Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And yet those are often the type of people telling the truth today, while those with medical credentials perpetuate an abundance of slanted lies to fit an agenda. I will take the honest guy culling the raw date over the AMA funded hack any day.
Like those 200 who signed the letter claiming that protestors had no risk of contracting the virus. When government officials also went along with that, you knew that neither the medical establishment or government had any credibility on these issues. It had been totally politicized. And guess what, we had surges almost everywhere in the country two weeks after the mass protests.
Yet church gatherings, weddings, funerals, motorcycle rallies, anti-shutdown rallies, those are all "super-spreader" events.
96% of the people who died had underlying health conditions and average age is 80. Only 4% died of the actual virus itself.
This is like the child's game of telephone. A student ??? who interviewed an JHU adjunct administrator (who has a degree in economics) says that SHE says that. After she examined data that at best is incomplete. Her data analysis is at odds with that of the CDC. Her analysis of or rather her conclusion drawn from the age percentiles demonstratively flawed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humble and Kind
This thread is another example of people choosing what they want to believe. Nothing wrong with that at all, it's your own personal choice to decide what to believe.
I personally believe the study put out by Johns Hopkins University, a "top-notch research University, and many students here are Biomedical engineering students, Public Health majors, or taking the Pre-med track."
No matter what science, facts, religion, "hearsay", or any other source of information people have they will still look for and believe in what they themselves agree with.
"Progress is impossible without change; and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything." George Bernard Shaw.
We can also believe the moon is made of green cheese. Part of what science is that it is a process, comprised of what's called the scientific method. Once again this is NOT an academic study. It was NOT sponsored by JHU. Does that university even have a medical review journal? Academic studies are subject to what is called peer review. With that an integral part of the process of. being accepted for publication by a reputable medical or scientific journal.
Their publication is a strong indicator not that a study is necessarily "right" or "true." But that the scientific methods used were not demonstrably biased or flawed. This is not that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2
Why don't you read why they pulled it? NOT because it was discredited. JHU just didn't like the conclusions people were drawing from it.
It gave people a reason to question the mainstream narrative. In other words, it was real science.
No, it was not real science. Real science may start with questioning the mainstream narrative. Creating an alternative hypothesis. But that does not mean that the scientific process then goes out the door. Scientific rigor should remain. Strong methodological analyses continue. Unsupported conclusions not accepted prima facie. What caused JHU to pull what otherwise would have been a generally meaningless student article was that it had been picked by up rightwing media dragging the universities' name and reputation into a bit of a mess.
There is a disclaimer to the article. She has no real original input into the debate. She is merely repeating the material repeatedly put out by the pro-Trump PACs. Maybe she will get charged with plagiarism.
96% of the people who died had underlying health conditions and average age is 80. Only 4% died of the actual virus itself.
They mainly die because the virus induces the cytokine storm that damages vital organs and causes blood clots. It is very similar to sepsis. If you don't have the virus, you will not get the infection in the bloodstream.
There is a disclaimer to the article. She has no real original input into the debate. She is merely repeating the material repeatedly put out by the pro-Trump PACs. Maybe she will get charged with plagiarism.
They mainly die because the virus induces the cytokine storm that damages vital organs and causes blood clots. It is very similar to sepsis. If you don't have the virus, you will not get the infection in the bloodstream.
Thanks for the cite. The review board for the student letter itself decided to pull the article, not JHU.
Quote:
The News-Letter is an editorially and financially independent, student-run publication. Our articles and content are not endorsed by the University or the School of Medicine, and our decision to retract this article was made independently.
Interesting to read the newsletter analysis of the flaws in Briand's analysis and her omissions. Finally, a 'peer review' of sorts.
Thank you for that. It's a great article. But cherry picking and spinning is not in the country's best interest.
These are direct quotes from the article " More research and data are needed to truly decipher the effect of Covid-19 on deaths in the United States." Braind.
The very last line in the article is the bottom line. " Covid should still be continuously treated as a deadly disease to safeguard the vulnerable population."
You can jockey numbers, spin them into an agenda, but you can not deny that Covid is a deadly disease. because it is just that.
And yet those are often the type of people telling the truth today, while those with medical credentials perpetuate an abundance of slanted lies to fit an agenda. I will take the honest guy culling the raw date over the AMA funded hack any day.
I am a technical writer by trade, and while you are correct that one does not have to be a medical professional to undertake such a project, it is customary to have it reviewed by professionals before it is published. It’s the technical writer’s job to translate complex information and data into layman’s terms (not to draw conclusions), and then present it to a professional in the field to be reviewed for accuracy. It does not sound like this particular individual did so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
