“Healthy user bias” (also “healthy vaccine effect”) is an important confounding factor in studies of vaccination effectiveness. This is based on the fact that people with serious previous illnesses avoid non-essential treatments such as vaccinations. Studies that compare data from unvaccinated people with data from vaccinated people are useless if previous illnesses are not clearly controlled for. When it came to Covid vaccines, this well-known bias was completely ignored and data on vaccination effectiveness were misinterpreted, as the GGI Initiative points out in a current release.
Healthy user bias – fundamental misinterpretation of vaccination studies
Press Release of GGI Initiative on November 7, 2023
Healthy user bias (HUB) is a systematic error that produces apparent effects of interventions in observational studies. The reason for this is the comparison between two groups, one of which is healthy enough to make a decision on intervention. The second group includes people with more serious or terminally ill conditions. This drawback has been largely ignored in recent years, which is why Covid injections appear to be particularly effective in observational studies. We demand an immediate halt to largely ineffective and harmful Covid injections and a return to the proven principles of evidence-based medicine.
background
healthy user bias Bias or systematic error caused by (HUB), or the health status of test subjects, has been long known and is a practically consistent phenomenon in observational studies of preventive interventions (vaccinations, medications, behavior). Below we summarize one contribution to this special issue Partiality Together, which first appeared on TKP. (1)
illustration
When it comes to decisions about interventions (e.g. vaccination) in a population, there are two groups, particularly (but not exclusively) among senior citizens. One includes people who are healthy enough to receive this vaccination or who are medically advised to do so because a preventive measure seems appropriate. The second includes people who are already seriously or terminally ill, that is, who have concerns other than vaccination or who have not been vaccinated because the end of their life is near anyway.
In the second group, it is likely that within a few weeks or months of the decision being made, a relatively large number of people will have severe disease or will die. There will be relatively large numbers of them, even if vaccination is actually harmful. Because by far the biggest risk of death comes from fatal disease. If you compare the vaccinated group with the non-vaccinated group for the above reasons, it is clear that the health of the latter is worse overall, but this cannot be attributed to non-vaccination. Because of this distortion, vaccination receives a much better rating in observed groups than it actually deserves.
In other words: the relationship between the intervention (vaccination) and health status is exactly the opposite of what is intuitively assumed. The intuition of poorly informed supporters of an intervention leads them to conclude that rejection of the intervention will result in serious illness or death. In reality, interventions are declined because of serious illness or (predictable) death.
Regarding vaccination, it has already been shown that flu vaccination can significantly reduce mortality even in the off-season. This is unbelievable and suggests a systematic error, especially the hub.
covid vaccination study
Despite the huge number of observational studies on Covid injections, the vast majority are of no significance. Only a few people are addressing the hub issue. This is done as so-called “sensitivity analysis”, although this is just technical jargon for feasibility testing. Instead of death from COVID-19, you can choose death from non-COVID causes or overall mortality. Therefore, the methodology of the study for sensitivity analysis is exactly repeated, only the endpoint Covid death is replaced by the endpoint non-Covid death (sum of all deaths from other causes). The endpoint could also be overall mortality, which is all deaths, whether caused by COVID-19 or something else.
All known studies that have examined the feasibility in this way find effect sizes similar to the effect of the injection over a period of a few weeks to a few months, both for protection against COVID-19 death and non-COVID death. For. This actually suggests that the immediate state of health plays the decisive role, not the injection.
On the contrary, there is considerable evidence that the injection actually causes considerable harm. We have already devoted a press release to the question why it is so little recognized and what are the reasons for the systematic under-reporting of vaccine harm. (2) The question as to where the harmful effects come from has not been clearly answered. But we are also working on the most obvious hypothesis at the moment, namely contamination by DNA residues. (3)
conclusion
For almost three years we have been watching so-called “experts” ignore such long-established principles of epidemiology and evidence-based medicine (EBM). Politicians and the government are still insisting on Covid injections, even though their uselessness and harmfulness have been clearly proven.
We demand a stop to these injections and support and compensation for their victims and relatives. In the event of another health crisis in which preventive measures appear necessary, critical voices and experts in EBM should also be consulted to rule out dubious and systematically inaccurate measures from the outset.
sources say
(1) Anonymous. Healthy User Bias – Fundamental Ignorance of Vaccination Apostles, TKP, 2023. Online: https://tkp.at/2023/10/29/healthy-user-bias-fundamentales-unwissen-der-impfapostel
(2) Anonymous. Under-recording of vaccine harm – mechanism and reasons, Green Association for Fundamental Rights and Freedom of Information, 2023. Online: https://ggi-initiative.at/wp/pm-64-untererfassung-von-impfschaeden-systematik-und-ursachen
(3) Anonymous. Plasmid contamination in mRNA vaccines – a complete failure of quality control, Green Association for Fundamental Rights and Freedom of Information, 2023. Online: https://ggi-initiative.at/wp/pm-57-plasmid-verunreinigugen-in-mrna-impfstofen-total Failure-der-qualitaetskontrolle
(tagstotranslate)bias
