Detection of Positive Vaccine Bias in Reports of Serious Adverse Events
Look for Unsupported Statements Plugging the COVID-19 Vaccines while Delivering Bad News on Side Effects
By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
The clinical reality of COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis, blood clots, and other medical disasters seems much larger than available reports in the medical literature. Because the vast majority of academic physicians who produce the worlds universe of medical manuscripts start from a pro-vaccine position, there is undoubtedly publication bias.
Publication bias means that compliant doctors at institutions that mandated the COVID-19 vaccines are disincentivized and may be implicitly prohibited from studying and reporting vaccine side effects. Even compelling papers describing new, important life-threatening conditions may fail to be approved by the institution and never make it to journal submission.
Nevertheless, I have been struck with obvious pro-vaccine bias in papers that are describing horrific adverse events. You can look for these because they are not supported and appear completely out of place. One wonders if these statements are reflecting a true psychological bias of mass formation or if they are intentionally deceptive so the authors do not appear to “dampening enthusiasm” for the novel shots. In some cases, the authors encourage vaccination despite the harms.
Be wary of glowing praise for the vaccines like “remarkably effective” or “blockbuster” in papers that present no efficacy data. It has been said that flattery will get you nowhere, expect possibly, publication of a COVID-19 vaccine paper in a medical journal.
Any time you see “the risks are far outweighed by the benefits” without a formal risk-benefit analysis, you are receiving dangerous pro-vaccine bias. This is particularly true for vaccine induced death. It is very hard to argue that case away and encourage more shots.
Other obvious statements such as “vaccines have been integral in our pandemic response” or “vaccines have saved millions of lives” or accolades such as “cutting-edge mRNA technology” or “breakthrough” or “cornerstone” seem out of place when the paper is describing vaccine victims either permanently damaged or sadly dead after the shot.
Probably the most severe form of positive vaccine bias and hubris would be “the vaccines are indicated or recommended for everyone” when a manuscript is not evaluating the overall population benefit it should not be making recommendations.
I hope these examples are helpful. The goal of reviewing papers is to evaluate the data yourself and in the context of vaccine side effects, overall risk-benefit statements by likely vaccinated authors from mandating institutions should be freely disposable.
Please subscribe to Courageous Discourse as a paying or founder member so we can continue to bring you the truth.
Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
President, McCullough Foundation
I just have to wonder whether the scientists and doctors making these kinds of biased statements still have confidence to take more shots themselves. It's one thing to wave a flag for a cause you want to believe in, it's another thing to sacrifice your own life for that cause.
For myself, early on when the vaccine was being rolled out, I was keenly interested to see what side effects it would have, since it was a new, and not thoroughly tested treatment. Then I read some of the horror stories, such as the tragedy of Simone Scott, a young college student: https://covidvaccinereactions.com/portfolio/2844/
My comment to that story was as follows:
"This is, to date, the worst Vaccine death I’ve read about, and having a daughter of her age, who is also in college, makes it very real to me. If I ever have the slightest tendency to flag about my commitment to not being vaccinated, I just remember Simone and my mind is made up. The CDC has the audacity to claim that there are “no deaths” from the vaccines. Just remember people, if you die from the vaccine, they count you as a “nobody,” and if you are injured, you are on your own. That’s how much they care about your health. Let it sink in."
Science is dead and buried - in its place we have Regime propaganda.