Bogus Canadian Research Slanders Unvaccinated Drivers. Higher Insurance Rates As Punishment?
We have all read research reports that are obviously flawed, but a Canadian research group has set a new bottom. This clown show actually has a lot of nerve even calling itself a “research Group.”
The main instigator, (not investigator), for this sham is Dr, Donald Redelmeier of The Sunnybrook Research Institute. Redelmeier claims that his research:
“Demonstrated traffic risks were 50%-70% more frequent for adults who had not been vaccinated compared to those who had.”
Somehow, the obviously politically motivated misuse of statistics, was published in this month’s American Journal Of Medicine.
Not only did this so called “study” massage and misinterpret the numbers, but they also used their platform to suggest that insurance companies should initiate punitive consequences to the policies of unvaccinated individuals.
“The observed risks might also justify changes to driver insurance policies in the future.”
So if bogus interpretation of statistics wasn’t enough, how about a large dose of supposition and conjecture.
The study proposed that the risk of a car crash by unvaccinated drivers:
“Exceeds the safety gains from modern automobile engineering advances and also imposes risks on other road users.”
Skipping a COVID vaccine does not mean that someone will get into a car crash. However, the study theorized that the unvaccinated are people that ignore public health recommendations and they may also:
“Neglect basic road safety guidelines.”
So why would an unvaccinated person ignore safety regulations? Well, this ridiculously transparent, fraudulent report had answers for that too.
“Distrust of the government, a belief in freedom, misconceptions of daily risks, faith in natural protection, antipathy toward regulation, poverty, misinformation, a lack of resources, and personal beliefs.”
These hypocrites are so arrogant that they actually suggested that primary care doctors should counsel unvaccinated patients on traffic safety.
Once the study was released some other professionals were quick to react. Dr Claire Craig, a British Diagnostic Pathologist took to Twitter to dispute the study.
“Here is a joke of a study claiming the unvaccinated are involved in more car accidents. There’s a lot wrong with it.”
Craig called the study “morally misguided,” and stated it was flawed in many ways. One of which included adding unvaccinated pedestrians injured in accidents.
“These claims are based on accidents which resulted in hospitalization. Each person injured is referred to in the paper as a ‘crash, even when the injured person was a pedestrian.”
Craig clarified that the study was based on the government database of vaccinated individuals. She also stated that if you had been involved in an accident and were not taken to the hospital, the accident was not included in the study.
“No matter which way you chop the data the risk is apparently increased by about the same amount.”
She then pointed out that the data could be manipulated to make any type of claim concerning the unvaccinated simply because the “denominator was artificially small.”
Believe it or not, this isn’t the first-time vaccination shaming was attempted in order to punish those who skipped the jab. In 2021 another study was published in the Journal of Bioeconomics. In that study more than 100,000 Canadians were surveyed, and supposedly found a correlation between risky driving habits and those having skipped the flu vaccine.
It is blatantly obvious that these are not “scientific studies.” To even imply that making a medical decision not to accept a controversial vaccine affects your ability to drive, is ludicrous.
Still, it’s obvious that the government has great disdain for those that chose not to be vaccinated. So much so, that they are still looking for ways to punish those that made that choice.
What does that say to you?
To me it means that those running the government no longer really care about personal freedom. Instead they want blind conformity and will try anything to obtain submission.
