Moshe-Mordechai van Zuiden
Psychology, Medicine, Science, Politics, Oppression, Integrity, Philosophy, Jews -- For those who like their news and truths frank and sharp

Faulty medical stats keep concluding nonsense

I was in Med School half a century ago. Did proper science die since then?

The above clip gives 100% fake news, as I’ll explain step by step. Cleverly, the clip downplays the faulty conclusion, but the clip’s blurb and title have the fake bottom line, and that’s the only thing most people will pick up on.

A friend sent me this one, a study showing that with updated COVID vaccination, you have more chance to get ill than without the update.

It’s like claiming that those who don’t watch out when crossing the street are more protected than those who look both ways. But top scientists and renowned medical institutions and publications buy this kind of nonsense!

Now, you don’t need to be good at medical or statistical jargon to see where they went wrong. A little common sense suffices. So, don’t get intimidated by the unreadable text. Just follow the main argument.

Faulty Statistics

The setup was faulty. They studied a huge sample. The larger the group, the smaller the statistical chance that your finding is coincidental.

But then, the method must be sound. And—you guessed it—it wasn’t.

They studied a population of whom some had updated their anti-COVID vaccination, and some had not.

They should have randomly divided a group of people into two groups, and then half should have received double-blindly a placebo and the other half an updated vaccination.

You can’t compare people who have updated their vaccination, on their own, to people who didn’t! Apples and oranges.

People less at risk are less likely to choose to be vaccinated.

And then it’s no wonder when you find they were less at risk!!!

People more at risk, either from being more vulnerable or more exposed, will sooner choose to revaccinate. That might not take away all risks, but how bad would their situation have been without the update?!

But even if a proper statistical connection is found, it’s merely a hint. Until you can point at a causal connection, the finding is in great doubt.

Please listen to your doctor and get your jabs updated if they say so.

No Medical Knowledge

If you know anything about COVID, you know more than the authors of this study.

More important than how many get ill is how many get seriously ill. These vaccinations especially help protect against serious illness, not against mild symptoms. And the vaccinated who get serious symptoms respond better to treatment and are safer than those not properly vaccinated.

But this study leaves this out completely. That is like saying that the half-year survival rate of untreated tuberculosis is 100% so treatment is not needed, while most untreated patients die after years (unnecessarily).

A Hoax?

A review of an earlier version of this study claims it’s an outright hoax.

I wouldn’t say so. It’s just shoddy work. Or is it?

Typically, fraudulent emails have typos giving away it’s a hoax. Serious people stop reading after seeing such poor language. It puts them off. The thieves want that. People less critically inclined are easier to rob.

In the summary of our article, it says twice: “48 344” [sic]. The comma is missing. That should say enough. They don’t want picky readers.

A medical specialist on CBS suggested a year ago that vaccinated people might get more COVID possibly because they might take more risks falsely assuming they’re now fully protected. That is possible. But before adding more assumptions, I would advise first to look at the ‘statistical’ method of studies that claim heightened risks for the properly vaccinated.

As I wrote before many times, humungous computer data are now sold for ‘statistical’ medical research giving a false impression of certainty.

Anti-vaxxers make this stuff go viral (pardon the pun) because they don’t care about objective truth. Anything ‘vindicating’ their religion is gospel. They made of it a famous urban legend already: shots cause infections.

