[worik]

Conspiracy BS because it cherry picks ideas to support a conclusion.

The implied conclusion is that Covid has been exaggerated to sell vaccines

Cherry picking exapmple: "criticized GAVI for focussing on funding expensive new vaccines and neglecting to give children cheap old ones" Two minutes reading the article on Wiki tells me that the purpose of the organisation is to facilitate access to new vaccines, expensive patented ones. Access to non patented cheap vaccines does not need a group like this.

Hardly worth bothering about, but the question was asked. That is why "conspiracy BS"

[grumpyautist]

So, the study is funded by groups that admit to existing to sell new vaccines? And you don't see a conflict of interest?

[des1nderlase]

There could be conflict of interest, but someone still needs to show that these numbers are substantially wrong.

[grumpyautist]

No, the burden of proof is on the author. And considering this is a model, not a study, I wouldn't hold my breath on it.

[knowaveragejoe]

The burden of proof rests on your shoulders, in this case.