Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dave's avatar

Are the batches that are causing highest adverse effects targeting certain areas of the country? What was voting trends of those area? Are racial makeup of those areas all the same or different? It is bad enough that the companies seem to be coordinating with timing but if they are also targeting areas for any reason it could prove they knew that it would cause harm or death and they sent them to these areas on purpose.

Expand full comment
Mike's avatar

Firstly, merry Christmas, and thank you for your stellar presentation of Paardekooper's work.

I have a couple of questions. My primary one is whether anyone has tried to interpret this from the lens of systemic under-recording.

It may at first seem silly to under-record batches irregularly, but if a total whitewash occurred, honest staffers would likely figure it out. Allowing some of the drastic increase in reporting correspondent to these vaccines to seep through but attenuating it by only allowing it for a subset of the lots might have been the most feasible way to systematically muffle the signal.

The fact that the majority of batches have one AE reminded me that batches with zero wouldn't show up in VAERS. I wonder if they idea that the safer batches were sent fewer places is spuriously inferred from the fact that there are fewer reports for some batches, and therefore fewer states from which the reports came from.

These might be dumb questions; I just don't see them explicitly addressed, so I had to ask. Sometimes the most obvious things get missed.

In any event, I'm incredibly grateful to researchers like you guys for bringing these facts to our attention. God bless and merry Christmas

Expand full comment
90 more comments...

No posts