🧵That report based on VAERs thats recieved a lot of condemnation.
Few things about it has come to my attention...
Few things about it has come to my attention...
2/ First off, the prominence of the report in the UK media compared to other studies does smell suspicious.
Not suprised Camilla Turner in Telegraph was one of the first to push it, she's been in touch with UsForThem for over a year
Not suprised Camilla Turner in Telegraph was one of the first to push it, she's been in touch with UsForThem for over a year
3/ Turners article was published less than 2 hours after the report was put out, interesting to see besides GBD/Collateral Global characters, who else was quick to take the study seriously
4/ Onto the authors of it, Hoeg isn't known in UK, contact in US describes her as a small potatoe who has radiply gained a larger platform.
There are questions if her credentials and that of the preprint are being oversold
There are questions if her credentials and that of the preprint are being oversold
https://twitter.com/emilygraymd_mph/status/1436700947833507840?s=19
5/ Stevenson one of the other authors is also in Rational Ground, skeptic groups with more of a anti vax vibe
https://twitter.com/emilygraymd_mph/status/1436785163275431937?s=19
6/ Funny enough Rational Ground also has Todd Kenyon as a member, who is also on Pandata.
7/ Pandata and HART are very close, even have weekly joint meeting.
They spend a lot of time rummaging through VAERs and considering how to represent the data
They spend a lot of time rummaging through VAERs and considering how to represent the data
8/ Considering how much is clearly wrong with the report, those who came put promoting it hard from the start should have their objectivity questioned
https://twitter.com/han_francis/status/1436167765220634631?s=19
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
