1. Update: what happened to this paper highlighting problems with the ONS data on vaccine efficacy and safety.......
researchgate.net/publication/35…
researchgate.net/publication/35…
2. The paper showed that idiosyncrasies in the ONS data could only be explained by systemic reporting errors which, when adjusted for, showed there was no evidence that the vaccines reduce all-cause mortality.
3. Idiosyncracies included (among others) the observation that, in each age group, there was a spike in non-Covid mortality in the unvaccinated at exactly the same time as the vaccine roll-out peaked for that age group.
4. This suggested the possibility that people who happened to die very shortly after vaccination were being misclassified as unvaccinated.
5. The original version of the paper got >300,000 reads on Researchgate. While some disputed our findings, their objections were all based on the claim that idiosyncrasies in the ONS data could be explained by the fact that the most unhealthy people were not getting vaccinated
6. i.e that there was a "healthy vaccinee" effect. So, we did further analysis and produced the revised version of the paper showing why this healthy vaccinee effect was not supportable.
7. Moreover, if there really was a "healthy vaccinee" effect, it would still mean that all of the ONS conclusions about vaccine efficacy and safety were systemically flawed and biased because they failed to adjust for this effect.
8. The only other type of criticism of the paper was it wasn't peer reviewed – despite its many authors (including senior clinicians who had to remain unnamed to protect their careers) & hundreds of comments and informal reviews from researchers who read the paper on ResearchGate
9. But the main journals (and even pre-print servers medrXiv & arXiv) have been systematically rejecting papers without review if they challenge the 'official' Covid narrative....
10. However, we did submit the latest version to the BMJ two weeks ago. Today they rejected it without review or any explanation why it would not be reviewed.
11. Blog post based on this thread: probabilityandlaw.blogspot.com/2022/02/update…
12. There is currently a problem with links in ResearchGate. The link in 1 goes to older version. This should be the latest (Jan 2020) version of the paper but it also sometimes links to the old version. researchgate.net/publication/35…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
