Posted on 05/06/2021 11:20:49 PM PDT by Cathi
In a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers from the Maryland-based biotech firm Novavax report that the company’s COVID-19 vaccine is 51% efficacious in protecting people from disease.
The results come from a Phase 2 study of the two-dose vaccine, which uses a different technology than the three COVID-19 shots currently authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Currently authorized shots from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna both use an mRNA-based technology, while Johnson & Johnson-Janssen relies on an adenovirus to deliver SARS-CoV-2 genes to the body—both approaches work by training the body’s immune cells to make viral proteins that other immune cells then attack, so these defenses are then ready to target the SARS-CoV-2 virus when infection happens. Novavax designed its shot to already contain the viral protein, so when it’s injected into the body, it’s immediately targeted as foreign.
In March, the company released results from its U.K.-based Phase 3 study, which showed that overall, the vaccine was 96% efficacious in protecting people from COVID-19 symptoms, and 86% efficacious in shielding them from the B.1.1.7. variant first identified in the U.K.
The recent NEJM study involved more than 2,600 people in South Africa, and was started in November 2020—after the U.K. study and, coincidentally, after the emergence of a new variant of SARS-CoV-2, called B.1.351, in the African country. That enabled the researchers to focus more specifically on whether the vaccine protects against the B.1.351 variant. Overall, a full regime of the Novavax vaccine—two shots—as 51% efficacious in protecting people from COVID-19 symptoms, ranging from mild to severe.
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
These efficacy numbers seem stupid to me, once I look into how it is calculated.
In one of the trials, they exposed animals to the virus and killed/examined the lungs of the animals 2 days later for signs of pathology.
I think 2 days is too short, an animal may slowly succumb. Saying vaccines are 95% efficacious doesn’t mean anything to me because the illness may progress slowly or the next exposure to the illness will sicken the test patient. All this is smoke and mirrors on ‘vaccines’ that arne’t vaccines and have only been tested 2 months or maybe 3 months instead of 10 years or more. ALl lies.
On the South African numbers....I would suggest that if you looked around at TB rates...there’s a fair sum of people who’ve had it and been treated with medication over the years. That might explain part of the numbers.
The pharma “efficacy” numbers are basically PR efforts. It’s the way you make stats “Lie”...:-)
Good video from a math prof explaining Absolute Risk Reduction vs. Relative Risk Reduction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2Ue85EV2Us
Pfizer’s “95%” efficacy (Relative Risk Reduction) really means that the unvaccinated in their trial had a 0.93% incidence of covid vs. the vaccinated incidence of covid 0.046% So the Absolute Risk Reduction was 0.884%.
So that means you would have to vaccinate 113 people to keep one person from getting serious covid.
From the study it means that 95% of the total COVID-19 cases came from the Placebo group. Only 5% of the total cases were in the vaccinated group.
I believe the incidence you are talking about would be additive. Meaning if you have a 0.93% chance of catching covid (as per the study) that would be the risk over 2 or 3 months (the time study participants were given before results were published). So in any given year you would have about a 3.7% to 5% chance of catching COVID-19 if no one took a vaccine.
In densely populated areas the probability would be much greater because elevators, subways, trains, office building would be in play. The study took place in a world wide shut down. Once things go back to normal the yearly probability of catching COVID will be much higher.
The thing is that in practice the efficacy rate of the mRNA vaccines is looking like it was much higher than the rates in the trial. They are incredibly effective, and the few people who do subsequently get Covid, get very mild cases.
Don’t take Novavax or Sinopharm, take Pfizer or Moderna.
“The thing is that in practice the efficacy rate of the mRNA vaccines is looking like it was much higher than the rates in the trial. They are incredibly effective, and the few people who do subsequently get Covid, get very mild cases.”
What I have been surprised by is that the actual breakthrough cases haven’t been “very mild cases.” In the latest CDC report (11 days old) only 27% have been asymptomatic; 8% were hospitalized and 1% died.
