Florida's Fake Surgeon General Faked COVID Vaccine 'Study' Results, Documents Show

If it's OK for hurricane forecasts, why not for public health?

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, who was appointed to the job because his anti-vaccine quackery pleased Ron Desantis, made news last October when he flogged a deeply flawed "study" as an excuse to recommend that Florida Men under the age of 40not get vaccinated against COVID-19. The recommendation and the study were roundly condemned by real medical experts at the time, because the study had multiple flaws: a tiny sample size, multiple methodological flaws, including several the authors pointed out themselves, and the glaring fact that the work hadn't been peer reviewed.

Previously:

 Florida dOiNg iTs oWN vAcCInE rEseArcH 

 In Bold Move, Ron DeSantis Appoints Actual COVID Virus As Florida Surgeon General 

 Yesterday, Politico reported that there's an even bigger reason to doubt the already shaky research: Dr. Ladapo "personally altered" the study to make it seem the COVID vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer pose "a significantly higher health risk for young men than had been established by the broader medical community," according to a copy of the study draft obtained through a public records request.

Ladapo’s changes [...] presented the risks of cardiac death to be more severe than previous versions of the study. He later used the final document in October to bolster disputed claims that Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines were dangerous to young men.

Specifically, Ladapo's revisions to the eight-page draft edited out the results of "an important analysis that would have contradicted his recommendation," in order to exaggerate the supposed risk of heart disease from the vaccines. Every last footnote and reference to that "sensitivity analysis" was deleted by Ladapo, making an already iffy study seem like its findings were more definite than it really was.

Hilariously — if you like HOLLOW MORDANT LAUGHTER at least — Ladapo responded to a request for comment from Politico with a real banger of a non-denial denial, a statement in which

Ladapo said revisions and refinements are a normal part of assessing surveillance data and that he has the appropriate expertise and training to make those decisions.

“To say that I ‘removed an analysis’ for a particular outcome is an implicit denial of the fact that the public has been the recipient of biased data and interpretations since the beginning of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine campaign,” he said. “I have never been afraid of disagreement with peers or media.”

We like the part where he doesn't really deny that he removed the sensitivity analysis to skew the outcome, but instead shifts to a completely different claim about whether the public has gotten good information. Those two clauses have nothing to do with each other.

And look, he did it twice:  

He also said that he determined the study was worthwhile since “the federal government and Big Pharma continue to misrepresent risks associated with these vaccines.”

Whether the second part of that sentence is true (it isn't) has nothing to do with the validity of the study, or of Ladapo's edits.

The deletion of the sensitivity analysis puts an entirely different spin on the conclusion of the study. In addition to removing the actual data from the analysis, a key sentence is shorn of an absolutely vital caveat, so that now it reads "COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a slight increased risk for cardiac-related mortality 28 days following vaccinations [...]"

What was removed? This statement, saying the additional analysis made that seeming result vanish:

in the primary analysis, but this association was attenuated and no longer significant when applying the event-dependent exposures model utilized for multidose vaccines. Thus,there is little suggestion of any effect immediately following vaccination.[emphasis added — Dok]

Instead, Ladapo inserted this assertion, which hadn't been in any of the earlier drafts:

"Results from the stratified analysis for cardiac related death following vaccination suggests mRNA vaccination may be driving the increased risk in males, especially among males aged 18-39. The risk associated with mRNA vaccination should be weighed against the risk associated with COVID-19 infection.”

Ladapo even removed a qualifier from the authors' fairly substantial section on the study's limitations, eliminating a caution that the work was "not academic research." More chillingly, he deleted the study's call for further, more detailed study of connections between actual COVID-19 infections and heart problems "before vaccine recommendations are changed."

Instead, he went right ahead and changed the recommendations. After all, if the word of caution is deleted, there's no need for caution.

Matt Hitchings, a biostatistics professor at the University of Florida (Motto: "Still real medicine until DeSantis starts fucking with us") said Ladapo's claim that the study showed an increased risk of cardiac death from the vaccine simply isn't justified by any of the the study's (already dubious) findings:

"I think it’s a lie. [...] To say this — based on what we’ve seen, and how this analysis was made — it’s a lie."

Further, Politico notes,

Hitchings chastised the integrity of Ladapo’s study after it was released last fall but is now much more critical.

“What’s clear from the previous analysis, and even more clear from Dr. L’s edits, is that absolutely there was a political motivation behind the final analysis that was produced,” Hitchings said. “Key information was withheld from the public that would have allowed them or other experts to interpret this in context.”

Finally, Politico points out that in November, shortly after Ladapo published the crap study, an anonymous complaint to the inspector general for Florida's Department of Health alleged that Ladapo had futzed around with the study results:  

“The analysis performed in DOH did not find this,” the individual wrote without providing evidence, according to the complaint. “He manipulated the final draft of the analysis.”

However, that story notes, the IG dropped the investigation "after the complainant didn’t respond to follow-up questions regarding the accusations," so thanks a lot, accurate but apparently cowardly whistle-blower. When Politico covered the story in February, Ladapo insisted that the complaint was "factually false," because of course he did.

We have little doubt that this new, clear evidence that Ladapo dishonestly edited an already flawed study so it would fit his boss's anti-vax agenda will cause a big scandal in Florida's medical and public health community, which will be completely ignored by DeSantis stans because after all the media lies about everything.

[ Politico / Ladapo Edits PDF / Politico ]

Yr Wonkette is funded entirely by reader donations. Please help us keep the lies at bay — Tampa Bay, prolly — with a monthly $5 or $10 donation, if you can!

 Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons .