FDA exploits fake science to inflict the public with dangerous vaccines, and who knows what else. Here are two examples of how it is done
FDA exploits fake science to inflict the public with dangerous vaccines, and who knows what else. Here are two examples of how it is done
It’s the Bayesian analysis, baby!
There is only one way you can get a bad drug or vaccine licensed. That way is to apply fake science to it. Because the paperwork has to exist. Studies must be done. The i’s and t’s must be dotted and crossed. That is thought to save every public health bureaucrat’s derrière. The studies do not have to make sense. They just have to exist.
And so now we have the reveal that FDA scientists knew they were dealing with fake science on the COVID vaccines. They used a technique called “empirical Bayesian datamining” or EB as one method of analysis, though it was known to be useless at picking up problems in this setting.
Seventeen years ago I challenged an FDA author for making incorrect assertions about reports of Gulf War syndrome in VAERS reports on anthrax vaccine. I had a copy of the entire dataset, via FOIA, so I knew the author, FDA’s Manette Niu, MD, had falsely minimized the vaccine injury findings in her paper. She claimed to use empirical Bayesian analysis. So I asked her what exactly had been done to the data—how had it been analyzed to come up with the wrong results?
You know what she told me? There was a company in Massachusetts that had developed the method for data analysis, and it was proprietary! FDA just sent them the data, and they furnished FDA with the results, and FDA had no knowledge of how it had beern analyzed! Pay contractor to get desired answer, and FDA remains blameless for mis-analyzing the data. What a perfect business model for both FDA and the contractor.
The only reason I got this much information was that I essentially threatened her with a potential complaint of scientific misconduct—so she brought in her boss, who recognized a problem, and offered to make a correction to the paper. But now I see the abstract is still lying about the results:
And the correction can’t be accessed without a subscription to the journal Vaccine.
And she still works at FDA and was one of those who studied COVID vaccine safety:
For example,
Perfectly safe. Yup. For adolescents. Forget myocarditis.
Here is the CHD story about a similar episode that relates to using a worthless method of analysis on the COVID vaccines. I wonder if it is still proprietary.
