Canadian study - unvaccinated more likely to have traffic accidents than vaccinated......

[MistressoftheDarkSide]

Have been pretty pre-occupied this year so not paid much attention to Covid other than checking if various hideous viruses over the last three months were Covid (none of the three were apparently).

But, I have seen reports about a Canadian study that suggests unvaccinated people are more like to be involved in traffic accidents..... 🤨

I hold my hands up and say I haven't read the paper but I have seen some commentary about it in various places, and it seems a little far fetched perhaps?

Am rubbish at linking on my phone but a quick Google should find reference to it for you.

But anyway, just wondered what the opinion is on this piece of scientific research?

Insurance companies already use information like occupation and home ownership to build a risk profile for customers, because there are established links between those and the likelihood of being in an accident, be it through correlation or causation

Probably watching the latest ' We're all doomed Captain!' video by John Campbell as they drive.

Hi Mistress
it's the usual suspects spouting shite
just wonder how it was funded.

Yup.

The funding info is, of course, given in the paper.
I wouldn't have thought it was very expensive as it uses public data and (from a brief scan) pretty standard methodology.

As to the use - not much except that it may help explain 'vaccine hesitancy' as being correlated with individual risk perception/behaviours rather than failures in public health information.

I guess it's useful for first responders to know this. If there is a higher likelihood of car crash victims to be unvaccinated then there is also a higher likelihood that they have flu/Covid so full virus precautions would be advised.

Was it not in Canada that thr unvaccinated people couldn't use public transport?? what a useless study🙄

Please stop peddling this misinformation; the Covid vaccine doesn’t stop you getting Covid or passing it on, so someone who isn’t vaccinated need not be treated like a leper. Jeez 🙄

And bad crossers of the road. A large proportion were pedestrians.

Also more likely to be walking or using their cars since only vaccinated people were allowed on public transport.

The study was for a month but they didn't count people as vaccinated if within two weeks of the vaccination. This seems a funny decision if all they were looking at was decision making. They also removed anyone who'd had an accident because of a medical event.

😂 hilarious, surely no one would be daft enough to believe this nonsense.

Which would be a valid thing to do if statistically the unvaccinated have more accidents. Isn't that exactly how motor insurance pricing works?

Unless the study says that one is the cause of the other why would anyone not believe it?

As others have said it sounds a reasonable conclusion that could be predicted from a behavioural point of view without too much of a stretch before doing the analysis

Interesting comments thank you all - when the first few went up after I posted peddling the "risk taking" behaviour line I thought I'd just leave it alone .....

I know Campbell is considered a conspiracy theorist but he has done a couple of videos, the second one more in depth than the first, and which I've only gotten halfway through.....

I'm going to watch the rest and ponder further.

Interesting that some still think the vaccine stops transmission when it has been officially announced that it doesn't.

Fascinating from a behavioural psychology point of view.....

And of course the old damn lies and statistics quite seems relevant.....

As I'm not vulnerable I am still unvaccinated by choice, yet I'm running a business and law abiding and I have similar friends.

I can see the reduction of risk by not drink driving and wearing a seat belt, but I really do think this paper is stretching it's arguments very thin....

Campbell had Australian biologist Susan Oliver on his YouTube early on in the pandemic. Last year she emailed him pointing out some errors in his report on Ivermectin - which he endorsed as a treatment for Covid. Oliver wanted a discussion on this. Campbell has not replied.

His endorsement of Ivermectin and increasing anti vaccine stance seems to have coincided with an explosion in his viewing numbers. I followed him from early 2020 - when often US based viewers would abuse him because he urged people to get vaccinated.

Back then he was ' just a stupid old poop nurse' and a ' corporate stooge'. Now he is a global phenomenon..I believe this is known as Audience Capture. Shame really as he made some good videos about Vitamin D , K2 etc.

Why has the thread swerved onto John Campbell?

As demonstrated by what must be hundreds of posts on him now, his videos are full of errors and basic misunderstandings. People have given very specific examples of the claims he's made that aren't true, and why they're not.

He makes huges amounts of money from his youtube channel, and is actively incentivised to promote conspiracy theories and misinformation because it gets more clicks.

For example: www.mumsnet.com/talk/coronavirus/4371621-Dr-John-Campbell-YouTube-videos-what-happened?page=1

I only mentioned Campbell because he actually goes through this study and points out it's flaws. From an analytical point of view.

God the dog whistles on this board are still active two years on!

In rebellious mood so I might start waxing lyrical on "State of Fear" and see how quickly I get labelled right wing 🙄

The point is made that this data was from a one month period when the "unvaccinated" were excluded from public transport so were likely to have to travel more for a start. Bad weather was involved. Also, people weren't considered vaccinated until 14 days post jab. It analysed in the region of 6,500 accidents including drivers, passengers and pedestrians out of a population of 11 million.

How on earth can pedestrians be included, unless the implication is that unvaccinated people become worse at crossing roads because they are unvaccinated?

I really don't think this can be considered a robust scientific piece of work based on these things alone.

^^ I gave a pretty robust criticism of the paper myself @MistressoftheDarkSide !

Lots of epidemiologists & other scientists have pointed out the obvious issues in it, so personally, based on the quality of Campbell's previous videos, and the fact he isn't a research scientist I would have highlighted their reviews.

No dog whistles here, but I am heartily sick of those profiting from this kind of thing like good old John!

I'm laughing at this but you're probably right. My friend is unvaccinated 'not putting that unproven rubbish in my veins' and she's had 3 accidents in recent years...

@rockly Yes your analysis was good and due to time constraints I didn't look for other reviews - he who must not be named came up as a suggestion on social media and it was just convenient - my bad 😞

It's the first time since my DP died in January that anything Covid related has really crossed my radar and my knee jerk response was basically "Are you fucking kidding me?"

This kind of alleged scientific research could indeed be leveraged in many ways including as you mention insurance premiums etc.

The whole pandemic was handled so badly I believe it has massively destabilised everything and opened the doors to mass manipulation on an unprecedented scale.

This sort of study is just ultimately damaging and unhelpful.

What an excellent example of ‘correlation ≠ causation’. Would be a very useful teaching tool.

The Covid vaccine doesn't prevent transmission in as much as people who have Covid are equally as likely to pass it on whether they are vaccinated or not. However vaccinated people are less likely to catch Covid and you can't transmit it if you're not infected with it. www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o298