As Fenton and Neil noted, and as the Czech researchers themselves acknowledge, " ... they show that observational data is so biased it cannot be used to support any claim by the authorities that the Covid-19 vaccines were proven effective or safe." It's an important study that is yet another nail in the coffin of the safe and effective narrative. Dr. Paul as an epidemiologist is well aware of the Health Vaccinne Effect bias. It's a major methodological flaw in research purporting to show that the jabs are safe and effective and, contrary to what you say, I doubt that he is going to shred that to pieces.
Fenton, considered one of the world's top statisticians, and Neil hypothesize that there is also an "Unhealthy Vaccinee Effect" (UVE). They note:
"We believe that there are likely numerous selection biases lurking in observational data - the cheap trick is not the only one. These other biases are perhaps operating at different times, in different cohorts to different degrees. Some age groups might be biased by HVE whilst other, more vulnerable age groups, might be contain both UVE and miscategorisation biases, interacting together. There is also the known issue with the UK data whereby the proportion of unvaccinated was being underestimated by the authorities, leading to systemic overestimation of mortality in the unvaccinated and underestimation in the vaccinated.
This mechanism of UVE and miscategorisation, operating together, would involve a higher mortality rate in the vaccinated, either because they were naturally moribund or suffered a higher mortality due to an unsafe vaccine, but by the simple act of recategorization this increased mortality burden could easily be transferred into the unvaccinated cohort, making the vaccinated cohort look relatively healthier and the vaccines look effective and safe."
As Fenton and Neil noted, and as the Czech researchers themselves acknowledge, " ... they show that observational data is so biased it cannot be used to support any claim by the authorities that the Covid-19 vaccines were proven effective or safe." It's an important study that is yet another nail in the coffin of the safe and effective narrative. Dr. Paul as an epidemiologist is well aware of the Health Vaccinne Effect bias. It's a major methodological flaw in research purporting to show that the jabs are safe and effective and, contrary to what you say, I doubt that he is going to shred that to pieces.
Fenton, considered one of the world's top statisticians, and Neil hypothesize that there is also an "Unhealthy Vaccinee Effect" (UVE). They note:
"We believe that there are likely numerous selection biases lurking in observational data - the cheap trick is not the only one. These other biases are perhaps operating at different times, in different cohorts to different degrees. Some age groups might be biased by HVE whilst other, more vulnerable age groups, might be contain both UVE and miscategorisation biases, interacting together. There is also the known issue with the UK data whereby the proportion of unvaccinated was being underestimated by the authorities, leading to systemic overestimation of mortality in the unvaccinated and underestimation in the vaccinated.
This mechanism of UVE and miscategorisation, operating together, would involve a higher mortality rate in the vaccinated, either because they were naturally moribund or suffered a higher mortality due to an unsafe vaccine, but by the simple act of recategorization this increased mortality burden could easily be transferred into the unvaccinated cohort, making the vaccinated cohort look relatively healthier and the vaccines look effective and safe."
You're welcome.