Recent COVID-19 research sponsored by vaccine makers and the federal government may actually undermine the rationale for vaccine mandates.
Two studies published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine ( NEJM) showed statistically insignificant differences between participants who received vaccinations or placebos in Pfizer and Moderna trials.
All deaths reported during the vaccine trials, regardless of listed cause, were similarly close between vaccine (31) and placebo (30) groups in the two appendices.
Indiana University medical professor Allon Friedman flagged the studies in a Brownstone Institute essay Thursday, calling their design "the gold standard and most rigorous scientific tool available to examine cause and effect relationships" between vaccination and death. https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/covid-vaccine-mandates- undermined-research-sponsored-vaccine-makers
这中网站玩指鹿为马，颠倒黑白的本事，真是炉火纯青。右派当年口口声声说左派把车祸带病毒算新冠死亡骂个半死，说他们夸大新冠危害性，到这里就只盯着死亡两个字，而不管“regardless of listed cause”了，正义感都去哪里了？
【 在 potassium (镇) 的大作中提到: 】 : 怎么肥四，苗厂自己花钱做的研究都无法证明疫苗有效？ : Recent COVID-19 research sponsored by vaccine makers and the federal : government may actually undermine the rationale for vaccine mandates. : Two studies published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine ( : NEJM) showed statistically insignificant differences between participants : who received vaccinations or placebos in Pfizer and Moderna trials. : All deaths reported during the vaccine trials, regardless of listed cause, : were similarly close between vaccine (31) and placebo (30) groups in the two : appendices. : Indiana University medical professor Allon Friedman flagged the studies in a : ...................
During the blinded, placebo-controlled period, 15 participants in the BNT162b2 group and 14 in the placebo group died; during the open-label period, 3 participants in the BNT162b2 group and 2 in the original placebo group who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths were considered to be related to BNT162b2 by the investigators. Causes of death were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4).
表S4中，疫苗组和对照组死于新冠的人数为1：2，没有统计意义。
Among 42,094 participants 12 years of age or older who could be evaluated and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, Covid-19 with an onset of 7 days or more after the second dose was observed in 77 vaccine recipients and in 850 placebo recipients up to the data cutoff date (March 13, 2021), corresponding to a vaccine efficacy of 91.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.0 to 93.2) (Table 2). Among 44,486 participants with or without evidence of previous infection who could be evaluated, cases of Covid-19 were observed in 81 vaccine recipients and in 873 placebo recipients, corresponding to a vaccine efficacy of 91.1% (95% CI, 88.8 to 93.0).
A total of 32 deaths had occurred by completion of the blinded phase, with 16 deaths each (0.1%) in the placebo and mRNA-1273 groups; no deaths were considered to be related to injections of placebo or vaccine, and 4 were attributed to Covid-19 (3 in the placebo group and 1 in the mRNA-1273 group)
1个疫苗组和3个对照组死于新冠。要说统计不显著，是嫌死的人不够多，是吗？
Vaccine efficacy in preventing Covid-19 illness was 93.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.0 to 94.8), with 55 confirmed cases in the mRNA-1273 group (9.6 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 7.2 to 12.5) and 744 in the placebo group (136.6 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 127.0 to 146.8). The efficacy in preventing severe disease was 98.2% (95% CI, 92.8 to 99.6), with 2 cases in the mRNA-1273 group and 106 in the placebo group, and the efficacy in preventing asymptomatic infection starting 14 days after the second injection was 63.0% (95% CI, 56.6 to 68.5), with 214 cases in the mRNA-1273 group and 498 in the placebo group.
疫苗有效性93%，防重症98%，可都是统计显著。
这个研究，又是怎么个无法证明疫苗有效？
twitter：Two studies published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) showed statistically insignificant differences between participants who received vaccinations or placebos in Pfizer and Moderna trials.
Even they "cannot" prove their efficacy, all the developed countries are buying them. Looks like trumpers on this board are smarter. Oh, did you call it Trump's vax back in Feb or March? Did you give credit to Trump's Wasp Speed?
"Simply put, the very best scientific evidence currently available to mankind does not support the widely held contention" that these vaccines lower the risk of death in the studied time period.
tell me what is wrong with this statement?
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】 : twitter引用的两篇文章： : https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2110345?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=: ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed : During the blinded, placebo-controlled period, 15 participants in the : BNT162b2 group and 14 in the placebo group died; during the open-label : period, 3 participants in the BNT162b2 group and 2 in the original placebo : group who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths were : considered to be related to BNT162b2 by the investigators. Causes of death : were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4). : 表S4中，疫苗组和对照组死于新冠的人数为1：2，没有统计意义。 : ...................
