Who Can You Trust? Not The American Journal of Medicine

CarolfromTX said:
Oh really? What about HIPA, which supposedly makes your medical records private? Sheesh. Come to that, who the hell thinks to link these two things together except someone with a political agenda, hmmm?
Click to expand...
Oh, hell, this is getting tedious.

First off, it's HIPAA not HIPA. And that is a federal law in the United States. The study in question was done in Canada, which has similar HIPAA laws called Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) but they are not identical. Each Canadian province can have its own rules and regs as long as they are substantially similar to PIPEDA.

The OP (@Indiana Joe) erroneously stated "This arrant nonsense was actually published this month in the American Journal of Medicine, proving yet again that academic study in the United States has become irremediably politicized and open to cultural and intellectual fads."

This study used encrypted identifiers on 11 million people from official Canadian government registries which means their identities were not revealed to the researchers. The study was paid for by the Canada Research Chair in Medical Decision Sciences, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Graduate Diploma in Health Research at the University of Toronto, and the National Sciences & Engineering Research Council of Canada NOT any US funds according to the financial disclosures.


I think this was a ridiculous study that contributed little to nothing to the scientific literature. And I'm done commenting on it.
 

CarolfromTX said:
Ridiculous studies like this are the reason I am reluctant to ā€œtrust the science.ā€
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with you that there are some ridiculous studies done in the name of science and certainly the one that is the subject of this thread fits in that category. But there are also some truly excellent studies that have led to important findings. This study was not one of them.
 
Leann said:
Oh, hell, this is getting tedious.

First off, it's HIPAA not HIPA. And that is a federal law in the United States. The study in question was done in Canada, which has similar HIPAA laws called Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) but they are not identical. Each Canadian province can have its own rules and regs as long as they are substantially similar to PIPEDA.

The OP (@Indiana Joe) erroneously stated "This arrant nonsense was actually published this month in the American Journal of Medicine, proving yet again that academic study in the United States has become irremediably politicized and open to cultural and intellectual fads."

This study used encrypted identifiers on 11 million people from official Canadian government registries which means their identities were not revealed to the researchers. The study was paid for by the Canada Research Chair in Medical Decision Sciences, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Graduate Diploma in Health Research at the University of Toronto, and the National Sciences & Engineering Research Council of Canada NOT any US funds according to the financial disclosures.


I think this was a ridiculous study that contributed little to nothing to the scientific literature. And I'm done commenting on it.
Click to expand...
You shouldn't confuse us folks on here with facts. :cautious::cautious: Whether the study is/was ridiculous or not is not for me to say.

btw, the OP is a copy/paste exercise from the linked article. Nothing original.
 
Buckeye said:
{shrug} the data speaks for itself. It was not suggested that the vax made you immune to auto accidents. What it said was that unvaxxed folks have accidents at a higher rate than vaxxed folks. They postulated that the correlation was because the unvaxxed, generally speaking, are less educated, and are more likely to engage in risky behaviors, which would lead to higher accidents rates. I haven't had a stats class since grad school, but as I recall, the first lesson on day one was that correlation does not imply causation.
Click to expand...
I resent this because I went to college, worked at my university and had family members in academia so I'm not under educated in any way. Maybe I'm so educated that I comprehend what "No product liability" really means.

covid joke banner.jpg
 
When weā€™re asked to trust election results, science, military operations, The FBI and etc etc forgive us if we are a tad apprehensive. Iā€™m pretty reasonable I feel and I trust none of the above. The Covid numbers stunk from the outset and perhaps even the origin as they claimed. Time will tell a lot like most things.
 
Buckeye said:
Did you take a stats class while your were there?
Click to expand...

Personally, I got all A's in statistics at major Universities, and think people who don't get potentially lethal clot shot injections are far more intelligent. I also don't play Russian Roulette, but to each their own. Intelligent people have critical thinking skills, use logical thinking to make our decisions, and don't blindly believe and obey whatever we're told to think by the CDC and their corporate owned media.

