🇳🇱
To be fair thats not a scientific journal saying that and PHS doesnt conduct peer review. Thats a government health agency.
>it's only the raw data source
yeah we need a meta study where the real data can be buried under layers of P-hacking
@crunklord420
Well there are other sources for raw data, but yes i agree obscuring the data is a bad move.
That said there is no dpubt that conspiracy theorists were abusing data they didnt understand. The VARES data in the usa was misrepresented by most of the nutters countless times. Personally im ok with that since freedom of information means idiots will abuse it and thats a fine tradeoff to make. But i do understand the reaction. People were so dumb thry were actually vares was an indication of death counts and other complete nonsense
they were previously just as flawed but used as a truncheon to show how safe things are ("look the db is so smol") then it flipped and multiple regions show the opposite and now they're suddenly very unreliable and can't be cited for anything.
well if they are unreliable why do they exist? if they can't signal danger because they're unreliable then they can't signal safety--their existence is literally pointless.
@crunklord420
Sort of, thry are **not** lists of everyone who died or had injury from the vaccine. They are a list of anyone who had any disease, regardless of if it is related to the vaccine, within a month or so of getting the vaccine. So on its own it provides no value as a list of people with adverse effects. Its purpose is only as a starting point tonfind case studies which, upon review, might lead to concerns.
Taking the list and going "look everyone on this list had an adverse reactionto the vaccine" is incorrect and idiotic. The vast majority of people on the list do not have reactions.
@crunklord420
Gone too soon.
He may rest in peace as there are no baby rapers in Heaven
i just made a woozy shitpost about data hiding and now we're doing all this crap
Doctor Freemo?
More like Doctor Chomo