3 Comments
Commenting has been turned off for this post
Martha's avatar

Based on the following statement, posted at the beginning of the linked BMC article by Skidmore, the powers that be aren't happy with the data/conclusions:

"26 January 2023 Editor's Note: Readers are alerted that the conclusions of this paper are subject to criticisms that are being considered by editors. Specifically, that the claims are unsubstantiated and that there are questions about the quality of the peer review. A further editorial response will follow the resolution of these issues."

Expand full comment
norstadt's avatar

Yes, his estimate of 278,000 vaccine fatalities must have ruffled some feathers. I don't really understand the study's bootstrapping method, but even if the analysis has problems, multiple lines of evidence (RCTs, VAERS, survey answers) point to vaccine safety issues.

Expand full comment
Martha's avatar

The statistical gymnastics are beyond me, unfortunately. But I thought he did a pretty good job straddling the fence, yet managing to include some pretty damning information in what was ostensibly, an analysis of vaccine hesitancy. Apparently, he wasn't quite skillful enough...

Expand full comment