Where did you take statistics and get your education?

Buckeye said:
lol - on the interwebz, we all got A's in everything. CDC has data on vaxx rates and education
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
"The "anti-vaxxers" were (and are) a bunch of ignorant yahoos. I would bet that unvaccinated status correlates closely with cigarette smoking, vaping, excessive alcohol use, wife-beating, consumption of deep-fried Snickers bars at state fairs, tattoos, crappy jobs, getting into traffic accidents, and thinking that the people inside the Capitol on January 6 were either innocent tourists or patriots doing their civic duty."

Here's my conclusion:

For sure one of the best ways to win someone over to your point is by ..... disparaging the others. Questioning their intelligence , and just insulting them in general. And questioning their way of life.

I am not vaxxed, for my own reasons , mostly having to do with the health of my heart [ if that part's even anyones business] However I am so so glad to see that due to that decision I have slipped into that abyss of what this poster sees as the pool of absolutely deplorable people.
 
John cycling said:
Personally, I got all A's in statistics, and think people who don't get potentially lethal clot shot injections are far more intelligent. I also don't play Russian Roulette, but to each their own.
Click to expand...
lol - on the interwebz, we all got A's in everything. Do you have any data to back up what you think? CDC has data on vaxx rates and education, but I haven't seen any on vaxx rates and intelligence.
 
Buckeye said:
lol - on the interwebz, we all got A's in everything. Do you have any data to back up what you think? CDC has data on vaxx rates and education, but I haven't seen any on vaxx rates and intelligence.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting idea!
 
Nemo2 said:
If you were running a sales/advertising campaign would you announce that those buying your product were a bunch of no-nothing dumbasses, or would you claim that they were the most aware and discerning people the world has ever seen?

Just axing.
Click to expand...
It's just data, and a brief analysis of that data. Not sure why folks get their panties in a knot about the numbers. It says nothing about you or me as an individual. Did you see any ads that made any of the references that you claim? I sure didn't. Jeebus.....
 
Buckeye said:
It's just data, and a brief analysis of that data. Not sure why folks get their panties in a knot about the numbers. It says nothing about you or me as an individual. Did you see any ads that made any of the references that you claim? I sure didn't. Jeebus.....
Click to expand...
I was referring to the reactions and interpretations...the mention of ads was an allusion...but, carry on.
 
rgp said:
"The "anti-vaxxers" were (and are) a bunch of ignorant yahoos. I would bet that unvaccinated status correlates closely with cigarette smoking, vaping, excessive alcohol use, wife-beating, consumption of deep-fried Snickers bars at state fairs, tattoos, crappy jobs, getting into traffic accidents, and thinking that the people inside the Capitol on January 6 were either innocent tourists or patriots doing their civic duty."

Here's my conclusion:

For sure one of the best ways to win someone over to your point is by ..... disparaging the others. Questioning their intelligence , and just insulting them in general. And questioning their way of life.

I am not vaxxed, for my own reasons , mostly having to do with the health of my heart [ if that part's even anyones business] However I am so so glad to see that due to that decision I have slipped into that abyss of what this poster sees as the pool of absolutely deplorable people.
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to win anyone over to my point of view. I do not care who gets vaxxed and who doesn't.

My point was (and I got deleted for it) that not wanting to get vaxxed correlates pretty closely with other behaviors. That's just a personal observation. Of course there are people with perfectly good reasons not to get vaxxed.

I like to make jokes and be a general smart ass, and it gets me into trouble on SF all the time.
 
Not that this JAMA article is BS, but why is the supposed date JAMA was published for this article is Dec 3, 2022. But the date of that week's JAMA issue is Dec 6,2022. If they can't even get the right date......
 
Last edited:
Hummm. Well rattlesnake bite demographics will tell you your odds of getting bitten are highest if you are a young adult male. Why? Because of a predisposition to drink and then do stupid thingsā€¦like pick up a rattlesnake. That is what the statistics show. Statistics can be funā€¦
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top