I am pretty sure the Japanes guys do the same mistake which unterwent Thomas Renz & Co in 2021 when trying to compare deadly outcomes of those vaccinated with Influenza-vaccine to those with Covid-Vaccines! Renz&Co used USA insurance data, just btw.
The mistake is to focus on "time to death since LAST dose received" WITHOUT considering that each dose given opens up a new time frame, a second, third, 4th, fifth ... chance to die inbetween any time range, for example inbetween 3 weeks after LAST dose.
To be very explicit:
someone you received 4 doses got 4 chances to die in 4 time frames,each lasting 3 weeks.
the result are time frames of 4x3weeks = 12 weeks in totally on risk to die!
The researchers compare that to people who are either injected by just 1 dose of influenza-vaccine
or to people who are completely unvaccianted. For both of those "control groups" they watch only a time frame lasting only 4 weeks. Not not 12 weeks. And they wonder when they see 'result' of 3-4x higher death counts. Good to wonder, but weak not to find the mistake!
Thats the point, the only point we need to know; it completely explains the really "astonishing results" if there would be real results. But those are not, there is nothing to see when looking on data only by such short view/thinking.
The readers just could see that ppl who spread studies with simple failures (like the one here)
are probably not exercised on statistics. But yet if so, and reach only a first wonder moment ,but not further along, it would be to state: they are not on best cognitive condition any more. Sadly to say.
I am pretty sure the Japanes guys do the same mistake which unterwent Thomas Renz & Co in 2021 when trying to compare deadly outcomes of those vaccinated with Influenza-vaccine to those with Covid-Vaccines! Renz&Co used USA insurance data, just btw.
The mistake is to focus on "time to death since LAST dose received" WITHOUT considering that each dose given opens up a new time frame, a second, third, 4th, fifth ... chance to die inbetween any time range, for example inbetween 3 weeks after LAST dose.
To be very explicit:
someone you received 4 doses got 4 chances to die in 4 time frames,each lasting 3 weeks.
the result are time frames of 4x3weeks = 12 weeks in totally on risk to die!
The researchers compare that to people who are either injected by just 1 dose of influenza-vaccine
or to people who are completely unvaccianted. For both of those "control groups" they watch only a time frame lasting only 4 weeks. Not not 12 weeks. And they wonder when they see 'result' of 3-4x higher death counts. Good to wonder, but weak not to find the mistake!
Thats the point, the only point we need to know; it completely explains the really "astonishing results" if there would be real results. But those are not, there is nothing to see when looking on data only by such short view/thinking.
The readers just could see that ppl who spread studies with simple failures (like the one here)
are probably not exercised on statistics. But yet if so, and reach only a first wonder moment ,but not further along, it would be to state: they are not on best cognitive condition any more. Sadly to say.