3 Comments
Dec 31, 2021·edited Dec 31, 2021Liked by AlmostWrong

Lol @ 28 days since first dose.

And I think we've had some back and forth on the use of Cox regressions to get adjusted hazard ratios. But to remind you, cox regressions should never, ever be used with vaccines. It's statistical heresy. Or did they use my other nemesis test negative control design? I may have read through the article too quick (will look closer when I'm home). In any case, they need to present the unadjusted numbers or don't present any numbers at all. I hate this behind the curtain habit of "trust us" adjustments they use

Expand full comment
author

Not only can you not use the Cox regressions but if you do, then you have the obligation to reveal where the model is showing hazard that's out of bounds. For example, what did it show was the hazard for those who just received an injection.

Since the dataset is rigged, the regression model should show higher before 14 days after 3rd dose.

Expand full comment

What hope for us in the Uk with WEF infiltrated Gov, Con and Lab. 🤔🤬

New contracts with Moderna,for our wonderful 😧catapult development 🤯 of new vaccines and drugs based on the allready failed MRNA tech.

All previous safety regs.swept aside ( thanks Hedley).

No MP‘s listening to Andrew Bridgen’s speech on vaccine damage, but a full house to discuss MP’s salaries. All the proof is there ,thank you for clarifying the rigged stats so succinctly👏🏻👏🏻 Perhaps there is hope with Twitter exposure ,on Substack it’s preaching to the choir…..

Expand full comment