And the even bigger surprise has been that short term efficacy is accompanied by unprecedented numbers of “after vax deaths” (4,178) and over 300,000 “adverse events” reports. Magnitudes of anything reported in VAERS 31 year history of vaccine reports.
95 MILLION people fully vaccinated as of the date of that report, and 9200 subsequent cases? That’s less than 0.01% subsequent infections. 132 deaths? 0.0001%
That’s what you’re calling bad news??? The thing is a miracle!
Follow the Big Pharma $$$$.
The vax is no miracle.
The 9,200 number is dated and very inaccurate. California, alone, has already reported over 3,000.
From the CDC:
“It is important to note that reported vaccine breakthrough cases will represent an undercount,” the CDC said in a statement after the newest results were released. “This surveillance system is passive and relies on voluntary reporting from state health departments which may not be complete.
“Also, not all real-world breakthrough cases will be identified because of lack of testing. This is particularly true in instances of asymptomatic or mild illness. These surveillance data are a snapshot and help identify patterns and look for signals among vaccine breakthrough cases.”
“I believe the incidence you are talking about would be additive. Meaning if you have a 0.93% chance of catching covid (as per the study) that would be the risk over 2 or 3 months (the time study participants were given before results were published). So in any given year you would have about a 3.7% to 5% chance of catching COVID-19 if no one took a vaccine.”
We haven’t gotten a lot of info about follow up after the two month trial data. But, we did get the six month follow up of the Moderna Cove 3 trial.
““Moderna’s latest analysis of its vaccine clinical trial data shows 900 people got COVID-19 after being vaccinated, consistent with 90% or more efficacy for the vaccine, company spokesperson Colleen Hussey said.”
“The company shared an update on the Phase 3 COVE study of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine. An updated review of adjudicated cases has identified over 900 cases of COVID-19 in the COVE study as of April 9th, including over 100 cases of severe COVID-19, as defined in the protocol, with a median follow-up of approximately 6 months post dose 2, it said.”
““Moderna’s latest analysis of its vaccine clinical trial data shows 900 people got COVID-19 after being vaccinated, consistent with 90% or more efficacy for the vaccine, company spokesperson Colleen Hussey said.”
Right so if you want to know your 6 month risk (in a shut down) of catching COVID-19, it's 900/30,420 (the size of the original pool of study subjects). That represents a 3% probability per 6 months of catching COVID-19. That would be a 6% chance per year.
Again once we fully open up, your chances of catching COVID-19 will go up from that baseline 6% per year. I only mention this because people drastically underestimate the risk (based on my read of various posts).
I am not a proponent of mandatory vaccines. You need to assess your risk factors for having a severe or deadly case of COVID-19 and make your own informed decision.
Also states should implement liability protection for schools, businesses and individuals. No one should be able to bring a law suit because they caught COVID-19 from a business, school, or individual. If you as an individual don't want to chance getting COVID-19 then stay home. Shop online or go to stores when there is less of a crowd. Don't expect the rest of us to pay just because you caught COVID-19 from living your life normally.
“You need to assess your risk factors for having a severe or deadly case of COVID-19 and make your own informed decision.”
I agree and a big part of that risk assessment is the safety of the vax. 4,178 “after vax deaths” reported to VAERS; over 300,000 “adverse events” reported all in just the first 5 months of vax. Historic, unprecedented; magnitudes of what has been reported to VAERS for any other vax in its 31 year history.
“Do take the time to click on this link (and add an extra 1,100 additional since April 24th) provided by
Jean Marc Benoit MD @JeanmarcBenoit
Emergency Physician, amateur covid data analyst. Clinical medicine, evidence-based medicine, data-based reporting·
Apr 24
“Vaccine suspected death reports in US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, from 1990 up to April 24, 2021.”
“Something is very wrong in 2021”
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ezy8oOnWYAI0IiJ?format=png&name=medium
Flu vaccines are also mostly given to senior citizens. Last year 194 million people got the flu vaccine. 20 of them were “after vax deaths.”
And the following graph you will need to add 2,400 additional deaths so far.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ExGIFGeVgAQu0qz?format=jpg&name=900x900
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.