But today the NYT ran a opinion piece basically arguing the Food and Drug Administration should okay the Pfizer mRNA shot for children under 5 even if they fail the ongoing clinical trial.
This hideousness was titled
A Smarter Way to Think About the Under-5 Vaccine
As soon as I saw the headline I knew it would be bad. But I couldn’t imagine how bad.
Imma translate it for you from scared academic phonics into English:
Pfizer’s mRNA shot appears to be failing its clinical trial in little kids.
Yes, it can’t even manage to demonstrate benefit in a trial intentionally designed to be as easy as possible to pass. (Remember, the pivotal clinical trials for mRNA jabs in adults showed a HUGE benefit against Covid infection, a benefit that doesn’t exist.)
I, Aubrey Clayton, PhD, wish to force my three young children to take a biotechnology that is useless for them to protect them from a disease that is an infinitesimal risk to them.
That way I can stop abusing them by forcing them to have outdoor play dates in subfreezing temperatures and wear masks on their tiny faces. Because I’m scared, or my second cousin has long Covid, or I have pronouns in my biography, who knows?
Point is, I want them to get the shot. Like about 10 percent of parents of little kids nationally, and 100 percent of the parents of little kids I know, I WANT THEM TO GET THE SHOT. I WANT I WANT.
Sad me. It looks like the FDA may do what it has done for generations, which is require that thetrial designed to show a medicine works actually show it works.
Sad me so sad. So I am proposing an alternative pathway to approval. It’s called the, “I really want this shot to work so I’m going to assume it works and look for evidence supporting that assumption” pathway for approval.
Then I can give my children the useless biotechnology and feel better.
Yay me.
—
This is Aubrey. He/him has thoughts.
—
Okay, here’s the thing.
Drug development is really hard. Pharmaceuticals and biologics mostly don’t work. Sometimes they have serious side effects. Randomized clinical trials are the ONLY way to know with any reasonable certainty whether a new therapeutic will do what its developer says it does.
A drug that fails to show meaningful clinical benefit (which does NOT mean cure) with more than 95 percent statistical significance in a carefully designed clinical trial is likely to be at best useless and at worst harmful in the real world. Trials generally OVERSTATE the effectiveness of medicines for all kinds of complex reasons.
Trials aren’t perfect. But in a world filled with error, they are not just our best but our only real alternative to guesswork.
Find a different way to mess up your kids, Aubrey.
I agree that this guy's argument is absurd on its face. Unfortunately, Alex, your own argument, that randomized trials are the ONLY way to know whether a drug works, is almost as absurd. We have all seen firsthand how easily they manipulated they are.
Please cite your source for this if you're going to keep making this absurd claim, because a top Yale epidemiologist, who knows a whole lot more about clinical trials than you do, says you are flat-out wrong, and that you're feeding into the drug industry's efforts to discredit non-randomized trials so that they can continue their monopoly on drug trials. Read about how wrong you are here:
As Dr. Harvey Risch, MD, makes clear, the whole body of scientific evidence must be considered when evaluating a drug. Randomized, controlled trials are just one way in which to test a drug's efficacy, and they can be very easily manipulated. He strongly advised against what he calls randomized trial "fetishism."
All the Covid-19 vaccine trials are a case in point: They have all been heavily manipulated to show safety and efficacy, when in reality the vaccines are neither safe nor effective, for any age group. Pfizer is in the process of seeing how it can manipulate the trial for children under five to skate through the approval process. I have no doubt they will submit the vaccine for approval even with no efficacy.
I agree with you on your conclusion and suggest that if we return full legal liability to drug makers for their vaccines, that they would quickly come up with ways to ensure that the vaccine trials would not be manipulated, because people who are on the hook legally want to know if the risks will outweigh the benefits.
You didn't answer my question. I agree that RCTs can be manipulated. And yes, I think the pfizer trials will ultimately be proven to have been manipulated. But you seem to be pushing for getting rid of RCTs completely. How then will we test drug efficacy and safety???
We are experiencing the end result of massive regulatory capture. The very entities chartered to protect citizens from the depredations of big pharmaceutical concerns are now funded by them.
We hired foxes to guard the hen house from the entrenched elite foxes.
Government sponsored “science” is dead. As currently constituted they cannot regain my trust.
No I am not advocating for getting rid of RCT's. I am sharing the opinion of Dr. Risch who says we need to look at all available evidence, including RCTs. We also can't assume a study is good simply because it claims to be an RTC. All the Pfizer vaccine trials are RCTs but are heavily manipulated and therefore worthless.
We all AGREE that RCTs can be manipulated. So what is the solution?
"Dr. Risch says look at all available evidence..." What exactly is ALL AVAILABLE EVIDENCE??? What other evidence can we get BEFORE the drug is released??
Observe what happen when said drug be given to bacteria (or other microbes), rats, and whatever people want to take it. Have you ever heard the expression, "experimenting with drugs"? Well, people who do that have an obligation to publish!
If there is absolutely no cure for the shingles, why get a vaccine which does nothing to prevent it and might just give it to you? Like the pneumonia shot that could give you pneumonia or the flu shot that sometimes gives you the flu.
How bout no shots and treat yourself naturally? Not to mention the hoards of aborted feral cells in them.
The same happened to me, the only time I had a flu shot, about 8 years ago, I actually got the flu, I had never gotten sick with the flu or anything like it, never again after that one time. Also my sister who’s an ophthalmologist in Venezuela got a flu shot and got so sick she had to be hospitalized, she never again gotten the flu shot and thinks that no one really needs it
I don't remember exact timeliness, but I haven't gotten flu in over 5 6 years. About same time I quit volunteer job where they required flu shit.... and I stopped taking it altogether.
Thank you Darby- Alex has been wildly off the rails since his off-key anti-Ivermectin rant on the Malaysian IVM testing. Alex is no genius and while clearly he has anti-vaxx derangement syndrome, Alex is not reasonable on his assessments of Ivermectin. In short, he is a one-act play and his limitations are severe and require recognition.
Excellent points from Al Rosen. Al, Bill Gates and Alex all have the same medical degree. Alex's stumbles on Ivermectin clearly show a blind spot in intellect and reason.
Children don't need to be vaccinated. They have a 1 10th of 1 percent ratio of getting sick. 300 kids out of 62 million died. That's nothing compared to car accident or the real flu. Do we say hey you can't ride in a car? Its stupid. When are the far left people going to admit they were lied to and gaslighted for 18 months. And that they ruined their kids lives and our businesses with their crazy policies. Look at FL and how he let the schools stay open and the no masks policy. In Orange County CA the mask mandates did not exist. The LA county had the masks. They had the same amount of deaths. Its a joke. Attacking anyone like Alex that has a different opinion is not right. Why don't you go back to twitter
They have them already; what they now dream of is 'up to two years old' 'abortions.' In case 'mom' has changed her mind. (Not too much written yet but the topic has been broached).
I have long had my issues with this anti-humanist charlatan. It is a crime that his hateful philosophy has been validated and disseminated from what was one an esteemed institution of higher learning. God, with whom Singer has had no acquaintance, will not look kindly on the Evil Professor. He was given the gift of an excellent intellect and chose to use it to promote harm to children who are conceived in God's own image and likeness.
How will the puppet spew his disingenuous narrative tonight? Has there ever been a puppet like Brandon in the WH who will have absolute zero remorse to lie once again to those who pay his salary.
He will declare victory like the polling firm wants. If he's smart he will stop paying hospitals extra to find covid cases. Without the financial incentives to test everybody, the whole thing should fall apart quickly.
I told a friend of mine yesterday when she cited the pandemic as a reason to not go indoors: "The pandemic is over. Biden will announce that tomorrow night." The look on her face of sincere joy still amuses me.
Helrna, you are respecting people who by and large would like you to be put in a concentration camp or just tie you down and force the DEATHVAX intlover. And btw, killing their own kids.
Sadly, I had to pull back from a number of friends over all this. They can't be reasoned with, and it's worse than pointless to try. I don’t want to be snarky or impatient with them. I also don't want to be inauthentic myself. The one I really miss is my best friend from college, a truly dedicated teacher. .... and unfortunately also a local teacher's union leader, buying the COVID panic narrative hook, line and sinker.
Yes you are totally right. People that did all those crazy policies don't want to admit they were lied to and they ruined their children's lives and other people's businesses. Businesses close but Walmart, Target, and fast food restaurants stayed open. SO stupid
He's dropping w.h. mask mandates. His state of the union address will declare victory. Gotta end the mask mandates before midterms to make dimwits forget that they've been had. They can say vaccines saved us and move on to the next deadly fake virus.
Remember though...for Congress, the mask mandates are only being "dropped" because they are at lower levels of covid. It's not really completely dropped...just hiding in the background waiting for its chance to come roaring back.
Masks are as effective as wearing lace or nylons in the wrong place. None are serious until they don a P100 respirator. Anything less is Totalitarian Theater, feel-good attire, the compliance of utter fools.
NO its being dropped because Democrats are trying to back peddle from ruining this country and wanting to get through the next election. They will bring them back after the November elections. More people should do what the truckers did
Totally agree as well. They are officially spinning it as low cv levels. US capitol physician speaks of it here (apologize in advance re the "source" - fastest one I found).
Unfortunately, it looks like many of the "dimwits," and many who only took the vaxxes due to coercion and deception, are going to be facing increasing health problems and premature deaths over the years, and that disaster may well be obvious to nearly-all by November. Big post on this coming to my PostModernConservative substack soon.
The prognosis sure looks like it will be increasing health problems including a great many autoimmune type diseases, as well as premature deaths, but to be honest, I don't think most of the vax victims will connect the dots due to the passage of time.
No matter who you vote in as potentially being good, Pharma bribery dissuades them from any majority values. We've reached that broad diminution in personal integrity. Their only ideal is one they must conceal, suppress its reaching the surface.
He knew at one time, but chose the path of perpetual lies as the 50 years mounted in the swamp. What we see now is an accumulative mess and you know what they say about if you tell a lie enough. He is so far gone now it doesn't matter and it is so very obvious isn't it.
Yes. Cumulative sin damage. He lives his own hell before he's even arrived at Judgment Day. Maybe he'll croak tonight during his speech--it'd be a fitting end and sign, but of course, also a disaster of immense proportions as then we'd be saddled with Harris. I try as much as possible not to think about Biden, so shameful a sign he is of how far we've fallen, but sure, events force me to from time to time. Back in August during the Afghanistan debacle, I wrote a mediocre poem on the subject "Was the Today the Day Joe Biden(D) Fell?" Says some of what you do. https://pomocon.substack.com/p/was-today-the-day-joe-biden-d-fell/comments?utm_source=url
I agree. If you look at his entire history of public life, he's a congenital liar from the beginning. As for his mental state, anyone can see there is definite cognitive decline, probably the onset of dementia. Compare his speeches of a year ago, two years ago, 5 years ago and so on, and it's quite obvious he is diminished mentally at this point. However, I do think that on a limited level he is quite aware he is lying and he is willing to at least go along with the things his Obama team wants him to do (and say) even if he doesn't think of these actions himself. But he's not entirely "out of it" as we'd like to believe.
My grandparents (WW2 gen), if they were alive would be appalled at what is happening in the world because of Covid. Its a world they they wouldn’t recognize…sad.
