Posted on 01/16/2023 3:25:17 PM PST by nickcarraway
If you are going to claim that more athletes have been suffering cardiac arrests and dying over the past two years, you had better sport some real numbers. Some real legitimate verifiable numbers. But that’s not what Tucker Carlson did on his FOX News show “Tucker Carlson Tonight” when he made such a claim. Instead of real numbers, he mentioned a letter. One letter. One letter to the editor of a medical journal to be exact.
But Carlson didn’t even specify that it was a letter in the episode of this show. The episode came after Buffalo Bills safety Damar Hamlin’s had suffered a cardiac arrest. Carlson, who is not a professional athlete, not a professional medical doctor, and not a professional scientist, suggested that there’s been a trend of more athletes suffering cardiac arrest. He asserted that “cardiologist Peter McCullough and researcher Panagis Polykretis looked into this trend in Europe, European sports leagues. They found that prior to Covid and the Covid-19 vaccines there were roughly 29 cardiac arrests in those European sports leagues per year.” Carlson went on to claim, “Since the vax campaign began, there have been more than 1,500 total cardiac arrests in those leagues and two-thirds of those were fatal.”
Hmm, does this sound like McCullough, a cardiologist who was not really known as an infectious disease expert or a public health researcher before the pandemic, and Polykretis, a biologist, actually conducted a real scientific study? Maybe even a peer-reviewed study? It looks like they didn’t, though, and instead all they did was write a letter to the editor published in the Scandinavian Journal of Immunology. It doesn’t take much to write a letter to the editor for such a journal. You have to be able to write, which may rule out some kids below
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
He sure is. This “author” sounds like a paid shill for big pharma or covidiots in ALL of his writings.
No, because it's public record.
The FDA had to redact personal information out of the clical trial data and wanted to do it slowly. They were going to release a cetrain amount each month.
A judge, rightfully, said they had to speed that up.
Big Pharma didn't try to delay the release of anything.
“Where did it go?”
“Right in the lumberyard...”
Full blown
SSDD
Dude doesn’t know what a letter to a medical or scientific journal is.
FOIA...how’s that working out for those who question the government?
Look, the feds have been lying about whatever suits them for a long time. Trust your instincts, that’s as reliable as statistics from the government. Which is a rather sad commentary when you think about it.
If “the government” was a human being, said human would be classified a pathological liar.
Sort of the same thing the MSM did with "climate change". It was based on one letter with no data. Wonder if Forbes will write about that?
It doesn’t matter. Few people under the age of 30 ever needed a vaccine for Covid. This proves it was always about money.
I thought Forbes was a business news outfit. Guess they expanded to medical.
Pfizer wasn't trying to delay the release, the FDA bureaucracy just wanted more resources to do the redaction.
Here’s my perspective:
alcohol (voluntary), opioids (voluntary), car crashes (sort of voluntary-at least not coerced), suicide (voluntary), and experimental drugs [vaccinations?] (forced)
Proof of how corrupt the FDA is.
Of course. Conspiratorial, too.
Maybe, but they are in no way comparable to the ones in the Lausanne study McCullough & Polykretis cite.
In what ways are the lists not comparable? For starters we know that both lists were generated by reviewing news reports.
Do you understand that medical journals are different from any random news source scoured off of the internet?
The authors of the Lausanne study state, in their paper, that "most" sudden cardiac deaths of young athletes aren't reported to these journals - which were the only ones the authors considered.
Goodsciencing.com, on the other hand, cast a very wide net.
"This means that provided a person is reasonably fit, healthy and does some athletic activity, rather than an unfit “couch potato,” then they can be included in this list. Needless to say, these are only the persons reported to us by readers or that we discovered during research. Also note that almost all of these have been reported in the media."
You didn't answer my earlier question but do you think it's honest to compare a very select number of cases written up in select medical journals to a random collection of deaths pulled from all over the internet?
This might seem a bit nit-picky, but you're probably referring to the FOIA case brought by "Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency" against the FDA which you can find on PACER with this case number 4:21-cv-1058-P, or on Scribed if you don't have a PACER account. This seems to be the most common source for the "someone or other" wanted to hide the data for "75 years" claims, and the counter-claims that precise thing never happened.
Anyway, the correct numbers are: Pages of documents covered by the FOIA:
440,000
Number of pages FDA wanted to release per month:
500
Number of pages the court ordered the FDA to release per month:
55,00
"all they did was write a letter"
are letters to an editor peer-reviewed?
Does the Int’l Olympic committee track all athelete deaths or just those of olympic atheletes?
I did find this from 2017:
“The overall prevalence of CV disorders in this population was 12% (i.e. 33/267)
https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/38/27/2092/3959647
That’s pretty clear.
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.