US health officials Nix publication of a study on Covid vaccine effectiveness
Comments
ggm
jfengel
They claim "methodological concerns". After all, if the study was done improperly, any conclusions it draws would be misleading.
In this case the methodology involved looking at hospital patients. That's a skewed sample, and the results don't necessarily apply more generally. It doesn't account for (among other things) people who got sick at levels that didn't require a hospital visit.
It's also a routine way to do things. Epidemiologists understand what it means and what it doesn't. And even without an exact understanding, the conclusions people will draw from it also happen to be valid.
They're hypothesizing some unknown skew factor, without being able to name it. Any scientist knows that you can't actually account for every conceivable variable, and holding science up to that standard would be impossible. And when its done exclusively when you don't like the results, that's clearly an excuse masquerading as a methodological concern.
I do believe the most likely reason is that it subverts the WH dominant paradigm, but there's really no evidence and it's possible, albeit I think less likely right now, there is a sound public health, epidemiology or policy reason to push back on publication. What we see in comments is vituperation. I guess if I understood better I might be vituperative too, but I don't.
So rather than add to the hobby horse parade around the table, can I ask if a data scientist in public health can state what might be reasonable concerns? Are there any? Is it common, or apolitical for things like this to be held back, or is it always brain worm people?
Let's face it, stacking advisory committees with anti vaxx bodies bodes ill for this, as does RFKjr as the voice of authority. But that's ad hom on my part too.