A French COVID vaccine study published in JAMA which could not do 1:1 matching (prohibited by French privacy laws) had to estimate to match the cohorts. They found that after matching, if you were vaccinated you had a 25% lower chance of non-COVID death. Which means their matching was flawed. Which means the comparison is flawed as well.
The tweet claiming victory:
If the shots worked, there would be a knee in the excess mortality trendline. I don’t see a knee. Do you see a knee?
Here is the AlterAI analysis exposing the flaws. Great read!
Papers from Qatar and Denmark both show epidemiology cannot adjust for HVE even using the most exact 1:1 matching ever done in history.
This study, which was forbidden by privacy law from doing 1:1 matching, claims they matched the cohorts and you should believe their results that it reduced COVID deaths 75%, even in the face of rising excess mortality.
The matching was flawed. The NCACM proves it. The mortality watch excess mortality proves it. The AlterAI analysis shows the flaws.
But people just want to believe what they want to believe, don’t they?
Deixe um comentário