First design
site theme
Register or log in to register for discussions!
Epidemiologists and public fitness experts spent the past weekend shaking their heads together at the latest damage from provocative Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, who announced Friday that he opposes mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines for men of 18 to 39 years old.
Ladapo uncovered his advice in questionable research, which was posted online through the Florida Department of Health. According to a misleading press release from the department, the research found “an 84% increase in the relative incidence of cardiac deaths in men aged 18 to 39 years within 28 days of mRNA vaccination. “
The press release claims that the research was conducted through the branch, but it was published as an undeniable PDF without the official header of the fitness branch and, more surprisingly, the authors are not listed, which is very unusual. reviewed, published in a clinical journal or even very well reviewed.
“Studying the protection and efficacy of any drug, adding vaccines, is a vital component of public health,” Ladapo said in the news release. “Much less attention has been paid to protection and the considerations of many other people have been ignored. Those are vital findings that will be communicated to Floridians. “
Experts bluntly called the investigation “total nonsense,” “extremely misleading” and “comically bad. “Some called the research approach “terrible” and one epidemiologist called it “the craziest research design I’ve ever seen. “Others noted that the conclusion “smelled of p-hacking” and knowledge selection.
These reactions are probably not unexpected to those who have followed Ladapo’s work as Florida’s most sensible doctor. Introduced by Governor Ron DeSantis in 2021, Ladapo has spent the pandemic minimizing the risk of COVID-19, fighting public fitness measures, surrounding himself with anti-vaccine voices, and attacking life-saving COVID-19 vaccines.
But the scaremongering and discouragement of COVID-19 vaccine use amid the national fall booster crusade and ahead of a predicted winter wave has the potential to further harm public and individual health. Withdrawal rates in the U. S. The U. S. is already abysmal. Less than some other people who won a number one series gained a singles booster. Only about 38% of other people over 50, who are more vulnerable to serious illness, gained momentary reinforcement. And so far, only 11. 5 million Americans, or about 3. 5 percent of the population, have gained the updated bivalent booster this fall crusade, according to the most recent figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
COVID-19 vaccines and boosters have proven remarkable and highly effective in preventing severe illness and death. But that hasn’t stopped some right-wing politicians and like-minded anti-vaccine voices critical of COVID-19, like Ladapo, from attacking them. This new “analysis” is the best example.
As expert reactions suggest, there are too many things with research, too many things to delve into a story of singleness. But these are some of the highlights of the seriousness of this research.
The research uses an “alternative” epidemiological examination design called a self-controlled case series (SCCS). This is an examination design that was originally developed to assess vaccine safety, but not necessarily vaccine-related deaths, as was used for Ladapo’s research. The design of examining is valid because it is an established approach that has already been used for similar purposes. But, as experts have pointed out, that doesn’t make it the most productive design, or even a smart one.
To assess the protection and effectiveness of a vaccine, you can wait for a study to compare an organization of other vaccinated people with a similar organization of other people who were not vaccinated, or who might have won a placebo. Then you can also simply compare the effects of other people in the two organizations, probably attributing the differences (the number of infections or side effects imaginable) to the apparent variable: the vaccine. But in a case series design, there is no control or comparison organization. The design uses each individual as their own comparator in constant time windows, comparing an era of threat to an era of later control.
By design, the study should only come with other people undergoing rapid intervention, such as vaccination, and a rapid training event after the intervention, as a possible side effect of the vaccine. The study then looks at the timing of the training event in relation to the intervention, assessing whether other people are more likely to enjoy the event in the age of threat some time after the intervention compared to a later era of control. If so, it suggests that intervention played a role in The Occasion.
For example, a 2004 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine used a case-series design to see if other people are more likely to suffer a stroke or central seizure after regimen vaccination or an acute infection. The study concluded that acute infections are transiently higher the threat of stroke and central attack, as opposed to vaccination.
Join the Ars Orbital Transmission email to get weekly updates to your inbox.