We are suffering all this because Russia was not consecrated by Pope to Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Bastards playing dress up Pope since Oct 1958 HATE Fatima, Our Lady.
Putin asked Whore Francis about Consecration. Catholics, especially those who desperately want true Pope and Consecration, absolutely 💯 stunned. The irony... beyond irony.
Of course, This is a small internal Catholic issue, mainly brought up by delusional Catholics.
The Church, nearly irrelevant save for another institutional voice, has backed away from the abyss only to fall off the nearby cliff. Out maneuvered by the compass & square to its self-implosion embracing the darkest of the worldly.
So Argus, you can insult what you think is the Catholic Church but won't respond when engaged because you know nothing but what you've been told about the very Church Jesus Christ founded..
I'm almost off for Lent, but you're another ignorant bigot that has zero interest in finding out about Catholic Church.
Btw, Catholic Church is in eclipse with 200k. Not 1.2 billion. 1 resident priest in Texas. Less than 10 Bishops in United States... and we have it the best
Why did secret societies (almost) destroy Catholic Church?
What was so dangerous about us?
Permanent Instructions of Alta Vendita. Bella Dodd for starters.
Catholic Church will put these bastards down. Great Age 9f Mary. Triumph of Immaculate Heart of Mary. Peace of Christ thru Reign of Christ
A possible starting lineup: Consistently lower the educational bar, place the blame of shortcomings on other people, make everyone comfy enough that they get complacent and add a heaping dose of groupthink.
It's not that Americans are weak-minded but that many keep their mouths shut out of fear. The middle one-third won't challenge the side they think is "winning" as they perceive it as risky. It's actually a pretty a pretty rationale course and is how much of the world's population operates. The past rugged individualism of Americans is quite unique and we are seeing a reversion to more typical human behavior.
The good news is that our side is now "winning" more and more so we can expect the middle third to swing our way.
BYW, Anyone who feels the need to announce their pronouns should be immediately dismissed out of hand. Either they are delusional and think people can't tell their sex by looking at them or they are using it to signal their virtue. These are not serious people.
In my 60 years on the planet, no one has ever gotten my pronouns wrong (and I don't think my experience is an outlier). Not a single time. But then my name isn't "Aubrey" so who knows what this guy went through as a kid.
Just noticed this guy starts his bio with who his parents are (child of two math teachers), who does that? It's important that we know he was actually bred to be "elite" apparently.
Your first paragraph defines weak-mindedness - fear of the schizoid mob. What are you preserving when you look in the mirror, only to see advanced jaundice?
i think the answer has a lot to do with the fact that an awful lot of people don't think that life should be hard
that they deserve an easier life
that an easier life exists
which it doesn't, but they grab with both fists at every empty promise
but not all
some people feel they can compete with the struggle
maybe some of these people were born stronger or smarter or better looking & derive some inner confidence from their inborn traits or circumstances
maybe some of these people clue into the religious premise that this world is a test and the rewards come later
not sure, but the the little brothers of the world seem to want to believe with all their hearts that the government is a fair parent that will level the playing field for them & tuck them in at night
it never quite works out that way because it can't but maybe next time will be different
The painful cost of that has been entirely forgotten thanks to so many undeserved protections and the escapement from personal responsibility. One can coddle oneself to death. Await the near future.
In a couple more: equal right to try is good. Everybody gets a turn at bat, that way society as a whole finds lots more good batmen than otherwise.
But equal right to keep batting despite not being equally good at it is bad.
And the next is the point of no return: equal outcome. Everyone has the right to bat top score.
After which comes where the entire western civilisation is right now: Harrison Bergeron-land. Where it is a crime for anyone to bat more than anyone else, meaning no one can be better than the worst.
From that point you cannot go back.
Edit: hope I got the idioms about batting right, we don't play baseball where I'm from.
I noticed the beginnings of this about 13 years ago and saw it one day while watching my 13 year old granddaughter playing in a volleyball game. When either side messed up, lost the ball etc., I saw them giving each other a high five at every single error. I couldn't believe what I saw seeing. I started paying attention and then noticed there were no real "winners" to these games, but everyone got a nice little "participation" trophy. It became apparent that with many other sports games, winning by a large margin was frowned upon and one time when a team really creamed the other one with a huge score against zero, that score suddenly disappeared. Then there was an English teacher who didn't like to use red pen to correct grammar/spelling errors on essays because it would be negative for the students and make them feel bad. The remedial type classes for students who weren't doing as well in math or English disappeared, and those students were merged into the regular classes where they no longer got special tutoring and attention. I wondered where all that stupidity was going....now I know.
Exactly! they have been diligently and patiently working not only here in the USA but all over the world, I’m originally from Venezuela and I can tell you that the left agenda has been spreading from the 60s across universities and more recently after Chavez took power the public schools curriculum were drastically changed, they basically became socialism propaganda :/
Dear Aubrey Clayton....Since you feel this way I suggest that you contact Pfizer immediately and enroll YOUR children in the ongoing trial. I know it's a little late but I'm sure Pfizer would be happy to include them.
In fact we’ve reached the point at which PhD is an indication of crippled critical thinking.
Also often equivalent to “Open for Business” for quid pro quo arrangements of whitewashing dangerous experiments in exchange for money or stature or political power.
Also, being the child of two teachers isn't helpful, as many of them have succumbed to the notion that taking courses and passing tests is equal to wisdom and reason.
One reason this covid era has been so detrimental to my mental health is now knowing I live around people who are perfectly fine torturing and experimenting on children. As more images come out of unmasked adults at Super Bowls and parties and masked children at recess I can’t help but think we are a sicker society then once thought.
Same same same. March 2020 to September 2021. Masks inside and outside. Heavy push to vax the kids. 90%+ over 12 are, 60isj% over 5. The parents here are brainwashed zombies spouting I’m holier than thou BS propaganda. 🤮
UChicago, Berkeley, Boston, PhD, uses pronouns. Doesn't get any more NPC than that. And this man is a statistician? Such a disgrace, his poor children will pay the toll of his virtue signaling.
I've yet to actually meet someone who states a preferred pronoun, but I feel fairly certain that when I do, I will go ballistic and no telling what I will say. It won't be nice, I'm sure of that.
Not that I agree, but I do understand the reasoning behind stating pronouns & not assuming. But if you were to ASK ME my pronouns, you're saying, "Hussy, I can't tell if you're a woman," which is super insulting.
"I can't tell if you're a woman," is absolutely an insult to me. (& lots of people, men & women alike!)
I look & sound & present totally like a chick. I even have a feminine first name. You can go ahead & assume all of that = Hussy is a woman! It's quite fine.
I read this line, "But the whole idea of statistical significance has been losing favor among many statisticians, for two good reasons. For one, this thinking is inherently binary; "
& thought, FFS, now anything "binary" must be bad?!
Aubrey's "position" is a prime example of a narcissist's use of cognitive dissonance. I want x to be true so i am going to believe it to be true, hence in my own world it "is true". It is a detachment from reality that is a sign of derangement.
It's also worth noting that multiple times, Aubrey asserts the use of accurate data. Would seem one of the "Editors" would tie that assertion to the story earlier this week about the CDC being, uhm, shall we say, "less than forthcoming" on the data it has released. I agree w/ Publius--his wants overpower the real stats & data.
Well, according to Aubrey 100% of the people he knows with little kids want the Vax. My advice to Aubrey is to broaden his damn social circle and then grow a pair and a brain and do some serious research on these covid shots. Please do not let your kids be part of the experiment. The sh*t is already starting to hit the fan.
Grow a pair. Methinks that train left the station long time ago for Aubrey, he/him. If you have to use use he/him, doesn't it kind of imply that you know you lack a pair?
People like this don’t write pieces like this because they are trying to do good. This piece signals to the establishment that he will play ball. He will be a manipulative propagandist on their behalf, and as such, they will employ him and shower him with money and prominence.
That’s what this kind of article is about. These people are deranged.
Exactly right. They view religion as superstition and will go to any length to show how much smarter they are for putting all their faith in science. Science is their religion.
Good science does not happen at warp speed. It is methodical, careful, and thorough...which takes time. Slow science can also end up being bad, but rushed science is never ever good.
My blood ran cold….freezing actually. I thought my blood couldn’t be any colder but I was wrong. The most Optimistic of Americans can hardly see past the onslaught of:
Ukraine. Canada, Border Crisis, Vaccine and pandemic over but continued by Government flunkies , intentional energy DEpendence, pronouns, George Soros, inflation, Education (from pre-school to college), OMG elections, Presidential Dementia (yeah that’s now a thing) aforementioned delivery of the State of the Union address, Hunter Biden, what’s her names diary, Dr. Jill deafening silence, leftist Supreme Court aka black woman, dead children every day in Atlanta.
Ad Infinitum. (I forgot the VP chuckles and her disgusting one button jackets.
Line must be drawn. A big red line that they see! No 5 year old should have to play Russian Roulette with a vaccine because their parents are too stupid And brainwashed to actually submit.
The worst is the one using kids spouting lines like "History shows that vaccines work !' But, do they ? The more I find out about the FDA and our other other "Health" agencies, the more I question all vaccines. My skepticism of the HPV shot several years back kept my kids from getting them. My distrust of government is being rewarded. Sadly.
Here in Kalifornia, I just heard a new one on the radio today. A young girl talking about how she got Covid a year ago and now she can't run without getting winded, and she can't think clearly. GET THE SHOT!!
I wonder what the long term psychological damage will be to kids whose parents are terrified of a virus that poses no threat to them and are too lazy to look beyond fake news about the vaccines.
I'm thinking the parents are so psychologically nuts that they won't even realize their kids are damaged too, the kids will seem like chips off the proverbial crazy blocks.
This will be the first generation to euthanize their parents. The cat will be out of the bag by the time these kids are adults that this was a major psychological operation and their parents abused them terribly for two years for failing to realize that the threat to them was zero.
Article for those who don’t subscribe to NYT (I’m taking the hit for you)
As a parent of three children under 4, I was hit hard by last month’s announcement that the Food and Drug Administration was delaying its review of Pfizer-BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine for children under 5.
Like many caregivers guarding young children against the coronavirus, my winter has been full of rapid tests, mask reorders and outdoor play dates in borderline frostbite conditions. I’m able to manage this because I believe it’s temporary; we just need to hold out a little longer until our children can get vaccinated.
But because I study statistics, I’m also racked with concern that if the data had been assessed in a more nuanced way, we might be putting vaccination appointments on the family calendar right now.
It’s unclear why the F.D.A. paused the review. The most recent data hasn’t been shared, and reporting suggests Pfizer found that the Omicron wave led to many more infections than previously seen in its clinical trial. The decision was made to wait for data on the third dose. Perhaps the two doses were not effective enough for the full group, though earlier data had suggested the vaccines produced a desired immune response for children ages 6 months to 24 months.
The bigger issue, as I see it, is in general statistical methods that are often relied on to evaluate the effectiveness of vaccines and drugs. The standard approach used in almost all clinical trials and endorsed by the F.D.A. requires new drugs to meet an arbitrary statistical threshold, the one people who have taken stats classes may recognize as statistical significance. This is appealing because it serves as a standardized final exam that experimental results all have to pass, unaided by preconceptions on the part of the reviewers or special pleading by the experimenters.
But the whole idea of statistical significance has been losing favor among many statisticians, for two good reasons. For one, this thinking is inherently binary; after the number crunching is complete, results are classified as significant or not significant, suggesting a finality and certitude that are rarely justified, and second, like any standardized test, it’s overly reductive. If relied on too heavily, it becomes a substitute for a more thoughtful, holistic analysis of the data, including important scientific context.
Nearly three years ago, an open letter signed by more than 800 scientists called for an end to the practice, and prominent statisticians, including the head of the American Statistical Association, put it bluntly: “Don’t say ‘statistically significant.’” Too often, they said, this binary labeling of results as worthy or unworthy has become “the antithesis of thoughtfulness,” a shortcut around what should be the hard work of any statistical inquiry.
What we need for the under-5 vaccine trial evaluation, instead of judgments of absolute safety or efficacy, is probable improvement over the next best alternative, taking into consideration all the available information. Even the concept of an emergency use authorization challenges the ordinary F.D.A. binary of approval and disapproval. We should take that idea and extend it.
There is a version of statistics that would be more suitable than significance testing for evaluating this trial data: Bayesian statistics. The essential tenets of this approach are that investigators should constantly update our understanding of any scientific claim based on the latest data and that we never need to label such a claim as definitively proved or disproved.
This methodology has had successes in many domains, from sports analytics to online commerce, and it shines the most when data is limited. Bayesian methods allowed Allied cryptanalysts in World War II to break enemy ciphers using only a few intercepted messages, and similar techniques are essential to marine search-and-rescue operations working from a vessel’s last known position or fragments of debris.
A Bayesian analysis of the vaccine for children under 5 would consider both that Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine has an excellent track record of safety for older children (obviously a 6-month-old is not a 5-year-old, but nor are they an entirely different species) and that we can already make reasonable estimates of how effective a two-dose regimen for little children will be, even against the Omicron variant. And if the newest data shows the vaccine losing effectiveness against this variant at the currently recommended dosages and schedules, statistical techniques that can incorporate this information as quickly as possible should be used to guide any necessary changes to the protocols.
The practice of borrowing information from one experiment to help understand another is not unprecedented. The F.D.A. has acknowledged the value of a Bayesian approach in certain circumstances, including pediatric trials. A 2020 policy document states, “Bayesian inference may be appropriate in settings where it is advantageous to systematically combine multiple sources of evidence, such as extrapolation of adult data to pediatric populations.” And the agency’s guidance for medical device clinical trials — where Bayesian methods have been more accepted for years — includes the endorsement that “Bayesian analysis brings to bear the extra, relevant, prior information, which can help F.D.A. make a decision.” The best way to demonstrate the advantages, when the under-5 vaccine is back up for review, would be for those evaluating the vaccine to put on their Bayesian goggles and consider the whole picture.
Referring to the vaccine trials for children under 5, Dr. Gregory Poland, the founder and director of the Mayo Vaccine Research Group in Minnesota, said recently, “I don’t like that there isn’t more data.” Neither do I and other parents. But I also don’t like that my children are unvaccinated going into year three of the pandemic. If the vaccines are safe — and we know they work well in other age groups — that’s meaningful to me both as a parent and as a statistician.
A 2018 editorial in The Journal of the American Medical Association suggested that when it comes to evaluating trial results, it’s time for clinicians to “embrace their inner Bayesian.” The same goes for the pharmaceutical industry and the agency that regulates it.
Now is the time for a statistical overhaul. If ever there was a trial that cried out for Bayesian methods, this is it. And if ever there were institutions powerful enough to bring about a fundamental change in the ways we interpret data, it would be the F.D.A. and the pharmaceutical companies during the pandemic. In the meantime, people across the country who fret about their unvaccinated young children will continue to do what we’ve become experts at: waiting.
[end]
Aubrey Clayton is a mathematical statistics researcher and a parent to three children under 4. He’s the author of “Bernoulli’s Fallacy: Statistical Illogic and the Crisis of Modern Science.”
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
The article is way worse than I imagined. He/they throw out statistical jargon like Bayesian, to sound smart and then says we just need the jab to "kind of work" for kids under 5 because it is soooo safe and effective for everyone else. This douche nozzle clearly hasn't looked at any data relative to the 'rona for healthy people under the age of 50.
Is it possible for you to post a comment to his article...nicely suggesting that he follow up his article in a few years to report back on how his kids are doing.
I am not familiar with Bayesian statistics, but I note that he cites applications in cryptology, physics (locating ships) and sports analysis. Does not cite anything to do with biology.
Is there any reason to believe these methods can/should be applied to biology, a much more complex science? And yet he is willing to inject children, especially his own, based on his application of Bayesian statistical methods.
Brave browser has the option to block javascript, if you turn on script blocking for NYT then you can read the whole article without that stupid SUBSCRIBE! popup.
You can disable javascript on any browser but it usually takes effect for all websites which is why I like Brave where you can set it for individual sites. I hope this helps!
Never Fear! Microsoft Edge is here to help. Has built-in 'Immersive Reader' allows breaking the paywall on almost ALL WEBSITES. Get it. Use it. Love it. (hint: immediately after the webpage launches, click the 'Reader' button on the URL bar, and it will strip the crap and allow you to read the whole page.
I’m a Parent and a Statistician. There’s a Smarter Way to Think About the Under-5 Vaccine.
By Aubrey Clayton
Dr. Clayton is a mathematical statistics researcher and a parent to three children under 4. He’s the author of “Bernoulli’s Fallacy: Statistical Illogic and the Crisis of Modern Science.”
As a parent of three children under 4, I was hit hard by last month’s announcement that the Food and Drug Administration was delaying its review of Pfizer-BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine for children under 5.
Like many caregivers guarding young children against the coronavirus, my winter has been full of rapid tests, mask reorders and outdoor play dates in borderline frostbite conditions. I’m able to manage this because I believe it’s temporary; we just need to hold out a little longer until our children can get vaccinated.
But because I study statistics, I’m also racked with concern that if the data had been assessed in a more nuanced way, we might be putting vaccination appointments on the family calendar right now.
It’s unclear why the F.D.A. paused the review. The most recent data hasn’t been shared, and reporting suggests Pfizer found that the Omicron wave led to many more infections than previously seen in its clinical trial. The decision was made to wait for data on the third dose. Perhaps the two doses were not effective enough for the full group, though earlier data had suggested the vaccines produced a desired immune response for children ages 6 months to 24 months.
The bigger issue, as I see it, is in general statistical methods that are often relied on to evaluate the effectiveness of vaccines and drugs. The standard approach used in almost all clinical trials and endorsed by the F.D.A. requires new drugs to meet an arbitrary statistical threshold, the one people who have taken stats classes may recognize as statistical significance. This is appealing because it serves as a standardized final exam that experimental results all have to pass, unaided by preconceptions on the part of the reviewers or special pleading by the experimenters.
But the whole idea of statistical significance has been losing favor among many statisticians, for two good reasons. For one, this thinking is inherently binary; after the number crunching is complete, results are classified as significant or not significant, suggesting a finality and certitude that are rarely justified, and second, like any standardized test, it’s overly reductive. If relied on too heavily, it becomes a substitute for a more thoughtful, holistic analysis of the data, including important scientific context.
Nearly three years ago, an open letter signed by more than 800 scientists called for an end to the practice, and prominent statisticians, including the head of the American Statistical Association, put it bluntly: “Don’t say ‘statistically significant.’” Too often, they said, this binary labeling of results as worthy or unworthy has become “the antithesis of thoughtfulness,” a shortcut around
what should be the hard work of any statistical inquiry.
What we need for the under-5 vaccine trial evaluation, instead of judgments of absolute safety or efficacy, is probable improvement over the next best alternative, taking into consideration all the available information. Even the concept of an emergency use authorization challenges the ordinary F.D.A. binary of approval and disapproval. We should take that idea and extend it.
There is a version of statistics that would be more suitable than significance testing for evaluating this trial data: Bayesian statistics. The essential tenets of this approach are that investigators should constantly update our understanding of any scientific claim based on the latest data and that we never need to label such a claim as definitively proved or disproved.
This methodology has had successes in many domains, from sports analytics to online commerce, and it shines the most when data is limited. Bayesian methods allowed Allied cryptanalysts in World War II to break enemy ciphers using only a few intercepted messages, and similar techniques are essential to marine search-and-rescue operations working from a vessel’s last known position or fragments of debris.
A Bayesian analysis of the vaccine for children under 5 would consider both that Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine has an excellent track record of safety for older children (obviously a 6-month-old is not a 5-year-old, but nor are they an entirely different species) and that we can already make reasonable estimates of how effective a two-dose regimen for little children will be, even against the Omicron variant. And if the newest data shows the vaccine losing effectiveness against this variant at the currently recommended dosages and schedules, statistical techniques that can incorporate this information as quickly as possible should be used to guide any necessary changes to the protocols.
The practice of borrowing information from one experiment to help understand another is not unprecedented. The F.D.A. has acknowledged the value of a Bayesian approach in certain circumstances, including pediatric trials. A 2020 policy document states, “Bayesian inference may be appropriate in settings where it is advantageous to systematically combine multiple sources of evidence, such as extrapolation of adult data to pediatric populations.” And the agency’s guidance for medical device clinical trials — where Bayesian methods have been more accepted for years — includes the endorsement that “Bayesian analysis brings to bear the extra, relevant, prior information, which can help F.D.A. make a decision.” The best way to demonstrate the advantages, when the under-5 vaccine is back up for review, would be for those evaluating the vaccine to put on their Bayesian goggles and consider the whole picture.
Referring to the vaccine trials for children under 5, Dr. Gregory Poland, the founder and director of the Mayo Vaccine Research Group in Minnesota, said recently, “I don’t like that there isn’t more data.” Neither do I and other parents. But I also don’t like that my children are unvaccinated going into year three of the pandemic. If the vaccines are safe — and we know they work well in other age groups — that’s meaningful to me both as a parent and as a statistician.
A 2018 editorial in The Journal of the American Medical Association suggested that when it
comes to evaluating trial results, it’s time for clinicians to “embrace their inner Bayesian.” The same goes for the pharmaceutical industry and the agency that regulates it.
Now is the time for a statistical overhaul. If ever there was a trial that cried out for Bayesian methods, this is it. And if ever there were institutions powerful enough to bring about a fundamental change in the ways we interpret data, it would be the F.D.A. and the pharmaceutical companies during the pandemic. In the meantime, people across the country who fret about their unvaccinated young children will continue to do what we’ve become experts at: waiting.
Thank you for posting this. So, basically he wants to use an analytic method that will allow for a predetermined conclusion, if he doesn't like the conclusion arrived at by proven analytical tools. Pure genius. Get him a McArthur, even if he's over 30. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Exactly. And as it is you can already rig trials to get data that shakes out as significant to get the answer you want. The Pfizer sub 5 data was so abysmal it didn’t work so he wants an even worse way of fabricating data.
What amount of injections are now given too children by the time they reach age 6. Is it 64 or 76 not including the mRNA injections? I imagine it varies state to state. How does a fragile organic developing human life form stand a chance of living a healthy life with such repeated physiological insult by big pharma created concoctions? Sure they may be alive, but at what cost to their vitality and immunity etc?
Once again, proving the words of Malcom X and Cassius Clay to be 100% correct - "The biggest danger to the black man is the white liberal". Idiots like this guy wanting to give little kids the Covid shots prove they truly believe in their own moral and intellectual superiority. Blind, cult like belief that is not only dangerous to themselves but all of us as these clowns permeate academia and most political bodies. They have moved from being the saviors of the poor blacks to now being the savior for all the rest of us rubes. I think not. Pray, plan, prepare and RESIST.
As I am in the epicenter of “woke” and “mask culture” I am so grateful for very person commenting here. Thank you for letting me know the entire world is not insane.
What is everyone so damn afraid of??!! Safety. Safety. Safety. Safety. It's obsessive and profoundly illogical.
I once met a woman whose 7 year-old fell out of a 1st floor window and died. Awful tragic story. But she went around preaching that buildings should no longer have windows on the first floor or at least they should have bars on them because children could die.
I think this is a last gasp from people who cannot handle seeing this 2 year mostly hoax, unmasked no pun, before their eyes. They will need to return to the climate change for meaning to their existence. Maybe seeing queen Nancy's face for the first time since she was in the hair salon, will give some comfort tonight.
"Randomized clinical trials are the ONLY way to know with any reasonable certainty whether a new therapeutic will do what its developer says it does."
I think Dr. Eric Ruben, of the FDA panel, might disagree with this. He's the guy that said, in reference to giving this to kids, "We're never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it."
So, I would say randomized control trials aren't the ONLY way to know. You could, as we have, just start jabbing as many people as possible with the therapeutic and then maybe discern how sick they all got from it. And, then, cover up the data because who needs to see *that*.
By the way, you know what is the main difference between Putin ordering the invasion and killing of Ukrainians, and Biden enforcing Co-Fib shots on people that have the likelihood of killing Americans?
Putin says his invasion is justified and basically says, “it’s my right, and I don’t care what happens!“
Biden? “I’m here to help you, and, we don’t care if people die because, that’s the price you pay when you’re trying to save other peoples’ lives, so take a shot, and, we forgot the the part where you are supposed to have a choice!”
Both sociopaths, one with a little more transparency, not much, but Biden, he is the consummate sociopath, he will shoot you, and then demand over your dying corpse, “thank me you bastard!“…
It is wild that the tagline from his book is "The foundation of the problem is a misunderstanding of probability and its role in making inferences from observations." The irony.
Bad. Sad. Idiotic. I've always known that we have a certain number of idiots living among us (intelligence, like most things, displays on a sort of bell curve) but these past two years have really made it so much easier to spot them. Thanks for sharing.
The good news is that most people have just stopped listening. What do you think Ukraine is largely about? It's the "break glass in case of emergency" for the elites to try to escape accountability for their China Virus destruction.
The sad thing is that he is not alone; I now know too many parents (can we call them parents if they indulge their off-spring in this way? I think abusers is more like it) who are all in. In another time I would have said something like 'Are you nuts?" but now I simply shrug and mutter my thoughts under my breath and carry on. These people are sadly way past saving.
Sadly there's a few hysterical parents out there that want it no matter what. I am afraid I have a sister in law that can't wait to inject her two month old. I don't get it, I waited three years before I had my horse injected with the west nile vaccine when it came out.
Why not? The FDA and CDC have been commanded by big pharma, fauci, gates and the WEF to murder as many as possible. No age limit, no time limit and no conscience...just create the fear of death.
"Sad me. It looks like the FDA may do what it has done for generations, which is require that the trial designed to show a medicine works actually show it works."
"has" should be "had". The FDA is no longer trustworthy, reputable, or honest.
The reason thalidomide never received approval in America was because bac, in the '60s the head of the FDA refused to allow it. (That's the Cliff's Notes version; she was lauded as a hero when the truth about thalidomide was finally discovered. Read about her. SHE is what the FDA used to be, but is no more.)
Oh, I'm sure that dude has plenty of other ways to mess up his kids.
I agree that this guy's argument is absurd on its face. Unfortunately, Alex, your own argument, that randomized trials are the ONLY way to know whether a drug works, is almost as absurd. We have all seen firsthand how easily they manipulated they are.
Please cite your source for this if you're going to keep making this absurd claim, because a top Yale epidemiologist, who knows a whole lot more about clinical trials than you do, says you are flat-out wrong, and that you're feeding into the drug industry's efforts to discredit non-randomized trials so that they can continue their monopoly on drug trials. Read about how wrong you are here:
https://darbyshaw.substack.com/p/i-hope-alex-berenson-never-gets-shingles?utm_source=url
Alex did point out that trials are not perfect and are manipulated by the pharma companies.
Please enlighten us: If randomized drug trials do not/cannot work, then what method should we be using to test drugs before giving them to the public?
As Dr. Harvey Risch, MD, makes clear, the whole body of scientific evidence must be considered when evaluating a drug. Randomized, controlled trials are just one way in which to test a drug's efficacy, and they can be very easily manipulated. He strongly advised against what he calls randomized trial "fetishism."
Read my article here:
https://darbyshaw.substack.com/p/i-hope-alex-berenson-never-gets-shingles?utm_source=url
All the Covid-19 vaccine trials are a case in point: They have all been heavily manipulated to show safety and efficacy, when in reality the vaccines are neither safe nor effective, for any age group. Pfizer is in the process of seeing how it can manipulate the trial for children under five to skate through the approval process. I have no doubt they will submit the vaccine for approval even with no efficacy.
Excellent job Darby. Both qualitative and quantitative assessment is required for drug trials.
How EXACTLY do we do a qualitative and quantitative assessment of a drug's efficacy and safety without an RCT?????
We can all agree that RCTs run by drug companies CAN be flawed. How do we fix that? Do either of you have an answer??
I agree with you on your conclusion and suggest that if we return full legal liability to drug makers for their vaccines, that they would quickly come up with ways to ensure that the vaccine trials would not be manipulated, because people who are on the hook legally want to know if the risks will outweigh the benefits.
You didn't answer my question. I agree that RCTs can be manipulated. And yes, I think the pfizer trials will ultimately be proven to have been manipulated. But you seem to be pushing for getting rid of RCTs completely. How then will we test drug efficacy and safety???
Do we just get rid of drugs completely???
We are experiencing the end result of massive regulatory capture. The very entities chartered to protect citizens from the depredations of big pharmaceutical concerns are now funded by them.
We hired foxes to guard the hen house from the entrenched elite foxes.
Government sponsored “science” is dead. As currently constituted they cannot regain my trust.
No I am not advocating for getting rid of RCT's. I am sharing the opinion of Dr. Risch who says we need to look at all available evidence, including RCTs. We also can't assume a study is good simply because it claims to be an RTC. All the Pfizer vaccine trials are RCTs but are heavily manipulated and therefore worthless.
We all AGREE that RCTs can be manipulated. So what is the solution?
"Dr. Risch says look at all available evidence..." What exactly is ALL AVAILABLE EVIDENCE??? What other evidence can we get BEFORE the drug is released??
Stress testing.
Same as how we test literally every other product for safety.
Observe what happen when said drug be given to bacteria (or other microbes), rats, and whatever people want to take it. Have you ever heard the expression, "experimenting with drugs"? Well, people who do that have an obligation to publish!
If there is absolutely no cure for the shingles, why get a vaccine which does nothing to prevent it and might just give it to you? Like the pneumonia shot that could give you pneumonia or the flu shot that sometimes gives you the flu.
How bout no shots and treat yourself naturally? Not to mention the hoards of aborted feral cells in them.
Fetal
The same happened to me, the only time I had a flu shot, about 8 years ago, I actually got the flu, I had never gotten sick with the flu or anything like it, never again after that one time. Also my sister who’s an ophthalmologist in Venezuela got a flu shot and got so sick she had to be hospitalized, she never again gotten the flu shot and thinks that no one really needs it
I don't remember exact timeliness, but I haven't gotten flu in over 5 6 years. About same time I quit volunteer job where they required flu shit.... and I stopped taking it altogether.
Thank you Darby- Alex has been wildly off the rails since his off-key anti-Ivermectin rant on the Malaysian IVM testing. Alex is no genius and while clearly he has anti-vaxx derangement syndrome, Alex is not reasonable on his assessments of Ivermectin. In short, he is a one-act play and his limitations are severe and require recognition.
Alex is pretty good. But.... Is he pro baby murder ? Objectively, he will land in hell if he doesn't repent.
Other than that, he's fairly insightful.
Oh, except putin had to go to war. Would we allow soviet troops on Canadian border (waaay back when we had a real, although deeeeeeply flawed Reagan
Excellent points from Al Rosen. Al, Bill Gates and Alex all have the same medical degree. Alex's stumbles on Ivermectin clearly show a blind spot in intellect and reason.
Ask John Ioannidis . The most ctitical, honest, ethical scientist and researcher I know.
Children don't need to be vaccinated. They have a 1 10th of 1 percent ratio of getting sick. 300 kids out of 62 million died. That's nothing compared to car accident or the real flu. Do we say hey you can't ride in a car? Its stupid. When are the far left people going to admit they were lied to and gaslighted for 18 months. And that they ruined their kids lives and our businesses with their crazy policies. Look at FL and how he let the schools stay open and the no masks policy. In Orange County CA the mask mandates did not exist. The LA county had the masks. They had the same amount of deaths. Its a joke. Attacking anyone like Alex that has a different opinion is not right. Why don't you go back to twitter
Thank you!
The Left has always dreamed of Post-Birth Abortions.
They have them already; what they now dream of is 'up to two years old' 'abortions.' In case 'mom' has changed her mind. (Not too much written yet but the topic has been broached).
If civilization isn't Mad, I don't know what you'd call it...Sui-handicapping?
Pro-infanticide Princeton bioethics professor Peter Singer:
https://lightupthedarkness.net/peter-singer-the-ethics-of-infanticide/
I have long had my issues with this anti-humanist charlatan. It is a crime that his hateful philosophy has been validated and disseminated from what was one an esteemed institution of higher learning. God, with whom Singer has had no acquaintance, will not look kindly on the Evil Professor. He was given the gift of an excellent intellect and chose to use it to promote harm to children who are conceived in God's own image and likeness.
He should face gallows for this.
Satan hates babies.
And they're not the left... they are commies and commie lite.
The republicans/ conservatives are predominantly cowards
Going on along time. Came up for a vote when Obama still a state legislator in Illinois. He either voyes DO IT or abstained.
This depopulation scheme is a chastisement for several things, including 62 billion butchered babies....
Look up 4 sins crying out to heaven for vengeance
Laetrile for cancer anyone?
I mean, can you JUST IMAGINE the next generation? Ay yi yi yi yi!
guessing his next generation is already a touch messed up.
Da truth!
Was writing this exact thing but I saw this was the top comment
I am equally sure he exercised every single one... multiple times. To think that our Republic could depend on that generation... SCARY.
This post should be registered with authorities as a dangerous weapon.
and the rest of society will be paying for it!
Come on, Alex! Vaccinating the kids will end covid!
