Ping this to anyone interested
FDA: OOPS!
Hearken to us,
exDemMom
Scientist with
great aplomb!
By the power of
Calculus™! we implore
your aid!
Help, help, we’re being
misinformed™!
the FDA knew this, and that all the mice
used for testing also died.
the FDA therefore mandated it for children
and pregnant women.
the FDA administrators belong in GITMO to get
the justice they deserve.
That’s not all ping.
IBTFR$$sD
only very urgent to the brainwashed masses who trusted the gov and gave their kids the shot.
I followed the links and read the abstract of the original study. The findings are not conclusive.
However, the study should not be ignored, as it is a legitimate study. It’s not the typical pro- or anti-vax propaganda we normally see.
What really bothers me is that all legitimate anti-vax studies are buried by the mainstream media. Folks have the right to hear all sides of the issue. And that’s sure not what we’re getting.
And as a side note, I mistrusted mRNA vaccines from the get-go. This study reinforces my decision to avoid them.
Crimes-Against-Humanity BUMP
My daughter-in-law got her little kids vaccinated out of spite. The little boy collapsed at school. He almost died. They don’t know what was wrong. They still claimed they don’t know. I know.
☠️
Poison
A thread on this study was published several days ago and I already went through a step-by-step analysis of why it is only posted on a pre-print server and will almost certainly not be published in the peer-reviewed medical/scientific literature.
I wish FR had a more user-friendly search function. I'd just repost my earlier analysis if I could.
The authors of the study report communicate over and over (without using the exact words) that the finding of increased seizure was most likely an artifact resulting from how they analyzed the data. They compared the rate of seizures between vaccinated children and the background incidence of seizures of children in the same age group.
When they compared seizure rates in vaccinated children to the 2020 background rate, they saw a slight increase in the vaccinated group which they only described as "meeting the statistical threshold." But when they compared the vaccinated children to the background rate in 2022, there was no difference:
However, in a post-hoc sensitivity analysis, the seizures/convulsions signal was sensitive to background rates selection and was not observed when 2022 background rates were selected instead of 2020 rates.
No one else has ever found an association between Covid vaccines and seizures, further indicating that the finding is an artifact:
The seizures/convulsions signal in children aged 2-4/5 years has not been previously reported for this age group in active surveillance studies of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.
The authors themselves say that no conclusion should be made from this study and that the finding must be confirmed in future, more carefully designed studies:
The new seizures/convulsions signal observed in our study should be interpreted with caution and further investigated in a more robust epidemiological study.
They stressed that background rates of seizures were lower in 2020 than they were in 2022. The significance of this is that since the FDA issued the EUA for pediatric Covid vaccines in July 2022, the comparison of occurrence of seizures in vaccinees should be made against the 2022 background, not the 2020 background. As the authors point out, viruses known to cause seizures were circulating in 2022:
However, seizures/convulsions rates in this age group in 2022 were twice as high as 2020 rates. There could be a couple of potential reasons for elevated outcome rates in 2022 compared to 2020. First, there was an increased incidence of respiratory infections (influenza and respiratory syncytial virus) which are shown to be associated with febrile seizure in younger children, during the study period (mid-2022 to mid-2023) compared to 2020. Second, in 2020, there were likely fewer emergency department visits for seizure-related events compared to 2022 because of COVID-19 pandemic healthcare resource limitations.
The paper contains absolutely no information about the statistical tests used or mention P values, confidence intervals, or any of the other statistical measures that are included in scientific papers. They do not define what they mean by "statistical threshold for a signal," which is not a general scientific term which would be widely understood within the scientific community. Furthermore, the authors repeatedly used language indicating that they consider that the "seizure signal" was a spurious result. If they had found something they thought was concerning, they would have said so in the report. I'd be surprised if this ever made it through peer-review to be published even in a low-impact medical journal; I question whether it has been submitted to a journal at all.
This study was funded by the FDA. It looks to me like it was written up and posted on the pre-print server to show whoever at the FDA authorized the funding that they did do the funded work (and didn't just spend the funds on office parties or whatever).
And let’s not forget that in countries like Israel we saw most the children in the population get TRIPLE jabbed