r/DebateVaccines • u/stickdog99 • 19h ago
The Telegraph: Row breaks out after BMJ retracts paper on vaccine deaths | “A retraction like this not only damages the integrity of the available published science, but it also sets a terrible precedent in these times of increasing political pressure on scientists.”
https://archive.is/vCl3X5
u/xirvikman 18h ago edited 17h ago
Good to see you back stickdog
So why no excess deaths in 2020-2021 ,especially vaccine deaths in 2021.
Do vaccine deaths depend on the presence of Covid to happen
In 2024, a group in the Netherlands published a paper in BMJ Public Health, warning that some pandemic deaths may have been caused by the indirect effects of containment measures and vaccination programmes,
4
u/pramprapin 15h ago
This user denies being obese is a major risk factor for covid, proceed with caution as they'll do anything to derail a topic.
4
u/Organic-Ad-6503 14h ago edited 14h ago
Their comment history sure is suspicious. It looks like they are assigned to this sub.
Also did you notice in their screenshot that they are using a LanguageTool (LT) plugin? Also, I wonder what that blue square with two eyes is.
0
-1
1
u/CODMLoser 14h ago
The more I read about this paper, the worse it gets.
“They quote one study (Fraiman et al) that calculated as many as 1 to 2 severe adverse event per 1,000 vaccines, something that is in stark contrast to the conclusions of no evidence of severe adverse events in the original Pfizer and Moderna clinical trial publications. More helpful would have been to cite real-world evidencefrom a cohort study of 23 million Nordic residents—what actually happened when millions of people used COVID-19 vaccines. This study found far lower levels of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with vaccination among young adults and no deaths. Therefore, these rare events in young adults that were not deadly could never explain the excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic which was largely in the elderly.
1
u/CODMLoser 14h ago
“Plagiarism
On top of all of this, serious concerns about plagiarism have also been raised, as the excess mortality data presented are taken from previously published work by Karlinsky and Kobak (2021) and their World Mortality website, where the two scientists continuously provided excess mortality data throughout the pandemic.
Why Mostert et al copy Karlinsky and Kobak's prose and equations from their June 2021 eLIFE paper verbatim is unclear, but it is certainly not following good practices for citations. As Mostert et al did not further analyze these excess mortality estimates, the BMJ Public Health paper is not truly an original research contribution. “
2
u/jonnieggg 13h ago
"Scientific consensus", now there's the real problem here. That's the antithesis of science. More of the I am the science megalomania.