But it's gotta do it in the next 10 hours before Biden does it first.
How will the puppet spew his disingenuous narrative tonight? Has there ever been a puppet like Brandon in the WH who will have absolute zero remorse to lie once again to those who pay his salary.
He will declare victory like the polling firm wants. If he's smart he will stop paying hospitals extra to find covid cases. Without the financial incentives to test everybody, the whole thing should fall apart quickly.
I told a friend of mine yesterday when she cited the pandemic as a reason to not go indoors: "The pandemic is over. Biden will announce that tomorrow night." The look on her face of sincere joy still amuses me.
The good/kind side of my personality is still working out how to respect people like that
Please share when you figure it out
HA!
😅
You shouldn't respect people like that. You should despise them.
I try not to despise people who are blind, deaf, or dumb. Willfully malevolent and authoritarian, that is a different order.
Depending, it is better to feel sorry for them because they are going to have a long hard road of enlightenment ahead (that they’re not ready for)
That comes naturally to me unfortunately 😅
Too gentle
Helrna, you are respecting people who by and large would like you to be put in a concentration camp or just tie you down and force the DEATHVAX intlover. And btw, killing their own kids.
2 years into this and you are a loser.
Why impose such a burden?
That’s quite a challenge!😣
Ask her to research the changes they made to the definition of a pandemic.
Used to be how many deaths
Now, it’s contagion.
So a common cold is now a pandemic 🤬
Just like they changed the definition of vaccine.
It's pervasive, too. And so few people give a shit.
Sadly, I had to pull back from a number of friends over all this. They can't be reasoned with, and it's worse than pointless to try. I don’t want to be snarky or impatient with them. I also don't want to be inauthentic myself. The one I really miss is my best friend from college, a truly dedicated teacher. .... and unfortunately also a local teacher's union leader, buying the COVID panic narrative hook, line and sinker.
Yes you are totally right. People that did all those crazy policies don't want to admit they were lied to and they ruined their children's lives and other people's businesses. Businesses close but Walmart, Target, and fast food restaurants stayed open. SO stupid
That is sad.
And she's allowed to vote & drive a car.
He's dropping w.h. mask mandates. His state of the union address will declare victory. Gotta end the mask mandates before midterms to make dimwits forget that they've been had. They can say vaccines saved us and move on to the next deadly fake virus.
But don’t get too comfortable.
The next Gates manufactured Lockdown will be Climate Crisis and cyber attacks
The NWO is giving people a rest and they will be coming back with a vengeance.
Spot on. Cyber attacks blamed on Putin. Climate Crisis, Blamed on Putin, Lockdowns for nukes. Blamed on Putin
and 5G.
Never forgive. Never forget.
Forgive for you own good; but NEVER FORGET for your own good
Sorry, not this one.
Hopefully civil wars worldwide will begin
The longer commies get to execute their plans virtually uncontested, the harder for us
Remember though...for Congress, the mask mandates are only being "dropped" because they are at lower levels of covid. It's not really completely dropped...just hiding in the background waiting for its chance to come roaring back.
Masks are as effective as wearing lace or nylons in the wrong place. None are serious until they don a P100 respirator. Anything less is Totalitarian Theater, feel-good attire, the compliance of utter fools.
NO its being dropped because Democrats are trying to back peddle from ruining this country and wanting to get through the next election. They will bring them back after the November elections. More people should do what the truckers did
Totally agree as well. They are officially spinning it as low cv levels. US capitol physician speaks of it here (apologize in advance re the "source" - fastest one I found).
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/27/politics/capitol-hill-mask-mandate/index.html
And yes, I agree it will come back, as is also mentioned based on cv levels (maybe they'll jack up the PCR CT again).
Unfortunately, it looks like many of the "dimwits," and many who only took the vaxxes due to coercion and deception, are going to be facing increasing health problems and premature deaths over the years, and that disaster may well be obvious to nearly-all by November. Big post on this coming to my PostModernConservative substack soon.
The prognosis sure looks like it will be increasing health problems including a great many autoimmune type diseases, as well as premature deaths, but to be honest, I don't think most of the vax victims will connect the dots due to the passage of time.
I doubt they will either. Even when pointed out, it will be a Conspiracy…..
Maybe the next virus will make your skin turn blue so it will be easy to tell who has it.
It will come in the vax.
And the dimwits WILL forget all about it come midterm time.
"if he is smart" Now that is funny!
😂🤣😂
I was gonna jump in that too...
"If he's smart"...best laugh I've had of the day. Let's Go Brandon!
I agree on the "stopping the bribery-incentives" and "fraudulent" use of PCR testing to perpetuate the 24-7 FEAR PORN casedemic.
obama, bush, clinton...
Murica - a First World citizenry with a Fourth World governing class.
You deserve the government you vote for. We have generations of failure in DC.
I see you are a Mencken fan as well. You forgot the good and hard part 😉
Good and hard, indeed. Thank you!
Hey dude, I feel.like washing slime off me when I vote. I never have had a candidate I liked.
No matter who you vote in as potentially being good, Pharma bribery dissuades them from any majority values. We've reached that broad diminution in personal integrity. Their only ideal is one they must conceal, suppress its reaching the surface.
Well, scum does rise to the top...
C'mon man, he's just reading the teleprompter
absolutely...100% He was placed in the WH for a reason right? The perfect puppet
He doesn’t know he’s lying. He doesn’t know much.
He knew at one time, but chose the path of perpetual lies as the 50 years mounted in the swamp. What we see now is an accumulative mess and you know what they say about if you tell a lie enough. He is so far gone now it doesn't matter and it is so very obvious isn't it.
Yes. Cumulative sin damage. He lives his own hell before he's even arrived at Judgment Day. Maybe he'll croak tonight during his speech--it'd be a fitting end and sign, but of course, also a disaster of immense proportions as then we'd be saddled with Harris. I try as much as possible not to think about Biden, so shameful a sign he is of how far we've fallen, but sure, events force me to from time to time. Back in August during the Afghanistan debacle, I wrote a mediocre poem on the subject "Was the Today the Day Joe Biden(D) Fell?" Says some of what you do. https://pomocon.substack.com/p/was-today-the-day-joe-biden-d-fell/comments?utm_source=url
I wonder how many TV screens will be broken tonight!?
Actually I don't think he's alive, he's just an animatronic
??????
I agree. If you look at his entire history of public life, he's a congenital liar from the beginning. As for his mental state, anyone can see there is definite cognitive decline, probably the onset of dementia. Compare his speeches of a year ago, two years ago, 5 years ago and so on, and it's quite obvious he is diminished mentally at this point. However, I do think that on a limited level he is quite aware he is lying and he is willing to at least go along with the things his Obama team wants him to do (and say) even if he doesn't think of these actions himself. But he's not entirely "out of it" as we'd like to believe.
How have people in America become so weak and weak minded?
My grandparents (WW2 gen), if they were alive would be appalled at what is happening in the world because of Covid. Its a world they they wouldn’t recognize…sad.
Adults I knew late 60s wouldn't either.
Russia has spread its errors.
Our Lady of Fatima, 1917
A little Great Apostasy dark humor.....
We are suffering all this because Russia was not consecrated by Pope to Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Bastards playing dress up Pope since Oct 1958 HATE Fatima, Our Lady.
Putin asked Whore Francis about Consecration. Catholics, especially those who desperately want true Pope and Consecration, absolutely 💯 stunned. The irony... beyond irony.
Of course, This is a small internal Catholic issue, mainly brought up by delusional Catholics.
Read secular press of 1917, 1960...
The Church, nearly irrelevant save for another institutional voice, has backed away from the abyss only to fall off the nearby cliff. Out maneuvered by the compass & square to its self-implosion embracing the darkest of the worldly.
So Argus, you can insult what you think is the Catholic Church but won't respond when engaged because you know nothing but what you've been told about the very Church Jesus Christ founded..
I'm almost off for Lent, but you're another ignorant bigot that has zero interest in finding out about Catholic Church.
Enjoy your final judgment.
Btw, Catholic Church is in eclipse with 200k. Not 1.2 billion. 1 resident priest in Texas. Less than 10 Bishops in United States... and we have it the best
Why did secret societies (almost) destroy Catholic Church?
What was so dangerous about us?
Permanent Instructions of Alta Vendita. Bella Dodd for starters.
Catholic Church will put these bastards down. Great Age 9f Mary. Triumph of Immaculate Heart of Mary. Peace of Christ thru Reign of Christ
You do accept the Church headed by Francis is not the Catholic Church?
Do you know the differences btwn Catholic Church popes statements on communism and Vatican II false popes (Roncalli on) on communism and freemasonry?
My guess is you ate spectacularly ignorant on some of these basic questions.
As is almost entire world. Except a tiny few... most notably Sedevacantists and our death foes NWO/ Secret societies
A possible starting lineup: Consistently lower the educational bar, place the blame of shortcomings on other people, make everyone comfy enough that they get complacent and add a heaping dose of groupthink.
Groupthink has been bottled and widely distributed as an energy drink. I think it's called SuccumbAs1 (HiveRave in the southwest).
Nice summary here LH.
That is a great question and worth serious thought at a minimum
The Soi Boi - Karen delusion that making men weak makes Soi Bois, Karens, and society safe.
Monumentally wrong. To make everyone safe you make men GOOD and appreciate courage.
In the absence of healthy men, look at the Hellscapes Soi Bois and Karens have created. Ted Wheeler in Portland comes to mind.
like
It's worldwide..same here in ireland
The Re-education camps called the The Public School System, where critical thinking gets you expelled.
Knowledge and achievement are the pillars of White Supremacy. Anti-Science and Gangsterism are universal unifiers.
it's systemically rewarded while strength is "toxic"
It's not that Americans are weak-minded but that many keep their mouths shut out of fear. The middle one-third won't challenge the side they think is "winning" as they perceive it as risky. It's actually a pretty a pretty rationale course and is how much of the world's population operates. The past rugged individualism of Americans is quite unique and we are seeing a reversion to more typical human behavior.
The good news is that our side is now "winning" more and more so we can expect the middle third to swing our way.
BYW, Anyone who feels the need to announce their pronouns should be immediately dismissed out of hand. Either they are delusional and think people can't tell their sex by looking at them or they are using it to signal their virtue. These are not serious people.
In my 60 years on the planet, no one has ever gotten my pronouns wrong (and I don't think my experience is an outlier). Not a single time. But then my name isn't "Aubrey" so who knows what this guy went through as a kid.
Just noticed this guy starts his bio with who his parents are (child of two math teachers), who does that? It's important that we know he was actually bred to be "elite" apparently.
He thinks that makes him look smarter? 🤦♀️
Your first paragraph defines weak-mindedness - fear of the schizoid mob. What are you preserving when you look in the mirror, only to see advanced jaundice?
i think the answer has a lot to do with the fact that an awful lot of people don't think that life should be hard
that they deserve an easier life
that an easier life exists
which it doesn't, but they grab with both fists at every empty promise
but not all
some people feel they can compete with the struggle
maybe some of these people were born stronger or smarter or better looking & derive some inner confidence from their inborn traits or circumstances
maybe some of these people clue into the religious premise that this world is a test and the rewards come later
not sure, but the the little brothers of the world seem to want to believe with all their hearts that the government is a fair parent that will level the playing field for them & tuck them in at night
it never quite works out that way because it can't but maybe next time will be different
Government schools.
