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.
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.