Posted on 08/08/2022 10:36:54 AM PDT by lightman
A top epidemiologist voiced his concerns about a new study published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that alleges there is an increased risk for post-COVID-19 conditions for children and teenagers who are seeking medical care.
In the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) on Aug. 5, researchers say that children aged 17 and younger with previous bouts of COVID-19 had higher rates of uncommon conditions such as myocarditis, cardiomyopathy, renal failure, type 1 diabetes, and other conditions. The study cited specific disease codes between March 2020 and January 2022.
In conclusion, the agency said that all children, even 6-month-olds, should get COVID-19 vaccines.
“COVID-19 prevention strategies, including vaccination for all eligible persons aged ≥6 months, are critical to preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and subsequent illness, and reducing the public health impact of post-COVID symptoms and conditions among persons aged 0–17 years,” the CDC wrote.
But University of California San Francisco epidemiologist Vinay Prasad, who has often criticized the CDC and other federal health agencies for their studies during the COVID-19 epidemic, argued CDC researchers are pushing “garbage” and “publishing poor quality science in MMWR.”
“It doesn’t help the vaccine decision,” he concluded on his Substack page last week. “The paper provides no evidence vaccination would have averted these outcomes, but worse: where is the evidence vaccination lowers the risk of these outcomes for a parent making that choice TOMORROW, where there is a 90+ percent chance their kid already had COVID?”
‘Not Persuasive’
“But more importantly, the paper is not persuasive. It is trash,” Prasad said. “I still don’t know if a kid who had asymptomatic COVID, mild COVID, or severe COVID has risks greater than not having had COVID, or having had a milder version of COVID. I am interested in this for biological and scientific reasons, but not so much policy reasons, as I note.
“If the authors cared about this question, they would need to reimagine the entire study. I think they would want to use seroprevalence to build a cohort and carefully stratify people by severity of illness and work from there. It would take actually work, not just playing with a claims data-set.”
The CDC’s study, he added, doesn’t separate children who were “sick enough to see a health care provider for COVID” from children who went to see a provider for reasons other than COVID-19 and “had an established doctor in whom that consultation was easy.”
“They don’t look at vaccination status, which leads to … claims that vaccines can prevent whatever they find, or this study shows ‘why kids’ vaccines are needed’ are unjustified,” Prasad wrote. “The authors could have explicitly looked at that, but chose not to.”
Prasad further argued that researchers with the CDC did not look into the child’s vaccination status and “picked a huge and garbage list of ICD codes that might possibl[y] be linked to [COVID].”
“COVID might be bringing in kids who weren’t getting regular care,” the epidemiologist added. “Imagine this: Both groups of kids have other medical problems at equal rates, but the ‘COVID’ group has more kids in whom COVID brings them to the [doctor] for the first time (at least in a while), prompting diagnosis of other problems.”
“Control kids have been coming for many visits, and other problems already coded in system. A positive COVID test doesn’t ‘cause’ the other problems but is the event that prompts work up for someone who hasn’t been seen for [over] 365 days.”
And the unexplained finding that COVID-positive children had a less likely chance to have mental conditions, sleeping disorders, and anxiety suggests the CDC researchers “are comparing apples and oranges the whole time,” Prasad said. “Likely their [expletive] methods are comparing kids sick enough with COVID who go to the doctor to kids suffering from school closure, disruption in normal social life, and all the other awful restrictions placed on kids.”
The Epoch Times has contacted the CDC for comment.
No kidding. IMHO it is all about the money.
There is no “poor quality science”. You have actual science and you have pseudoscience... otherwise known a fraud.
If the vaunted “vaccine” is so effective:
....why does it need to be mandated for health care workers?
....and why do the vaccinated still need to wear masks in health care facilities?
So.
There’s a higher incidence of certain serious illnesses health conditions in children.
The named conditions and illnesses appear to be being CAUSED BY those children having received COVID-related mRNA gene therapy product injections.
And the proposed course of action is: Juice, juice, juice these and all other children with as many additional doses if this garbage as we can get our hands on?
What do they take us for. Anyway?
Fauci’s whole job is to spin science to a meaningless propaganda point. Science journals, research and the medical establishment have paid a huge price by the pandemic. We see it for what it really is, trash.
In the same vein...
Zogby finds up to 1 / 5 vaccinated Americans report possible jab injuries; Biden is back and busy; CDC recommends limiting anonymous sex partners; health officials try not to say “gay;” and more ...
The Epoch Times, which has not been shy lately about running vaccine-injury stories, ran an article this weekend headlined, “10 Percent of Americans Regret Taking COVID Vaccine, 15 Percent Have a New Medical Condition After It: Poll.” The headline actually understates things.
The story reports on two recent Zogby polls commissioned by Childrens’ Health Defense. The first surveyed just over 1,000 Americans of all ages. Of those surveyed who were vaccinated, ten percent now regret it, and fifteen percent say they have developed at least one new medical condition since their shot.
Of the newly diagnosed medical conditions, the most common were: blood clots (21%), heart attack (19%), liver damage (18%), leg and lung clots (17%), and stroke (15%).
The second poll (run simultaneously) of about 900 people aged 18-49 found that 22% reported a new medical diagnosis within weeks or a few months after the jab. Of this group, 14% said they regretted taking the shot.
(More at the link)
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/-coffee-and-covid-monday-august-8
~Easy
Eisenhower should have warned of the biomedical-pharmaceutical complex.
“Of the newly diagnosed medical conditions, the most common were:...”
I have had probably 3-4 x the conditions which are listed there. More like what wasn’t damaged with me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.