Agreed. If you are not familiar with scientific papers then this is a great introduction into manipulation of science by those in positions to influence public policy.
Sad thing is it's nothing new either. When I was a student at university we was offered courses in how to write grant applications - that's no big deal perhaps but having courses in how to write a research proposal is, because that porcess can be laced and laden with leading key owrds and phrases, heavily influencing what research is given the go ahead in the first place.
And for some reason, it was never politically sensitive issues - the ones where you really need to know in detail all the who's and what's and so on.
I have a sibling who teaches at university, and it's the same still. Sibling is in the natural sciences and says this: "Write one single article speaking out against the big business interests and you're blacklisted for life".
Excellent editorial analysis by Dr Robert Malone. I concur completetly. PS sounds like they might use it to push higher or more frequent toxins into the litle children. We have to keep trying to shut this down before April's FDA/CDC/Pfizer push, in my opinion.
Clear as a bell and don’t we all wish Dr Malone was a reviewer for all of these spirited, but biased studies presented for review and publication. Dr. Malone’s use of the three strikes and your out analogy seems fitting for this study. Sadly most of us do not have access to medical journals. Because if we did, he gave us a very good template to judge the quality of a study, even as a Kay person💕💕
You’ve got some access to medical journals through pre-prints and through PubMed. Do a little googling and you can learn to use these sources.
Also, *highly recommended*: The IPAK journal “Science, Public Health Policy, and Law” — Editor is James Lyons-Weiler. A small journal accessible free online including back issues. He has published two of Jessica Rose’s reports on VAERS.
The free newsletter of Children’s Health Defense is a good source for fairly easy-to-read reviews of many studies related to COVID, vaccines (COVID and others), and toxics impacting kids’ health.
BTW, James Lyons-Weiler has an educational project where people can take online courses taught by scientists. Not long ago he offered a course on reading and understanding scientific studies (and I think that included medical studies). I have a great deal of respect for Lyons-Weiler's work as a scientist, publisher, and educator.
I saw this note under table 2 of the study: “Negative VE values observed in later timepoints likely reflect estimator instability and/or residual confounding, as opposed to true relatively-
increased risk for those vaccinated.” I’d like the authors to let us know just how likely, if that’s OK. I don’t need any statistics. They could use “really, really likely,” or maybe “more likely than not.” Just ballpark it. After all, we’re just vaccinating kids.
Your sarcasm is an excellent sauce over the top of the study authors' bovine manure. Phrases like "estimator instability and/or residual confounding" are so delicious. They deserve the best topping.
Robert Malone has been saying many right things for a while which we are all glad to be hearing. But he has a very long history, as he points out himself, in what might be termed "the vaccine/virus game" that raise some questions, in my mind (for one), and I'm wondering to what extent, Jessica, you and others who follow your substack have examined this history with a critical eye. Would love to see Malone interviewed by a someone with indepth awareness of his career and activities over time who was also willing and capable of asking penetrating and illuminating questions. Forgive my not specifying my suspicions, i.e., questions, re Malone. But those questions are already out there for those who have been following the narratives.
More important than vaccine effectiveness results is the lesson Malone gives on how to think properly about (analyze) the paper. This seems to be where things are falling apart for many people. The fear does not help rationality. Morpheus: "This is Zion, and we are not afraid!" www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY5VqsgpENQ
In addition to the critique that Malone puts forth, I would add: Where is the proof that covid, omicron or any of the other variants have actually been isolated and viewed as an intact virus? Computer generated, 'cut and paste' "viruses" don't count. It seems like a paper about ghosts is unworthy right out of the gate.
Taking the time and effort to review this document lends it far too much credibility.
I agree, but Malone is developing his own non-mRNA injection, under the assumption "covid-19" is going to remain a deadly disease.. what's the phrase? .. a "Public Health Emergency of International Concern" (which definition triggers pre-determined government actions on everything from border closures to being required to buy pharma products to suspension of civil liberties).
He thinks (wants it to be that?) the emergency will go on for the foreseeable future and doesn't seem to be doing anything to dampen the idea that C-19 will be a forever issue.
Jessica, I know you examine raw data. I see the Pfizer court ordered documents for March 1, 2022, have been released. I imagine this document would be of interest to examine, but you'd have to get a utility to convert it from PDF to Word, then you can accept corrections, to see it in a form that is readable.
Agreed. If you are not familiar with scientific papers then this is a great introduction into manipulation of science by those in positions to influence public policy.
Sad thing is it's nothing new either. When I was a student at university we was offered courses in how to write grant applications - that's no big deal perhaps but having courses in how to write a research proposal is, because that porcess can be laced and laden with leading key owrds and phrases, heavily influencing what research is given the go ahead in the first place.
And for some reason, it was never politically sensitive issues - the ones where you really need to know in detail all the who's and what's and so on.
I have a sibling who teaches at university, and it's the same still. Sibling is in the natural sciences and says this: "Write one single article speaking out against the big business interests and you're blacklisted for life".
Excellent editorial analysis by Dr Robert Malone. I concur completetly. PS sounds like they might use it to push higher or more frequent toxins into the litle children. We have to keep trying to shut this down before April's FDA/CDC/Pfizer push, in my opinion.
