It's not "small." 700 people were in the experimental group. n=1,000. That's well more than enough to produce highly statistically significant results. Even the subgroup analysis of 372 cancer patients you noted is more than sufficient to produce a statistically significant result. You note that yourself with the discussion of the p-value.
By calling it "small," you minimize the impact of the work, as if it's not big enough to prove anything. That's false. The numbers are clear and the work stands on its merits. The mRNA vaccines cause heart inflammation even in health, asymptomatic patients and the effect persists even 6 months after introduction of the vaccine. You don't need 10,000 people to prove this.
It's not "small." 700 people were in the experimental group. n=1,000. That's well more than enough to produce highly statistically significant results. Even the subgroup analysis of 372 cancer patients you noted is more than sufficient to produce a statistically significant result. You note that yourself with the discussion of the p-value.
By calling it "small," you minimize the impact of the work, as if it's not big enough to prove anything. That's false. The numbers are clear and the work stands on its merits. The mRNA vaccines cause heart inflammation even in health, asymptomatic patients and the effect persists even 6 months after introduction of the vaccine. You don't need 10,000 people to prove this.