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】 : twitter引用的两篇文章： : https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2110345?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=: ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed : During the blinded, placebo-controlled period, 15 participants in the : BNT162b2 group and 14 in the placebo group died; during the open-label : period, 3 participants in the BNT162b2 group and 2 in the original placebo : group who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths were : considered to be related to BNT162b2 by the investigators. Causes of death : were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4). : 表S4中，疫苗组和对照组死于新冠的人数为1：2，没有统计意义。 : ...................
【 在 potassium (镇) 的大作中提到: 】 : 说的是防死亡，当然我的标题也没写清楚。 : 你所说的那个91%的efficacy，已经是笑话了，我想我们就不要再讨论了。 : "Simply put, the very best scientific evidence currently available to : mankind does not support the widely held contention" that these vaccines : lower the risk of death in the studied time period. : tell me what is wrong with this statement?
More and more developed countries are authorizing the vaccines for 5-11. What makes the whole bunch of losers here think they know better? No offense, "losers" simply serves as a reminder that you trumpers just lost the election and all those cases.
怎么肥四，苗厂自己花钱做的研究都无法证明疫苗[防死亡]（修改）有效？
Recent COVID-19 research sponsored by vaccine makers and the federal
government may actually undermine the rationale for vaccine mandates.
Two studies published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine (
NEJM) showed statistically insignificant differences between participants
who received vaccinations or placebos in Pfizer and Moderna trials.
All deaths reported during the vaccine trials, regardless of listed cause,
were similarly close between vaccine (31) and placebo (30) groups in the two appendices.
Indiana University medical professor Allon Friedman flagged the studies in a Brownstone Institute essay Thursday, calling their design "the gold
standard and most rigorous scientific tool available to examine cause and
effect relationships" between vaccination and death.
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/covid-vaccine-mandates-
undermined-research-sponsored-vaccine-makers
不符合我们期望结果的都是阴谋论
其实就是数据massage，作假，
这中网站玩指鹿为马，颠倒黑白的本事，真是炉火纯青。右派当年口口声声说左派把车祸带病毒算新冠死亡骂个半死，说他们夸大新冠危害性，到这里就只盯着死亡两个字，而不管“regardless of listed cause”了，正义感都去哪里了？
【 在 potassium (镇) 的大作中提到: 】
: 怎么肥四，苗厂自己花钱做的研究都无法证明疫苗有效？
: Recent COVID-19 research sponsored by vaccine makers and the federal
: government may actually undermine the rationale for vaccine mandates.
: Two studies published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine (
: NEJM) showed statistically insignificant differences between participants : who received vaccinations or placebos in Pfizer and Moderna trials.
: All deaths reported during the vaccine trials, regardless of listed cause,
: were similarly close between vaccine (31) and placebo (30) groups in the
two
: appendices.
: Indiana University medical professor Allon Friedman flagged the studies in a
: ...................
别扣帽子， 具体说那文章哪里有错？
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 这中网站玩指鹿为马，颠倒黑白的本事，真是炉火纯青。右派当年口口声声说左派把车
: 祸带病毒算新冠死亡骂个半死，说他们夸大新冠危害性，到这里就只盯着死亡两个字，
: 而不管“regardless of listed cause”了，正义感都去哪里了？
: two
: a
看来科学的说法应该是打了疫苗容易车祸死 不打疫苗容易新冠死 虽然都是死 但是疫
苗还是死死的有效的
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 这中网站玩指鹿为马，颠倒黑白的本事，真是炉火纯青。右派当年口口声声说左派把车
: 祸带病毒算新冠死亡骂个半死，说他们夸大新冠危害性，到这里就只盯着死亡两个字，
: 而不管“regardless of listed cause”了，正义感都去哪里了？
: two
: a
标题写的很清楚了，无法证明有效。
不是证明无效。
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 这中网站玩指鹿为马，颠倒黑白的本事，真是炉火纯青。右派当年口口声声说左派把车
: 祸带病毒算新冠死亡骂个半死，说他们夸大新冠危害性，到这里就只盯着死亡两个字，
: 而不管“regardless of listed cause”了，正义感都去哪里了？
: two
: a
twitter引用的两篇文章：
https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2110345?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=
ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed
During the blinded, placebo-controlled period, 15 participants in the
BNT162b2 group and 14 in the placebo group died; during the open-label
period, 3 participants in the BNT162b2 group and 2 in the original placebo
group who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths were considered to be related to BNT162b2 by the investigators. Causes of death were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4).
表S4中，疫苗组和对照组死于新冠的人数为1：2，没有统计意义。
Among 42,094 participants 12 years of age or older who could be evaluated
and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, Covid-19 with an onset of 7 days or more after the second dose was observed in 77 vaccine
recipients and in 850 placebo recipients up to the data cutoff date (March
13, 2021), corresponding to a vaccine efficacy of 91.3% (95% confidence
interval [CI], 89.0 to 93.2) (Table 2). Among 44,486 participants with or
without evidence of previous infection who could be evaluated, cases of
Covid-19 were observed in 81 vaccine recipients and in 873 placebo
recipients, corresponding to a vaccine efficacy of 91.1% (95% CI, 88.8 to 93.0).
