to the risk balance. Their own data show marginal results that our brave writer rightly observes.