The painful cost of that has been entirely forgotten thanks to so many undeserved protections and the escapement from personal responsibility. One can coddle oneself to death. Await the near future.
In one word: equality.
In a couple more: equal right to try is good. Everybody gets a turn at bat, that way society as a whole finds lots more good batmen than otherwise.
But equal right to keep batting despite not being equally good at it is bad.
And the next is the point of no return: equal outcome. Everyone has the right to bat top score.
After which comes where the entire western civilisation is right now: Harrison Bergeron-land. Where it is a crime for anyone to bat more than anyone else, meaning no one can be better than the worst.
From that point you cannot go back.
Edit: hope I got the idioms about batting right, we don't play baseball where I'm from.
I noticed the beginnings of this about 13 years ago and saw it one day while watching my 13 year old granddaughter playing in a volleyball game. When either side messed up, lost the ball etc., I saw them giving each other a high five at every single error. I couldn't believe what I saw seeing. I started paying attention and then noticed there were no real "winners" to these games, but everyone got a nice little "participation" trophy. It became apparent that with many other sports games, winning by a large margin was frowned upon and one time when a team really creamed the other one with a huge score against zero, that score suddenly disappeared. Then there was an English teacher who didn't like to use red pen to correct grammar/spelling errors on essays because it would be negative for the students and make them feel bad. The remedial type classes for students who weren't doing as well in math or English disappeared, and those students were merged into the regular classes where they no longer got special tutoring and attention. I wondered where all that stupidity was going....now I know.
The radical leftists of the 1960s went into education and began to indoctrinate America's children.
Exactly! they have been diligently and patiently working not only here in the USA but all over the world, I’m originally from Venezuela and I can tell you that the left agenda has been spreading from the 60s across universities and more recently after Chavez took power the public schools curriculum were drastically changed, they basically became socialism propaganda :/
Long before that. Public schools are freemasonic, communistic. By 1960s they were able to make greater inroads because the world had no pope
Dear Aubrey Clayton....Since you feel this way I suggest that you contact Pfizer immediately and enroll YOUR children in the ongoing trial. I know it's a little late but I'm sure Pfizer would be happy to include them.
We must not speak of children as handy lab specimens of an unknown species.
Our problem is with MR. aub.
Shame on you for bringing kids into baal worship
Another fine example that just because you have a degree and fancy letters after your name, you can still be an idiot. PhD-Phony Dumbass.
In fact we’ve reached the point at which PhD is an indication of crippled critical thinking.
Also often equivalent to “Open for Business” for quid pro quo arrangements of whitewashing dangerous experiments in exchange for money or stature or political power.
Spot on. PHD means zero critical thinking skills and street smarts these days.
Just regurgitation of the propaganda they memorized in the Soros/ Gates Funded Dullard educational system
PhD means you’ve spent the max time in the brainwashing machine...
Bingo.
Also, being the child of two teachers isn't helpful, as many of them have succumbed to the notion that taking courses and passing tests is equal to wisdom and reason.
My pop used to call them educated idiots. And he’s right.
PhD = piled high and deep. (A joke we used to tell in graduate school.)
Me too. I escaped as I just have an M.
One reason this covid era has been so detrimental to my mental health is now knowing I live around people who are perfectly fine torturing and experimenting on children. As more images come out of unmasked adults at Super Bowls and parties and masked children at recess I can’t help but think we are a sicker society then once thought.
Yep.
As a Mom in a blue state, it's horrific. My fury at 13+ months of school closure burns like a thousand suns.
Same same same. March 2020 to September 2021. Masks inside and outside. Heavy push to vax the kids. 90%+ over 12 are, 60isj% over 5. The parents here are brainwashed zombies spouting I’m holier than thou BS propaganda. 🤮
Schools closed? GREAAAT. COMMIE training grounds
UChicago, Berkeley, Boston, PhD, uses pronouns. Doesn't get any more NPC than that. And this man is a statistician? Such a disgrace, his poor children will pay the toll of his virtue signaling.
Dude definitely tells you his/their pronouns, is a member of the Branch Covidians, and probably wants to transition his kids at age 7 also.
I'd take branch davidians over him
I've yet to actually meet someone who states a preferred pronoun, but I feel fairly certain that when I do, I will go ballistic and no telling what I will say. It won't be nice, I'm sure of that.
Not that I agree, but I do understand the reasoning behind stating pronouns & not assuming. But if you were to ASK ME my pronouns, you're saying, "Hussy, I can't tell if you're a woman," which is super insulting.
"I can't tell if you're a woman," is absolutely an insult to me. (& lots of people, men & women alike!)
I look & sound & present totally like a chick. I even have a feminine first name. You can go ahead & assume all of that = Hussy is a woman! It's quite fine.
I'm transing to this:
https://www.google.com/search?q=gorilla+&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&source=android-browser&sxsrf=APq-WBtubagzvVMntSu0sP9ISJNNTzcLcw%3A1646182943749&ei=H8IeYouOLeSnqtsPufOY8AY&oq=gorilla+&gs_lcp=ChNtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1zZXJwEAMyBAgjECcyBwgAELEDEEMyBAgAEEMyBAgAEEMyBAgAEEMyCAgAEIAEELEDMgsILhCABBCxAxCDATIFCAAQgAQ6BwgjEOoCECc6BwguEOoCECc6CwguEMcBEK8BEJECOgUIABCRAjoLCAAQgAQQsQMQgwE6EQguEIAEELEDEIMBEMcBENEDOg4ILhCABBCxAxDHARCjAjoNCC4QsQMQxwEQ0QMQQzoLCC4QxwEQowIQkQI6CAguEIAEELEDOgcILhDUAhBDOgsILhCABBCxAxDUAjoECC4QQzoKCC4QxwEQ0QMQQzoKCC4QsQMQsQMQCjoHCCMQsQIQJzoHCC4QsQMQQzoKCC4QsQMQ1AIQQ0oECEEYAFCJDliPVWD5W2gCcAB4AYABzgKIAf0MkgEHMC43LjEuMZgBAKABAbABD8ABAQ&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-serp#imgrc=9g76WZKhCnmVjM
My husband is going through the is at work right now…
LOL, you can read the article here:
https://archive.fo/686CK#selection-633.279-633.345
I read this line, "But the whole idea of statistical significance has been losing favor among many statisticians, for two good reasons. For one, this thinking is inherently binary; "
& thought, FFS, now anything "binary" must be bad?!
Wtf 🤬 statistical significance is binary? What the hell is the dude talking about? Without significance all statistics are trash. Complete trash.
Won't let his kids eat GMO corn chips, but has no issues GMOing his kids.
This.
Excellent post
Definition of an unfit parent.
Aubrey's "position" is a prime example of a narcissist's use of cognitive dissonance. I want x to be true so i am going to believe it to be true, hence in my own world it "is true". It is a detachment from reality that is a sign of derangement.
It's also worth noting that multiple times, Aubrey asserts the use of accurate data. Would seem one of the "Editors" would tie that assertion to the story earlier this week about the CDC being, uhm, shall we say, "less than forthcoming" on the data it has released. I agree w/ Publius--his wants overpower the real stats & data.
There's a reason that 90% of American parents don't want to jab their little ones with this stuff.
Well, according to Aubrey 100% of the people he knows with little kids want the Vax. My advice to Aubrey is to broaden his damn social circle and then grow a pair and a brain and do some serious research on these covid shots. Please do not let your kids be part of the experiment. The sh*t is already starting to hit the fan.
The vaxxxed are going to go ballistic
https://www.bitchute.com/video/dg9i2XWB1Jxk/
Count down to the Mass Hysteria of the Vaccinated
https://lawrencebutts.substack.com/p/count-down-to-the-mass-hysteria-of
Grow a pair. Methinks that train left the station long time ago for Aubrey, he/him. If you have to use use he/him, doesn't it kind of imply that you know you lack a pair?
Ewwwww gawd I hate the personal pronoun BS. I heard Kamala say it. 🤮🤮🤮🤮
Recently I saw a lady who said her pronouns were "iel/they."
Wut? I can't even.
Only good thing about this vax, is this contagion of BS might not be able to spawn any longer
But you know they're gonna try. Or morph into another social bullshit movement
That's what I was thinking.
Sophia, don't try. Don't play their demonic little games. Commie bastards want to control the language. Piss on them.
Instead of BLM... say, of course the existence of African Americans matter, as does all people
I didn't play her games. It was something I saw recently online. I wasn't talking to the person or anything.
Maybe he already has micro brain clots and isn't capable of processing
You're going places
Yes, you are correct. He's a little lying male bastard
Parents love for children is very powerful. But commies are working on it. They really belong to the state, they believe
People like this don’t write pieces like this because they are trying to do good. This piece signals to the establishment that he will play ball. He will be a manipulative propagandist on their behalf, and as such, they will employ him and shower him with money and prominence.
That’s what this kind of article is about. These people are deranged.
I wonder if he was paid good money to write this op-ed. Wouldn't surprise me, if so.
They are viewing this as getting their children baptized. They are using their children to show off how virtuous they (the parents) are.
Exactly right. They view religion as superstition and will go to any length to show how much smarter they are for putting all their faith in science. Science is their religion.
That in itself is bad enough. Worse still, they make no distinction between good, or honest science, and bad, or corrupt, fraudulent science.
Good science does not happen at warp speed. It is methodical, careful, and thorough...which takes time. Slow science can also end up being bad, but rushed science is never ever good.
And fighting involved. Not immediate censorship
False science is their religion
My blood ran cold….freezing actually. I thought my blood couldn’t be any colder but I was wrong. The most Optimistic of Americans can hardly see past the onslaught of:
Ukraine. Canada, Border Crisis, Vaccine and pandemic over but continued by Government flunkies , intentional energy DEpendence, pronouns, George Soros, inflation, Education (from pre-school to college), OMG elections, Presidential Dementia (yeah that’s now a thing) aforementioned delivery of the State of the Union address, Hunter Biden, what’s her names diary, Dr. Jill deafening silence, leftist Supreme Court aka black woman, dead children every day in Atlanta.
Ad Infinitum. (I forgot the VP chuckles and her disgusting one button jackets.
Line must be drawn. A big red line that they see! No 5 year old should have to play Russian Roulette with a vaccine because their parents are too stupid And brainwashed to actually submit.
God bless you. It'sworse than you say. But. Read Gen 315. There 8s hope.
"Daddy, my chest hurts. Does this mean the vaccine is working?"
And normalizing heart attacks for teens. Satan's little children, all of them
So the Aubrey guy is nuts, basically.
Mad as a hatter as far as I can tell...
With generous helping of evil
Have you seen the TV ads pushing the vax for children? Disgusting people smh😒
The worst is the one using kids spouting lines like "History shows that vaccines work !' But, do they ? The more I find out about the FDA and our other other "Health" agencies, the more I question all vaccines. My skepticism of the HPV shot several years back kept my kids from getting them. My distrust of government is being rewarded. Sadly.
