5 Filters

Another questionable (or should that be dodgy) Lancet report on adverse events

Covid
#1

From Jessica Rose (on whom I would always put my money when challenging The Lancet or the GIC’s).

A new study has been published in The Lancet entitled: “Safety of mRNA vaccines administered during the initial 6 months of the US COVID-19 vaccination programme: an observational study of reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and v-safe” and it made me mad. It made me mad because the conclusion or rather ‘the interpretation’ was the following:

Safety data from more than 298 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administered in the first 6 months of the US vaccination programme show that most reported adverse events were mild and short in duration.

“And by the way, this work was funded by none other than the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We declare no competing interests. Really?”

1 Like
#2

Theres a very acute below-the-line comment on “we declare no competing interests”. Pointing out that this is not exactly the same as “we have no competing interests”.

epoché (ἐποχή, “suspension”) – an active suspension of disposition. The suspended state of judgement exercised by a disciplined and objective mind, in preparation to conduct research. A state of neutrality which eschews the exercise of religious, biased rational or critical, risky provisional and dogmatic dispositions when encountering new observations, ideas and data. In contrast with a wallow in passive neutrality or apathy, epoché is a form of active investigation based upon a discipline of impartiality. A desire to find the answer, tempered by the wisdom that answers do not come as easily as most people believe. It is the step of first being skeptical of self, before addressing challenging or new phenomena. Underpinned by both a examination of the disciplines of true knowledge development (epignosis) and the repository of vetted and accepted knowledge (gnosis). If someone relates a challenging observation to you, you suspend disposition, and catalog it. If you toss it out based upon a fallacy, trivial flaw or terminal disinterest – then you are a cynic, not a skeptic.

Source: Glossary C – F | The Ethical Skeptic

1 Like
#3

hi @KarenEliot this comes to mind at this juncture:
“There are known knowns, things we know that we know; and there are known unknowns, things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns, things we do not know we don’t know.”. ― Donald Rumsfeld

But there are also State knowns which you will never know!

cheers

1 Like
#4

Although Rumsfeld probably said this with his characteristic ruthless smirk he was basically correct. I suspect he nicked the idea from Joe and Harry though, this gets taught at Spook School I’m sure