A-men! Thanks Jessica!
Agreed, one of Malone's very best articles.
Their conclusion is pure propaganda/agenda b..s..! I'm sooo sick of this "chimeric" defamation of True Science and Research.
The chimeric of science and propaganda...
Just read this peer review on Malone’s substack. *Very educational*. Thank you for republishing it here!
Rosenberg was also lead author of the infamous NY hospital study (May 2020) which downplayed the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine against Covid.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC7215635/#__ffn_sectitle
Here is a closely related NEJM article on how HCQ performed on NY hospitalized patients led by Neal Schluger. Same approach and timeframe.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410
Recall: it was Schluger’s *editorial* which called for an end to HCQ efforts against Covid in summer of 2020.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-5041
Clear as a bell and don’t we all wish Dr Malone was a reviewer for all of these spirited, but biased studies presented for review and publication. Dr. Malone’s use of the three strikes and your out analogy seems fitting for this study. Sadly most of us do not have access to medical journals. Because if we did, he gave us a very good template to judge the quality of a study, even as a Kay person💕💕
You’ve got some access to medical journals through pre-prints and through PubMed. Do a little googling and you can learn to use these sources.
Also, *highly recommended*: The IPAK journal “Science, Public Health Policy, and Law” — Editor is James Lyons-Weiler. A small journal accessible free online including back issues. He has published two of Jessica Rose’s reports on VAERS.
The free newsletter of Children’s Health Defense is a good source for fairly easy-to-read reviews of many studies related to COVID, vaccines (COVID and others), and toxics impacting kids’ health.
I hope this is helpful to you.
Thanks💕
BTW, James Lyons-Weiler has an educational project where people can take online courses taught by scientists. Not long ago he offered a course on reading and understanding scientific studies (and I think that included medical studies). I have a great deal of respect for Lyons-Weiler's work as a scientist, publisher, and educator.
Go to Google Scholar and you'll find lots of papers.
I saw this note under table 2 of the study: “Negative VE values observed in later timepoints likely reflect estimator instability and/or residual confounding, as opposed to true relatively-
increased risk for those vaccinated.” I’d like the authors to let us know just how likely, if that’s OK. I don’t need any statistics. They could use “really, really likely,” or maybe “more likely than not.” Just ballpark it. After all, we’re just vaccinating kids.
Your sarcasm is an excellent sauce over the top of the study authors' bovine manure. Phrases like "estimator instability and/or residual confounding" are so delicious. They deserve the best topping.
1. There is no such thing as "independent" peer review (PR).
2. Former journal editors have said that "a PR can mean anything or nothing".
3. At least 50% of PR "studies" were bogus since they could not be replicated.
Robert Malone has been saying many right things for a while which we are all glad to be hearing. But he has a very long history, as he points out himself, in what might be termed "the vaccine/virus game" that raise some questions, in my mind (for one), and I'm wondering to what extent, Jessica, you and others who follow your substack have examined this history with a critical eye. Would love to see Malone interviewed by a someone with indepth awareness of his career and activities over time who was also willing and capable of asking penetrating and illuminating questions. Forgive my not specifying my suspicions, i.e., questions, re Malone. But those questions are already out there for those who have been following the narratives.
I think everyone is so desperate for a hero that they are not inclined to look this gift horse(man) in the mouth.
Sucharit Bhakti said "if you take these jabs you will go to your doom." That's all I need to know.
And Biden is urging Ukrainians to protect themselves: "Get vaccinated!"
More important than vaccine effectiveness results is the lesson Malone gives on how to think properly about (analyze) the paper. This seems to be where things are falling apart for many people. The fear does not help rationality. Morpheus: "This is Zion, and we are not afraid!" www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY5VqsgpENQ
In addition to the critique that Malone puts forth, I would add: Where is the proof that covid, omicron or any of the other variants have actually been isolated and viewed as an intact virus? Computer generated, 'cut and paste' "viruses" don't count. It seems like a paper about ghosts is unworthy right out of the gate.
Taking the time and effort to review this document lends it far too much credibility.
https://secularheretic.substack.com/p/does-the-covid-virus-exist?utm_source=url
https://secularheretic.substack.com/p/does-the-covid-virus-exist-2?utm_source=url
I agree, but Malone is developing his own non-mRNA injection, under the assumption "covid-19" is going to remain a deadly disease.. what's the phrase? .. a "Public Health Emergency of International Concern" (which definition triggers pre-determined government actions on everything from border closures to being required to buy pharma products to suspension of civil liberties).
He thinks (wants it to be that?) the emergency will go on for the foreseeable future and doesn't seem to be doing anything to dampen the idea that C-19 will be a forever issue.
Jessica, I know you examine raw data. I see the Pfizer court ordered documents for March 1, 2022, have been released. I imagine this document would be of interest to examine, but you'd have to get a utility to convert it from PDF to Word, then you can accept corrections, to see it in a form that is readable.
https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/125742_S1_M5_c4591001-T-S-final-reacto-tables-track.pdf
This document was obtained perusing and examining a host of documents dumped on this date from Pfizer. https://phmpt.org/pfizers-documents/
txs, Malone did a nice didactic job on that!