I agree with you, the more I dig the more I regret all the vaccines we’ve gotten, especially the HPV shot! :(
Here in Kalifornia, I just heard a new one on the radio today. A young girl talking about how she got Covid a year ago and now she can't run without getting winded, and she can't think clearly. GET THE SHOT!!
Running in Pennsylvania. Paid for by Pennsylvania taxpayers.
I wonder what the long term psychological damage will be to kids whose parents are terrified of a virus that poses no threat to them and are too lazy to look beyond fake news about the vaccines.
I'm thinking the parents are so psychologically nuts that they won't even realize their kids are damaged too, the kids will seem like chips off the proverbial crazy blocks.
They hate children.
THEY HATE CHILDREN
I've no doubt that guy has already messed up his kids.
This will be the first generation to euthanize their parents. The cat will be out of the bag by the time these kids are adults that this was a major psychological operation and their parents abused them terribly for two years for failing to realize that the threat to them was zero.
Well, Cuomo, Whitmire, Hancock have started...
They've been murdering elderly in Belgium and/ or Holland for decades.
AND DON'T SAY euthanasia. You are using commie term.
It's called 1st degree murder. State sponsored
Article for those who don’t subscribe to NYT (I’m taking the hit for you)
As a parent of three children under 4, I was hit hard by last month’s announcement that the Food and Drug Administration was delaying its review of Pfizer-BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine for children under 5.
Like many caregivers guarding young children against the coronavirus, my winter has been full of rapid tests, mask reorders and outdoor play dates in borderline frostbite conditions. I’m able to manage this because I believe it’s temporary; we just need to hold out a little longer until our children can get vaccinated.
But because I study statistics, I’m also racked with concern that if the data had been assessed in a more nuanced way, we might be putting vaccination appointments on the family calendar right now.
It’s unclear why the F.D.A. paused the review. The most recent data hasn’t been shared, and reporting suggests Pfizer found that the Omicron wave led to many more infections than previously seen in its clinical trial. The decision was made to wait for data on the third dose. Perhaps the two doses were not effective enough for the full group, though earlier data had suggested the vaccines produced a desired immune response for children ages 6 months to 24 months.
The bigger issue, as I see it, is in general statistical methods that are often relied on to evaluate the effectiveness of vaccines and drugs. The standard approach used in almost all clinical trials and endorsed by the F.D.A. requires new drugs to meet an arbitrary statistical threshold, the one people who have taken stats classes may recognize as statistical significance. This is appealing because it serves as a standardized final exam that experimental results all have to pass, unaided by preconceptions on the part of the reviewers or special pleading by the experimenters.
But the whole idea of statistical significance has been losing favor among many statisticians, for two good reasons. For one, this thinking is inherently binary; after the number crunching is complete, results are classified as significant or not significant, suggesting a finality and certitude that are rarely justified, and second, like any standardized test, it’s overly reductive. If relied on too heavily, it becomes a substitute for a more thoughtful, holistic analysis of the data, including important scientific context.
Nearly three years ago, an open letter signed by more than 800 scientists called for an end to the practice, and prominent statisticians, including the head of the American Statistical Association, put it bluntly: “Don’t say ‘statistically significant.’” Too often, they said, this binary labeling of results as worthy or unworthy has become “the antithesis of thoughtfulness,” a shortcut around what should be the hard work of any statistical inquiry.
What we need for the under-5 vaccine trial evaluation, instead of judgments of absolute safety or efficacy, is probable improvement over the next best alternative, taking into consideration all the available information. Even the concept of an emergency use authorization challenges the ordinary F.D.A. binary of approval and disapproval. We should take that idea and extend it.
There is a version of statistics that would be more suitable than significance testing for evaluating this trial data: Bayesian statistics. The essential tenets of this approach are that investigators should constantly update our understanding of any scientific claim based on the latest data and that we never need to label such a claim as definitively proved or disproved.
This methodology has had successes in many domains, from sports analytics to online commerce, and it shines the most when data is limited. Bayesian methods allowed Allied cryptanalysts in World War II to break enemy ciphers using only a few intercepted messages, and similar techniques are essential to marine search-and-rescue operations working from a vessel’s last known position or fragments of debris.
A Bayesian analysis of the vaccine for children under 5 would consider both that Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine has an excellent track record of safety for older children (obviously a 6-month-old is not a 5-year-old, but nor are they an entirely different species) and that we can already make reasonable estimates of how effective a two-dose regimen for little children will be, even against the Omicron variant. And if the newest data shows the vaccine losing effectiveness against this variant at the currently recommended dosages and schedules, statistical techniques that can incorporate this information as quickly as possible should be used to guide any necessary changes to the protocols.
The practice of borrowing information from one experiment to help understand another is not unprecedented. The F.D.A. has acknowledged the value of a Bayesian approach in certain circumstances, including pediatric trials. A 2020 policy document states, “Bayesian inference may be appropriate in settings where it is advantageous to systematically combine multiple sources of evidence, such as extrapolation of adult data to pediatric populations.” And the agency’s guidance for medical device clinical trials — where Bayesian methods have been more accepted for years — includes the endorsement that “Bayesian analysis brings to bear the extra, relevant, prior information, which can help F.D.A. make a decision.” The best way to demonstrate the advantages, when the under-5 vaccine is back up for review, would be for those evaluating the vaccine to put on their Bayesian goggles and consider the whole picture.
Referring to the vaccine trials for children under 5, Dr. Gregory Poland, the founder and director of the Mayo Vaccine Research Group in Minnesota, said recently, “I don’t like that there isn’t more data.” Neither do I and other parents. But I also don’t like that my children are unvaccinated going into year three of the pandemic. If the vaccines are safe — and we know they work well in other age groups — that’s meaningful to me both as a parent and as a statistician.
A 2018 editorial in The Journal of the American Medical Association suggested that when it comes to evaluating trial results, it’s time for clinicians to “embrace their inner Bayesian.” The same goes for the pharmaceutical industry and the agency that regulates it.
Now is the time for a statistical overhaul. If ever there was a trial that cried out for Bayesian methods, this is it. And if ever there were institutions powerful enough to bring about a fundamental change in the ways we interpret data, it would be the F.D.A. and the pharmaceutical companies during the pandemic. In the meantime, people across the country who fret about their unvaccinated young children will continue to do what we’ve become experts at: waiting.
[end]
Aubrey Clayton is a mathematical statistics researcher and a parent to three children under 4. He’s the author of “Bernoulli’s Fallacy: Statistical Illogic and the Crisis of Modern Science.”
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
The article is way worse than I imagined. He/they throw out statistical jargon like Bayesian, to sound smart and then says we just need the jab to "kind of work" for kids under 5 because it is soooo safe and effective for everyone else. This douche nozzle clearly hasn't looked at any data relative to the 'rona for healthy people under the age of 50.
Douche nozzle....outstanding.
If his kids picked the Omicron sniffles, they'd be all set. Because unlike the vaccines, Omicron is safe and effective.
He would subject them to quarantine in their cribs with N95 toddler masks and walk into their room in hazmat suit only to put crackers in their crib.
Exactly right. And then compose a self-righteous Twitter thread about all the precautions he took.
Oh, we did that at precisely the same time!
Thanks to you both!
Thanks for posting! Frightening what this guy is proposing.
Is it possible for you to post a comment to his article...nicely suggesting that he follow up his article in a few years to report back on how his kids are doing.
Thank you for posting the entire article.
I am not familiar with Bayesian statistics, but I note that he cites applications in cryptology, physics (locating ships) and sports analysis. Does not cite anything to do with biology.
Is there any reason to believe these methods can/should be applied to biology, a much more complex science? And yet he is willing to inject children, especially his own, based on his application of Bayesian statistical methods.
It can indeed. The wiki on Bayesian Inference is quite interesting.
Here is an example of how the process has been corrupted for surely nefarious purposes. Ots well worth reading:
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/bayesian-datacrime-defining-vaccine?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web
Thanks, that was fascinating. Written very well, so that I could grasp the logic even without a deep dig into the actual numbers.
Hey, can you post the entire article? NYT requires a subscription to read it, and I just won't do that! Thx!
Brave browser has the option to block javascript, if you turn on script blocking for NYT then you can read the whole article without that stupid SUBSCRIBE! popup.
You can disable javascript on any browser but it usually takes effect for all websites which is why I like Brave where you can set it for individual sites. I hope this helps!
You're a badass
Try opening it and immediately putting your phone in airplane mode. Sometimes that works
You're another badass
Never Fear! Microsoft Edge is here to help. Has built-in 'Immersive Reader' allows breaking the paywall on almost ALL WEBSITES. Get it. Use it. Love it. (hint: immediately after the webpage launches, click the 'Reader' button on the URL bar, and it will strip the crap and allow you to read the whole page.
If you are correct, I’ll consider you a good friend of mine 😂
I posted full article above… or below… however the comment sorting works
The picture at the top alone is glorious.
https://imgur.com/a/lzt6Dte
Wow, doesn't that look like a fun world for children!
I’m a Parent and a Statistician. There’s a Smarter Way to Think About the Under-5 Vaccine.
By Aubrey Clayton
Dr. Clayton is a mathematical statistics researcher and a parent to three children under 4. He’s the author of “Bernoulli’s Fallacy: Statistical Illogic and the Crisis of Modern Science.”
As a parent of three children under 4, I was hit hard by last month’s announcement that the Food and Drug Administration was delaying its review of Pfizer-BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine for children under 5.
Like many caregivers guarding young children against the coronavirus, my winter has been full of rapid tests, mask reorders and outdoor play dates in borderline frostbite conditions. I’m able to manage this because I believe it’s temporary; we just need to hold out a little longer until our children can get vaccinated.
But because I study statistics, I’m also racked with concern that if the data had been assessed in a more nuanced way, we might be putting vaccination appointments on the family calendar right now.
It’s unclear why the F.D.A. paused the review. The most recent data hasn’t been shared, and reporting suggests Pfizer found that the Omicron wave led to many more infections than previously seen in its clinical trial. The decision was made to wait for data on the third dose. Perhaps the two doses were not effective enough for the full group, though earlier data had suggested the vaccines produced a desired immune response for children ages 6 months to 24 months.
The bigger issue, as I see it, is in general statistical methods that are often relied on to evaluate the effectiveness of vaccines and drugs. The standard approach used in almost all clinical trials and endorsed by the F.D.A. requires new drugs to meet an arbitrary statistical threshold, the one people who have taken stats classes may recognize as statistical significance. This is appealing because it serves as a standardized final exam that experimental results all have to pass, unaided by preconceptions on the part of the reviewers or special pleading by the experimenters.
But the whole idea of statistical significance has been losing favor among many statisticians, for two good reasons. For one, this thinking is inherently binary; after the number crunching is complete, results are classified as significant or not significant, suggesting a finality and certitude that are rarely justified, and second, like any standardized test, it’s overly reductive. If relied on too heavily, it becomes a substitute for a more thoughtful, holistic analysis of the data, including important scientific context.
Nearly three years ago, an open letter signed by more than 800 scientists called for an end to the practice, and prominent statisticians, including the head of the American Statistical Association, put it bluntly: “Don’t say ‘statistically significant.’” Too often, they said, this binary labeling of results as worthy or unworthy has become “the antithesis of thoughtfulness,” a shortcut around
what should be the hard work of any statistical inquiry.
