In the Connecticut Medicare data when I calculated a normalized mortality rate from the day of the first dose up to July 2024, so that I calculated the baseline number of deaths by multiplying the number of person-days for each combination of age and ongoing month with the mortality rate in the general US population for the same combinat…
In the Connecticut Medicare data when I calculated a normalized mortality rate from the day of the first dose up to July 2024, so that I calculated the baseline number of deaths by multiplying the number of person-days for each combination of age and ongoing month with the mortality rate in the general US population for the same combination of age and month, Pfizer got about 1.25 times higher total mortality than Moderna: sars2.net/connecticut.html#Moderna_Pfizer_ratio_by_month_of_vaccination_and_ongoing_month.
When I combined data for adverse event reports from Eudravigilance with data for vaccine doses administered from OWID, the ratio of reports per doses administered was about 1.6 times higher for Pfizer than Moderna in Italy: sars2.net/czech4.html#Adverse_event_reports_by_country_at_EudraVigilance.
I've added a new section on big data at the end of the article.
Great work on the CT data.
For dose 3, the MRR shifts from 1.44 to .6 in just 30 days. Explain how THAT happens.
confounders causing large differences don't suddenly shift like that in a month or 2 months. If you think they do, explain to me what happened.
It is much more likely that these differences are due to vaccine batch variability than anything else.
If you think it is due to preferential brand distribution, show me the evidence for that. All the health authorities said the brands were equal.
It is nearly impossible to have accidentally, by chance, to have created a 30% ASMR difference in the Czech data. The Z score is over 20 for populations sample sizes of 100,000 or more.
So walk us through your explanation that fits the Czech and CT data.
In the Connecticut Medicare data when I calculated a normalized mortality rate from the day of the first dose up to July 2024, so that I calculated the baseline number of deaths by multiplying the number of person-days for each combination of age and ongoing month with the mortality rate in the general US population for the same combination of age and month, Pfizer got about 1.25 times higher total mortality than Moderna: sars2.net/connecticut.html#Moderna_Pfizer_ratio_by_month_of_vaccination_and_ongoing_month.
When I combined data for adverse event reports from Eudravigilance with data for vaccine doses administered from OWID, the ratio of reports per doses administered was about 1.6 times higher for Pfizer than Moderna in Italy: sars2.net/czech4.html#Adverse_event_reports_by_country_at_EudraVigilance.
When I calculated a ratio of deaths per reports in an old snapshot of VAERS data where the country codes of European countries had not been removed, out of countries with a large enough sample size, the ratio was much higher for Pfizer than Moderna in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Spain, and Sweden: sars2.net/czech4.html#Ratio_of_deaths_per_adverse_event_reports_in_VAERS_calculated_by_Hans_Joachim_Kremer.
I've added a new section on big data at the end of the article.
Great work on the CT data.
For dose 3, the MRR shifts from 1.44 to .6 in just 30 days. Explain how THAT happens.
confounders causing large differences don't suddenly shift like that in a month or 2 months. If you think they do, explain to me what happened.
It is much more likely that these differences are due to vaccine batch variability than anything else.
If you think it is due to preferential brand distribution, show me the evidence for that. All the health authorities said the brands were equal.
It is nearly impossible to have accidentally, by chance, to have created a 30% ASMR difference in the Czech data. The Z score is over 20 for populations sample sizes of 100,000 or more.
So walk us through your explanation that fits the Czech and CT data.