The Profoundly Confounding and the Profoundly Unconfounding

Shattering the Efficacy Illusion, Part 3

Articles from the Vaccine Wars can be found here. See Part 1 and Part 2 if you're just getting started.

---

Vaccine Cards: Profoundly Unconfounding

"I'm not offended by blonde jokes because I know that I'm not dumb. And I also know that I'm not blonde." -Dolly Parton

Before I move forward into my own analysis, I'd like to point out that the wealthy have almost certainly been more likely to pony up $200 to $500 for a fake vaccine card (if you don't know the going rate, you might need to up your street smarts). I've had numerous friends, colleagues, and readers admit to purchasing fake vax cards. In one case, somebody I know made a good homemade forgery—just in case they needed the card on them for any purposes. 

Sharyl Attkisson 🕵️‍♂️💼🥋 @SharylAttkisson

Part 3: Allegation: Some drs secretly given the chance by their hospital employer to fake getting Covid vaccine. #VaccineMandates #CovidVaccines @FullMeasureNews @P_McCulloughMD @PierreKory @DrJBhattacharya @DrAseemMalhotra @RepThomasMassie @TheChiefNerd @thackerpd

Who even knows precisely how common this is, but it clearly confounds the confounders because the ability to make or purchase fake documents [obviously] correlates with intelligence/education and wealth (and thus life expectancy). All I can do is take the data at face value, express a result, and then comment on the limitations of the analysis. At least we know that the effect would be one-way, which is to say that these healthier people should make VE look better than it actually is. In other words, fake vaccine cards are simply part of the HUB.

Let's be clear: That didn't happen in numbers worth talking about. There are always anomalies, but I haven't heard of a single case like this, and my network is a diverse one.

---

A Brief History of the Vaccine Safety Datalink: A Profoundly Confounded System

"My friends tell me I have an intimacy problem. But they don't really know me." -Gary Shandling

Big data projects often seem so shiny. So…shiny.

Just remember these wise words from some very wise man or woman: 

"You can't polish a turd!"

Big Data is so shiny…

A name that includes "safety" and "datalink" immediately conjures slick images of the best possible uses of Big Data. The naming of the system is a sly sales job. I suspect that Big Data will one day be better aligned with the interests of people, broadly (like this?), but for now it appears that mass data mining has been the province of a handful of Big Tech billionaires, elite oligarchs, and perhaps most especially the Department of Defense. Unless you're not paying attention at all, you probably have some instinct as to how such centralization of valuable power in the form of data lies at the heart of current global power struggles (see my conversation with J.J. Couey including harvesting of the broadest genetic data pool).

Big Data is smoking something…

The VSD was established in 1990, the same year that the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) was established. The FDA and the CDC were to use these tools as pharmacovigilance systems—or at least to feign interest in pharmacovigilance. These organizations seem to think that a 1.6 order of magnitude (~40x) explosion of VAERS reports is not meaningful enough to perform a serious investigation including organized autopsies, yet despite well-paid academic consultants at Harvard suggesting system improvements, nobody was motivated to update it (but we pay millions of dollars annually for it).

The VSD on the other hand is fawned over by so-called experts such as the highly performative Paul "I draw that line at studies on eight mice" Offit.

Mathew Crawford @EduEngineer

"I don't think we should ask tens of millions of people to get vaccinated based on mouse data." -Offit No shit, Sherlock, but when you walk ten paces toward insanity, the next one feels expected.

rumble.comDr. Paul Offit Surprisingly Speaks Out Against the FDA Authorizing Pfizer’s Latest Boosters“Right now they are saying that we should trust mouse data and I don’t think that should ever be true. I don’t think you should ever ask tens of millions of people to get a vaccine based on mouse data

The VSD was one of several sources incorporated into the CDC's Vaccine Safety Technical (VaST) work group reports.

To be clear: used properly, the VSD is a potentially better tool for tracking safety data for drugs and other medical therapies and interventions. Its champions will point to the system's tracking of millions of Americans without the reporting bias drawback of VAERS, and the ability to mine data using Bayesian statistical filters that correct for some confounding variables that bias outcomes. But none of that matters if one single and enormous confounding bias (the HUB) is left uncorrected. We can be certain that American consumers of medical consumers are unaware of the problem.

We should also wonder whether or not the people running the VSD and using it are aware of the misleading statistics generated by the VSD system. They should be. Responsible researchers have previously lamented a lack of state and local surveillance programs (McCarthy et al, 2011) needed to formulate more complete data sets that would increase N (sample/patient sizes) in papers in which the HUB goes uncorrected.

If that uncorrected bias is known by insiders, then all the advantages of the VSD are accrued to actors seeking the game the system for profit or power. These incentives do not align with any plan to improve it. Nearly everyone associated with the system could be entirely unaware of its use as a tool by those interested in using it to mislead people. In theory, this is a lot like rent seekers selling access to political networks. And while the National Academy of Sciences complained in 2005 about a lack of transparency of the VSD system, those complaints have gone essentially unanswered. In fact, evidence that the complaint was ever submitted on record was difficult to track down (thank you Wayback Machine).

Paul Offit explains the "Ten Mouse Minimum Testing Standard" (TMMTS) for The Vaccine Science to colleagues.

Let's be clear: the VSD is designed in a way that generates an illusion of safety and efficacy for all vaccines and biological products by ignoring the HUB. The VSD's own publications display a profound HUB with respect to the COVID-19 vaccines. In the VSD system, the vaccinated were as much as 72% less likely than the unvaccinated to die of non-COVID causes. For the majority of demographics, the HUB appears to be greater than 60%, and is highest with respect to the mRNA genetic quasi-vaccines.

When looking at signals of vaccine efficacy (VE) in U.S. county data, we find that median household income almost perfectly tracks (and usually outperforms) vaccine status as a determiner of who dies from COVID-19. In fact, more income seems to be more protective from COVID-19 for a county than vaccines. Maybe lockdowns weren't such a good idea…

This fundamental flaw in the VSD—that it does not correct for health/wealth/education as variables that influence outcomes—needs to be understood and acted on.

---

We have now paved the way for our primary arguments. Stay tuned…