Flawed studies desperately attempting to prop up the ‘official’ covid narrative are getting worse
No matter how many times we (and others) have pointed out the statistical flaws and biases that compromise covid studies (especially those attempting to show vaccine effectiveness and safety), studies continue to be published in the most prestigious medical journals that should never have passed review because of these flaws.
In the last week we have reported on two flawed studies (here and here) that were published in the Lancet. A reader has alerted us to another - about the effects of covid during pregnancy - which suggests increasing desperation to prop up the ‘official’ narrative. I decided to do a video (11 minutes) which discussed all three of these studies:
Congratulations for your brave work. These authors may really think that no one would ever read their papers with close attention. They’ve been lying for so long now, that they have forgotten what the truth looks like. Sad. But true.
It’s no consolation, Norman, that it’s the same situation for ‘high impact factor’ Higher Education journals. At least I’m still being invited to peer-review these pieces of crap. Although maybe not for much longer. It gives me surprising amounts of pleasure to edit phrases that elude to the authors’ perceived ‘wonderful, ‘free’ online learning platforms’, with the reality of data harvesting from vulnerable students with AI. Along with adding ‘Government policies during the...’ before sentences relating to the impact of the ‘Covid pandemic’ on students’ learning. Not sure how these editors are coping, but they must know their time is running out?