About the Author
MM is a prolific and creative writer and thinker, previously a daily blog contributor to the TOI. He often makes his readers laugh, mad, or assume he's nuts—close to perfect blogging. He's proud that his analytical short comments are removed both from left-wing and right-wing news sites. None of his content is generated by the new bore on the block, AI. * As a frontier thinker, he sees things many don't yet. He's half a prophet. Half. Let's not exaggerate. Or not at all because he doesn't claim G^d talks to him. He gives him good ideas—that's all. MM doesn't believe that people observe and think in a vacuum. He, therefore, wanted a broad bio that readers interested can track a bit what (lack of) backgrounds, experiences, and educations contribute to his visions. * This year, he will prioritize getting his unpublished books published rather than just blog posts. Next year, he hopes to focus on activism against human extinction. To find less-recent posts on a subject XXX among his over 2000 archived ones, go to the right-top corner of a Times of Israel page, click on the search icon and search "zuiden, XXX". One can find a second, wilder blog, to which one may subscribe too, here: or by clicking on the globe icon next to his picture on top. * Like most of his readers, he believes in being friendly, respectful, and loyal. However, if you think those are his absolute top priorities, you might end up disappointed. His first loyalty is to the truth. He will try to stay within the limits of democratic and Jewish law, but he won't lie to support opinions or people when don't deserve that. (Yet, we all make honest mistakes, which is just fine and does not justify losing support.) He admits that he sometimes exaggerates to make a point, which could have him come across as nasty, while in actuality, he's quite a lovely person to interact with. He holds - how Dutch - that a strong opinion doesn't imply intolerance of other views. * Sometimes he's misunderstood because his wide and diverse field of vision seldomly fits any specialist's box. But that's exactly what some love about him. He has written a lot about Psychology (including Sexuality and Abuse), Medicine (including physical immortality), Science (including basic statistics), Politics (Israel, the US, and the Netherlands, Activism - more than leftwing or rightwing, he hopes to highlight reality), Oppression and Liberation (intersectionally, for young people, the elderly, non-Whites, women, workers, Jews, LGBTQIA+, foreigners and anyone else who's dehumanized or exploited), Integrity, Philosophy, Jews (Judaism, Zionism, Holocaust and Jewish Liberation), the Climate Crisis, Ecology and Veganism, Affairs from the news, or the Torah Portion of the Week, or new insights that suddenly befell him. * Chronologically, his most influential teachers are his parents, Nico (natan) van Zuiden and Betty (beisye) Nieweg, Wim Kan, Mozart, Harvey Jackins, Marshal Rosenberg, Reb Shlomo Carlebach, and, lehavdil bein chayim lechayim, Rabbi Dr. Natan Lopes Cardozo, Rav Zev Leff, and Rav Meir Lubin. This short list doesn't mean to disrespect others who taught him a lot or a little. One of his rabbis calls him Mr. Innovation [Ish haChidushim]. Yet, his originalities seem to root deeply in traditional Judaism, though they may grow in unexpected directions. In fact, he claims he's modernizing nothing. Rather, mainly basing himself on the basic Hebrew Torah text, he tries to rediscover classical Jewish thought almost lost in thousands of years of stifling Gentile domination and Jewish assimilation. (He pleads for a close reading of the Torah instead of going by rough assumptions of what it would probably mean and before fleeing to Commentaries.) This, in all aspects of life, but prominently in the areas of Free Will, Activism, Homosexuality for men, and Redemption. * He hopes that his words will inspire and inform, and disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed. He aims to bring a fresh perspective rather than harp on the obvious and familiar. When he can, he loves to write encyclopedic overviews. He doesn't expect his readers to agree. Rather, original minds should be disputed. In short, his main political positions are among others: anti-Trumpism, for Zionism, Intersectionality, non-violence, anti those who abuse democratic liberties, anti the fake ME peace process, for original-Orthodoxy, pro-Science, pro-Free Will, anti-blaming-the-victim, and for down-to-earth, classical optimism, and happiness. Read his blog on how he attempts to bridge any tensions between those ideas or fields. * He is a fetal survivor of the pharmaceutical industry (, born in 1953 to his parents who were Dutch-Jewish Holocaust survivors who met in the largest concentration camp in the Netherlands, Westerbork. He grew up a humble listener. It took him decades to become a speaker too, and decades more to admit to being a genius. But his humility was his to keep. And so was his honesty. Bullies and con artists almost instantaneously envy and hate him. He hopes to bring new things and not just preach to the choir. * He holds a BA in medicine (University of Amsterdam) – is half a doctor. He practices Re-evaluation Co-counseling since 1977, is not an official teacher anymore, and became a friendly, powerful therapist. He became a social activist, became religious, made Aliyah, and raised three wonderful kids. Previously, for decades, he was known to the Jerusalem Post readers as a frequent letter writer. For a couple of years, he was active in hasbara to the Dutch-speaking public. He wrote an unpublished tome about Jewish Free Will. He's a strict vegan since 2008. He's an Orthodox Jew but not a rabbi. * His writing has been made possible by an allowance for second-generation Holocaust survivors from the Netherlands. It has been his dream since he was 38 to try to make a difference by teaching through writing. He had three times 9-out-of-10 for Dutch at his high school finals but is spending his days communicating in English and Hebrew - how ironic. G-d must have a fine sense of humor. In case you wonder - yes, he is a bit dyslectic. If you're a native English speaker and wonder why you should read from people whose English is only their second language, consider the advantage of having an original peek outside of your cultural bubble. * To send any personal reaction to him, scroll to the top of the blog post and click Contact Me. * His newest books you may find here:
Related Topics
Related Posts