What we need for the under-5 vaccine trial evaluation, instead of judgments of absolute safety or efficacy, is probable improvement over the next best alternative, taking into consideration all the available information. Even the concept of an emergency use authorization challenges the ordinary F.D.A. binary of approval and disapproval. We should take that idea and extend it.
There is a version of statistics that would be more suitable than significance testing for evaluating this trial data: Bayesian statistics. The essential tenets of this approach are that investigators should constantly update our understanding of any scientific claim based on the latest data and that we never need to label such a claim as definitively proved or disproved.
This methodology has had successes in many domains, from sports analytics to online commerce, and it shines the most when data is limited. Bayesian methods allowed Allied cryptanalysts in World War II to break enemy ciphers using only a few intercepted messages, and similar techniques are essential to marine search-and-rescue operations working from a vessel’s last known position or fragments of debris.
A Bayesian analysis of the vaccine for children under 5 would consider both that Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine has an excellent track record of safety for older children (obviously a 6-month-old is not a 5-year-old, but nor are they an entirely different species) and that we can already make reasonable estimates of how effective a two-dose regimen for little children will be, even against the Omicron variant. And if the newest data shows the vaccine losing effectiveness against this variant at the currently recommended dosages and schedules, statistical techniques that can incorporate this information as quickly as possible should be used to guide any necessary changes to the protocols.
The practice of borrowing information from one experiment to help understand another is not unprecedented. The F.D.A. has acknowledged the value of a Bayesian approach in certain circumstances, including pediatric trials. A 2020 policy document states, “Bayesian inference may be appropriate in settings where it is advantageous to systematically combine multiple sources of evidence, such as extrapolation of adult data to pediatric populations.” And the agency’s guidance for medical device clinical trials — where Bayesian methods have been more accepted for years — includes the endorsement that “Bayesian analysis brings to bear the extra, relevant, prior information, which can help F.D.A. make a decision.” The best way to demonstrate the advantages, when the under-5 vaccine is back up for review, would be for those evaluating the vaccine to put on their Bayesian goggles and consider the whole picture.
Referring to the vaccine trials for children under 5, Dr. Gregory Poland, the founder and director of the Mayo Vaccine Research Group in Minnesota, said recently, “I don’t like that there isn’t more data.” Neither do I and other parents. But I also don’t like that my children are unvaccinated going into year three of the pandemic. If the vaccines are safe — and we know they work well in other age groups — that’s meaningful to me both as a parent and as a statistician.
A 2018 editorial in The Journal of the American Medical Association suggested that when it
comes to evaluating trial results, it’s time for clinicians to “embrace their inner Bayesian.” The same goes for the pharmaceutical industry and the agency that regulates it.
Now is the time for a statistical overhaul. If ever there was a trial that cried out for Bayesian methods, this is it. And if ever there were institutions powerful enough to bring about a fundamental change in the ways we interpret data, it would be the F.D.A. and the pharmaceutical companies during the pandemic. In the meantime, people across the country who fret about their unvaccinated young children will continue to do what we’ve become experts at: waiting.
Thank you for posting this. So, basically he wants to use an analytic method that will allow for a predetermined conclusion, if he doesn't like the conclusion arrived at by proven analytical tools. Pure genius. Get him a McArthur, even if he's over 30. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Exactly. And as it is you can already rig trials to get data that shakes out as significant to get the answer you want. The Pfizer sub 5 data was so abysmal it didn’t work so he wants an even worse way of fabricating data.
I’m guessing that people who use pronouns have a 99.98% vaccination rate. I’m basing this on super detailed scientific studies.
Based on inferred statistical significance 😂
Some people should not have kids.
And, some should have theirs taken away.
Can these people just start their own vaccine-based religion already??? The Church of Sooner Day Jabs. Westboro Vaxxests.
What amount of injections are now given too children by the time they reach age 6. Is it 64 or 76 not including the mRNA injections? I imagine it varies state to state. How does a fragile organic developing human life form stand a chance of living a healthy life with such repeated physiological insult by big pharma created concoctions? Sure they may be alive, but at what cost to their vitality and immunity etc?
These are depopulation maniacs. Gates can't stop giggling
I've stopped believing people like this guy are ignorant, under-informed or stupid. They are just plain evil.
Post of the month
Only because it's March 1 - ha!
No shit! Welcome to the party pal!
Once again, proving the words of Malcom X and Cassius Clay to be 100% correct - "The biggest danger to the black man is the white liberal". Idiots like this guy wanting to give little kids the Covid shots prove they truly believe in their own moral and intellectual superiority. Blind, cult like belief that is not only dangerous to themselves but all of us as these clowns permeate academia and most political bodies. They have moved from being the saviors of the poor blacks to now being the savior for all the rest of us rubes. I think not. Pray, plan, prepare and RESIST.
Yes. Read Margaret Sanger, afdc/ welfare as long as dad out 9f house... these people hate blacks
As I am in the epicenter of “woke” and “mask culture” I am so grateful for very person commenting here. Thank you for letting me know the entire world is not insane.
Even me?
What is everyone so damn afraid of??!! Safety. Safety. Safety. Safety. It's obsessive and profoundly illogical.
I once met a woman whose 7 year-old fell out of a 1st floor window and died. Awful tragic story. But she went around preaching that buildings should no longer have windows on the first floor or at least they should have bars on them because children could die.
Prisons are pretty safe, I guess.
I think this is a last gasp from people who cannot handle seeing this 2 year mostly hoax, unmasked no pun, before their eyes. They will need to return to the climate change for meaning to their existence. Maybe seeing queen Nancy's face for the first time since she was in the hair salon, will give some comfort tonight.
You have a strange definition of “comfort”, Gina...
Probably not the first: "Let's Make Statistics SUBJECTIVE, Boyz and Girlz!
Ideas / Stupid / Only Academic /Embrace
"Randomized clinical trials are the ONLY way to know with any reasonable certainty whether a new therapeutic will do what its developer says it does."
I think Dr. Eric Ruben, of the FDA panel, might disagree with this. He's the guy that said, in reference to giving this to kids, "We're never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it."
So, I would say randomized control trials aren't the ONLY way to know. You could, as we have, just start jabbing as many people as possible with the therapeutic and then maybe discern how sick they all got from it. And, then, cover up the data because who needs to see *that*.
This is clearly a novel form of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4341319/
Wait, Aubrey is a dude? No wonder he’s messed up.
He's not even serious about his delusion. No long hair, no make up.
Btw, I'm transing to this
https://www.google.com/search?q=gorilla+&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&source=android-browser&sxsrf=APq-WBtubagzvVMntSu0sP9ISJNNTzcLcw%3A1646182943749&ei=H8IeYouOLeSnqtsPufOY8AY&oq=gorilla+&gs_lcp=ChNtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1zZXJwEAMyBAgjECcyBwgAELEDEEMyBAgAEEMyBAgAEEMyBAgAEEMyCAgAEIAEELEDMgsILhCABBCxAxCDATIFCAAQgAQ6BwgjEOoCECc6BwguEOoCECc6CwguEMcBEK8BEJECOgUIABCRAjoLCAAQgAQQsQMQgwE6EQguEIAEELEDEIMBEMcBENEDOg4ILhCABBCxAxDHARCjAjoNCC4QsQMQxwEQ0QMQQzoLCC4QxwEQowIQkQI6CAguEIAEELEDOgcILhDUAhBDOgsILhCABBCxAxDUAjoECC4QQzoKCC4QxwEQ0QMQQzoKCC4QsQMQsQMQCjoHCCMQsQIQJzoHCC4QsQMQQzoKCC4QsQMQ1AIQQ0oECEEYAFCJDliPVWD5W2gCcAB4AYABzgKIAf0MkgEHMC43LjEuMZgBAKABAbABD8ABAQ&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-serp#imgrc=9g76WZKhCnmVjM
I'm like a 6 year old entertaining myself with a joke no one enjoys. But sure do
By the way, you know what is the main difference between Putin ordering the invasion and killing of Ukrainians, and Biden enforcing Co-Fib shots on people that have the likelihood of killing Americans?
Putin says his invasion is justified and basically says, “it’s my right, and I don’t care what happens!“
Biden? “I’m here to help you, and, we don’t care if people die because, that’s the price you pay when you’re trying to save other peoples’ lives, so take a shot, and, we forgot the the part where you are supposed to have a choice!”
Both sociopaths, one with a little more transparency, not much, but Biden, he is the consummate sociopath, he will shoot you, and then demand over your dying corpse, “thank me you bastard!“…
It's NATOs fault.... Ukraine leaders are criminally stupid.
How would we react ( before biden). China?
You are extremely naive
It is wild that the tagline from his book is "The foundation of the problem is a misunderstanding of probability and its role in making inferences from observations." The irony.
I noticed that too.
Bad. Sad. Idiotic. I've always known that we have a certain number of idiots living among us (intelligence, like most things, displays on a sort of bell curve) but these past two years have really made it so much easier to spot them. Thanks for sharing.
The good news is that most people have just stopped listening. What do you think Ukraine is largely about? It's the "break glass in case of emergency" for the elites to try to escape accountability for their China Virus destruction.
The NYT gives us daily condescending wing nut propaganda. Then wrings their hands about why the public won’t trust them.
The sad thing is that he is not alone; I now know too many parents (can we call them parents if they indulge their off-spring in this way? I think abusers is more like it) who are all in. In another time I would have said something like 'Are you nuts?" but now I simply shrug and mutter my thoughts under my breath and carry on. These people are sadly way past saving.
Sadly there's a few hysterical parents out there that want it no matter what. I am afraid I have a sister in law that can't wait to inject her two month old. I don't get it, I waited three years before I had my horse injected with the west nile vaccine when it came out.
NY Times has always been covering up for the fascists.
They used to be the best
Why not? The FDA and CDC have been commanded by big pharma, fauci, gates and the WEF to murder as many as possible. No age limit, no time limit and no conscience...just create the fear of death.
Last line of Aubrey's bio that Alex screenshot: "...teaches graduate courses in the philosophy of pro..."
I'm guessing his bio goes on to finish that sentence with "...pronoun use..."
"Sad me. It looks like the FDA may do what it has done for generations, which is require that the trial designed to show a medicine works actually show it works."
"has" should be "had". The FDA is no longer trustworthy, reputable, or honest.
The reason thalidomide never received approval in America was because bac, in the '60s the head of the FDA refused to allow it. (That's the Cliff's Notes version; she was lauded as a hero when the truth about thalidomide was finally discovered. Read about her. SHE is what the FDA used to be, but is no more.)
This reminded me of 'Deep thoughts with Jack Handey'. He wrote a book on statistical fallacy? I swear this timeline.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/ontario-judge-rules-in-favour-of-mother-who-doesnt-want-her-children-to-receive-covid-vaccine_4309913.html?utm_source=share-btn-copylink&st=Zz_PbEuDh_1kQ5LO_Ki54ptUIVj4pO4VT8bgzfhQzK36G3hqfXmrQ_yY0FfaJR4txpirrzaeUzqs4xwf_ciP4vXe3Dx6iN_s0eg Here is a mother who was successful in court. Let's keep encouraging people to keep their children safe with innate immunity.