Could you define "solid" ?
pubpeer.com/publications...
Could you define "solid" ?
pubpeer.com/publications...
Why do you think Viki hasn't spotted the Cox implentation (major) errors - among various critical flaws which make this study retractation material ?
pubpeer.com/publications...
This study should be retracted as it doesn't analyse what it says it does, and contains multiple implementation & analytical errors.
pubpeer.com/publications...
The judgment hasn't taken place yet - as very clearly specified by the article this guy is using as a source.
But well, replies locked, so no risk to be corrected.
Analysis completely bugged & faulty which, in any normal universe, would already be retracted.
pubpeer.com/publications...
Why are you presented as "not involved" - while you're one of the peer-reviewers (with arguably conflicts of interests given that you have been one of the key proponents of vaccinations in pregnancy)?
Secondly, this study is completely flawed. Have you looked at the code?
pubpeer.com/publications...
A dive on Eugenics & Neo-Malthusianism, mid-19th to the recent Kenyan affair.
Key actors, ideas & events to have in mind to appraise the current demographic decline & the push toward populations control ‡οΈ
openvaet.info/p/eugenics-a...
Refusal of a bug report which should have been accepted - or the label should at the very least have been fixed.
Pubpeer blocks valid bug reports from publication... to keep an illusion of transparency ?
Below a bug report which should have been accepted - or the label should at the very least have been fixed.
But hey, if you want, you can buy the data they scrapped on Pubmed π€
@brandonstell.bsky.social
Why don't you precise that Levi is co-author of an in depth study on pregnancies risks of COVID 19 vaccination..?
While @vikilovesfacs.bsky.social has demonstrated countless times during the pandemic that she had a grasp of statistics & risk/benefit appraisal close to zero?
bsky.app/profile/open...
@davefarina.bsky.social, are you the one from the painful debate with Kory & Kirsch ?
Why Twitter/X's "Ethical Skeptic" is a complete fraud, manually faking his data ‡οΈ
openvaet.substack.com/p/a-conversa...
You understand that this kind of papers usually isn't peer-reviewed in 20 days without review of the data ..?
openvaet.substack.com/p/pfizerbion...
The problem is that Pfizer is lying. On pretty much everything.
openvaet.substack.com/p/pfizerbion...
And speaking about cringe... why do you use a picture from the inside of your nose as profile picture ?
Do you feel like it makes you.. impressive π€..?
If your friends haven't told that you that you look ridiculous they don't really respect you, Copy π
Gosh this is so cringe. You're converting your twitter space's session abusing carefully selected dimwits in "podcasts" now Copy π?
Why don't we see you anymore in the Thursday's spaces, you were tired to be ridiculed and to have nothing more to reply than your ridiculous xenophobic tropes ?
Glad to see that nonsensical incitements to get the Covid vaccines for pregnant women have ended.
@vikilovesfacs.bsky.social, have you commented on the Guetzkow et al. preprint which joins Shimabukuro's data in pointing in an increase of miscarriage risk with these?
www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...
Glad to see that nonsensical incitements to get the Covid vaccines for pregnant women have ended.
@vikilovesfacs.bsky.social, have you commented on the Guetzkow et al. preprint which joins Shimabukuro's data in pointing in an increase of miscarriage risk with these?
www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...
New inconsistencies in the Pfizer-BioNTech's C4591001 trial (EUA v BLA): AE dates shifted later, 358 AEs missing, PCR flipped NEGβPOS, AEs βseriousβββnon-seriousβ.
We also have edits to visit fields: V01DT changed in 13,413 cases; V02DT in 43,081.
Audit it now.
openvaet.substack.com/p/pfizerbion...
Hi.
Your thread is entirely erroneous and misleading, as I demonstrated here.
bsky.app/profile/open...
Good day !
Why do you claim to have left Twitter (while you're still there) or that Cat' harasses you (while it's the exact opposite), Mollie?
Your mythomania isn't limited to one network π€?
Oh, it wasn't just one uninformed tweet, it was a full uninformed thread.
How do you care about safety when you're suppressing your adverse events, Bill ?
davidhealy.org/disappeared-...
Why do we have 5 Menorrhagia in the trial and 12 to 25% post roll-out, in your informed statistician opinion ?
Fact, this is one of the most corrupt studies in history which you're proudly relaying.
Find an error or stop your propaganda work please.
openvaet.substack.com/p/pfizerbion...
They also delayed the efficacy announcement to deny Trump his political victory, so I'm not sure he would be very well disposed toward Pfizer.
openvaet.substack.com/p/pfizerbion...
The real problem was that the trial was entirely corrupt...
openvaet.substack.com/p/pfizerbion...
so the "95% efficacious at preventing symptomatic PCR" was never observed in real life.
The public certainly hasn't seen it, hence the collapsing trust.
It never measured this, but it did measure symptomatic positive PCRs, which makes the error of people who read the trial of "good faith one".
The way to control for transmission would have been regular n-bindings and pcr tests for every subject (to control for asymptomatic transmission).
You can verify every source. What you're telling me is that you have abolished your critical sense.
This article is cosigned by experienced biostats, trial insiders, and university teachers. Keep your condescension and your "solid review" claims. Unconvincing.
www.bmj.com/content/378/...
(You'll find nine as it has been reviewed by countless people and I find rather worrying that I'm learning you something.)
Allow me to conclude that your "audits" weren't very thorough π
My data is perfectly accurate and derives directly from the BLA documents made public through Phmpt.
Feel free to point an error between points 82 to 112 if you contest how many people received Process 2.
openvaet.substack.com/p/pfizerbion...
Every source and code line is handy.