疫苗有效性91%，这个可是统计显著。
现在，你说说看，辉瑞的研究，怎么个无法证明疫苗有效？因为对照组和疫苗组死于新冠的人太少么？疫苗只有防止死亡一个功能么？
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2113017
A total of 32 deaths had occurred by completion of the blinded phase, with
16 deaths each (0.1%) in the placebo and mRNA-1273 groups; no deaths were
considered to be related to injections of placebo or vaccine, and 4 were
attributed to Covid-19 (3 in the placebo group and 1 in the mRNA-1273 group)
1个疫苗组和3个对照组死于新冠。要说统计不显著，是嫌死的人不够多，是吗？
Vaccine efficacy in preventing Covid-19 illness was 93.2% (95% confidence
interval [CI], 91.0 to 94.8), with 55 confirmed cases in the mRNA-1273 group (9.6 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 7.2 to 12.5) and 744 in the placebo
group (136.6 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 127.0 to 146.8). The efficacy in preventing severe disease was 98.2% (95% CI, 92.8 to 99.6), with 2 cases in the mRNA-1273 group and 106 in the placebo group, and the efficacy in
preventing asymptomatic infection starting 14 days after the second
injection was 63.0% (95% CI, 56.6 to 68.5), with 214 cases in the mRNA-1273 group and 498 in the placebo group.
疫苗有效性93%，防重症98%，可都是统计显著。
这个研究，又是怎么个无法证明疫苗有效？
twitter：Two studies published last month in the New England Journal of
Medicine (NEJM) showed statistically insignificant differences between
participants who received vaccinations or placebos in Pfizer and Moderna
trials.
看着这种黑白颠倒的twitter，你不觉得丢脸么？
【 在 potassium (镇) 的大作中提到: 】
: 标题写的很清楚了，无法证明有效。
: 不是证明无效。
Even they "cannot" prove their efficacy, all the developed countries are
buying them. Looks like trumpers on this board are smarter.
Oh, did you call it Trump's vax back in Feb or March? Did you give credit
to Trump's Wasp Speed?
说的是防死亡，当然我的标题也没写清楚。
你所说的那个91%的efficacy，已经是笑话了，我想我们就不要再讨论了。
"Simply put, the very best scientific evidence currently available to
mankind does not support the widely held contention" that these vaccines
lower the risk of death in the studied time period.
tell me what is wrong with this statement?
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: twitter引用的两篇文章：
: https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2110345?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=: ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed
: During the blinded, placebo-controlled period, 15 participants in the
: BNT162b2 group and 14 in the placebo group died; during the open-label
: period, 3 participants in the BNT162b2 group and 2 in the original placebo
: group who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths
were
: considered to be related to BNT162b2 by the investigators. Causes of
death
: were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4).
: 表S4中，疫苗组和对照组死于新冠的人数为1：2，没有统计意义。
: ...................
当时还没有delta
对付covid19可能有用
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: twitter引用的两篇文章：
: https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2110345?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=: ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed
: During the blinded, placebo-controlled period, 15 participants in the
: BNT162b2 group and 14 in the placebo group died; during the open-label
: period, 3 participants in the BNT162b2 group and 2 in the original placebo
: group who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths
were
: considered to be related to BNT162b2 by the investigators. Causes of
death
: were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4).
: 表S4中，疫苗组和对照组死于新冠的人数为1：2，没有统计意义。
: ...................
新冠疫苗防死亡的机理是打进去该死的14天内死亡，
14天后绝对是降低了死亡率。
基于这一点我不怀疑其有效性。
呵呵。防死亡无效。也就是因为疫苗组死得还是比对照组少。要是换过来，标题早改成打了疫苗死亡率是不打疫苗的200%和300%了。
【 在 potassium (镇) 的大作中提到: 】
: 说的是防死亡，当然我的标题也没写清楚。
: 你所说的那个91%的efficacy，已经是笑话了，我想我们就不要再讨论了。
: "Simply put, the very best scientific evidence currently available to
: mankind does not support the widely held contention" that these vaccines
: lower the risk of death in the studied time period.
: tell me what is wrong with this statement?
