We interrupt our regularly scheduled program...
for this breaking news story
When does the patently ridiculous become the completely absurd?
When weak-minded climate-captured pseudo-scientists try to relate one unrelatable thing with another unrelatable thing to produce completely nonsensical conclusions.
The once-venerable American Journal of Medicine this month published this piece of complete horse-hockey1 by a medical doctor - Donald Redelmeier, and two MSc graduates (the first with an MMASc - a Masters of Management of Applied Science no less… high qualification for a medical paper2!).
You might be forgiven for thinking, given the venue and the fact that their work was financed by a Canadian Research Chair in Medical Decision Sciences, that this paper would be informative and useful to the current debate on covid vaccination…
But you couldn’t be more wrong !
Being vaccine hesitant - that ‘we’re not saying you’re anti-vax’ way these people like to say that anyone who didn’t line up with a sleeve rolled up and dribble coming out the corner of their mouths for the Covid-19 jabs is a dirty stinking anti-vaxxer… or… *ahem, in plainer words, being someone who has not had a Covid-19 jab, they say, increases your risk of a serious traffic accident.
This group of researchers seem to be a one trick pony (another horse dig there!) - a vacuous group with one dataset that they twist, turn and manipulate to say the same thing but with a new trigger cause.
They’ve previously told us that being in the second trimester of pregnancy, that cataract surgery to improve your vision, the April 20 cannabis celebrations, being obese, diabetes, halloween, having watched the superbowl on tv, a history of gambling, being a recent immigrant, daylight, a full moon, your income tax, fibromyalgia (muscle pain), a new preprint on syncope (fainting - perhaps unsurprisingly and completely unrelated to the covid jabs I’m sure), and even optical illusions are ALL increasing your risk of a traffic crash…
I’d be really worried at this point if you had some sort of traffic-accident-causing disorder composed of some mix of several of the above… perhaps you’re an obese recent immigrant bingo player who had cataract surgery last year? a diabetic who feints because your blood sugar is low due to pregnancy and you keep thinking you see a McDonalds up the road?
Or perhaps not given Redelmeier et al’s desire to get headlines simply by linking any old random thing with traffic accidents. Anyone would be forgiven for thinking Redelmeier and crew have drunk the Klaus Schwab World Economic Forum cool aid while sniffing the Swedish Doom Goblin brand of Net Zero Climate Change cyanoacrylate.
Highly Toxic Greta Glue - For those times when you need something stuck up
Redelmeier doesn’t want you driving when the sun is up. Nor when there’s a full moon. He simply doesn’t want you driving…
Ever
About the only thing his headline-attracting train wreck publication history says decreased traffic accidents is the death of Princess Diana…
What a class act this guy and his research minions are…
Really deserving stuff from his Government and tax-payer funded Canadian Research Chair (*cough)
I do wonder if their work, like the UK’s ONS, suffer from the miscategorisation issue whereby people who recently got vaccinated are categorised as unvaccinated for the first 14 days. Anyone whose car crash is related to a serious adverse event would end up in Redelmeier’s unvaccinated data thus biasing the results. However, I’ll leave others like Dr Clare Craig and Prof Norman Fenton to debunk the really appalling statistics and other biases in the paper…
Suffice to say theres *A LOT* wrong with it.
For those unfamiliar with the term horse hockey, Colonel Potter on MASH used the term to describe when someone was feeding him a complete load of…
That said, in covid times we’ve seen people with some sort of nanomaterial science degree on youtube claiming to know everything medicine and to be a covid misinformation superbuster (thanks Susan Oliver… or maybe not) and a covidian pipette fondler with limited patient-facing experience and the bedside manner of a hyperactive brown mouse who wanted to jab any child that stopped moving long enough even though all the Science (TM) said kids were never really at risk (nobody is missing you Deepti G!)… these people became our bastions of Covid Knowledge (also TM)
I'm in a debate with my husband. I thought the vaccination status determined by >14 days from dose might be a factor. He pointed out in the study this line: "COVID vaccination status was based on the COVAXON database, with further details on product (manufacturer), date of first dose (earlier or later), and completeness (1 or 2 doses)."
Do you think this means vaccination status was determined by date of dose, or 14 days after dose?