梦遗壶，你年初发文嘲笑右派，说左派能用作弊等等脏手段来赢，右派不能学着干同样的事，就是不能与时俱进，输了活该。才几个月，为了疫苗，又开始指责右派学左派了？你为了疫苗也是拼了，左右开弓打自己脸也无所谓了，板上无人能及呀。另外，疫苗对Delta的感染与传播无效，柳叶刀的文章也说了。对新变种很可能完全无效，moderna和az的老总这几两周都承认了，当然，它们都没你个活五毛病毒科学。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
<br>: 这中网站玩指鹿为马，颠倒黑白的本事，真是炉火纯青。右派当年口口声声说左
派把车
<br>: 祸带病毒算新冠死亡骂个半死，说他们夸大新冠危害性，到这里就只盯着死亡两
个字，
<br>: 而不管“regardless of listed cause”了，正义感都去哪里了？
<br>: two
<br>: a
<br>
明明说的是__无法证明__有效，从来没有说过__证明了__无效。这是两个完全不同的概念。
你连基本的阅读理解都没有掌握，学位是哪里拿的？
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 呵呵。防死亡无效。也就是因为疫苗组死得还是比对照组少。要是换过来，标题早改成
: 打了疫苗死亡率是不打疫苗的200%和300%了。
狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
【 在 hounddog (巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
嗯。你能说出“没有证明无效”就比很多人客观多了。只能说“这个clinical trial”的死亡人数太少，虽然趋势存在，但统计不显著。不过呢，如果防重症能到90%，防死
亡有效也是可预期的。除了这个clinical trial，还有那么多国家，那么多现实的数据，就看你想不想去看了。
【 在 potassium (镇) 的大作中提到: 】
: 明明说的是__无法证明__有效，从来没有说过__证明了__无效。这是两个完全不同的概
: 念。
: 你连基本的阅读理解都没有掌握，学位是哪里拿的？
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
关键问题是这个是药厂自己做的测试, 他们都没法证明是有效. 所以很能说明问题了.
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 嗯。你能说出“没有证明无效”就比很多人客观多了。只能说“这个clinical trial”
: 的死亡人数太少，虽然趋势存在，但统计不显著。不过呢，如果防重症能到90%，防死
: 亡有效也是可预期的。除了这个clinical trial，还有那么多国家，那么多现实的数据
: ，就看你想不想去看了。
友情提醒楼上几位：新英格兰医学杂志是顶级期刊，比cns还要高一等
狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
【 在 hounddog (巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
这只是其中一个clinical trial而已。防止感染和重症都证明了有效，只是因为死亡人数少而统计不显著，不会影响判断。
【 在 lczlcz (lcz) 的大作中提到: 】
: 关键问题是这个是药厂自己做的测试, 他们都没法证明是有效. 所以很能说明问题了.
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
【 在 hounddog (巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
梦虎你账户被盗了？
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 呵呵。防死亡无效。也就是因为疫苗组死得还是比对照组少。要是换过来，标题早改成
: 打了疫苗死亡率是不打疫苗的200%和300%了。
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
【 在 hounddog (巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
笑话你好，笑话再见。
【 在 daemonself (let's go Brandon) 的大作中提到: 】
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
【 在 hounddog (巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
为什么对防止感染有效？ 这个是疫苗， 又不是什么药．
还有他们哪个测试里面证明疫苗对死亡有效呢? 贴一个出来看看?
【 在 DreamTiger (祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 这只是其中一个clinical trial而已。防止感染和重症都证明了有效，只是因为死亡人
: 数少而统计不显著，不会影响判断。
: .
你查一下你们州死亡里面有多少打了疫苗，多少没打，反正在你心里打了疫苗的都是小白鼠，你就把现实当成一个巨大的clinical trial好了。
【 在 lczlcz(lcz) 的大作中提到: 】
: 为什么对防止感染有效？ 这个是疫苗， 又不是什么药．
: 还有他们哪个测试里面证明疫苗对死亡有效呢? 贴一个出来看看?
狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
【 在 hounddog(巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
: 你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
笑话你好，笑话再见。
【 在 hounddog (巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
: 你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛狗就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
:
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
:
你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
<br>: 笑话你好，笑话再见。
<br>
狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
【 在 hounddog (巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
: 你这满版被人追着打的弱智五毛就不要再在这儿当笑话了。
:
: 笑话你好，笑话再见。
:
五毛孽畜早点碰武松李逵。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
【 在 hounddog (巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
: 五毛孽畜早点碰武松李逵。
:
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
:
五毛孽畜早点碰武松李逵。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
【 在 hounddog (巴蒂) 的大作中提到: 】
: 五毛孽畜早点碰武松李逵。
:
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
:
More and more developed countries are authorizing the vaccines for 5-11.
What makes the whole bunch of losers here think they know better? No
offense, "losers" simply serves as a reminder that you trumpers just lost
the election and all those cases.
祝五毛孽畜梦大虫早日碰武松李逵。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。
祝五毛孽畜梦大虫早日碰武松李逵。
【 在 DreamTiger(祝你平安) 的大作中提到: 】
: 狗狗你好，狗狗再见。