Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: ransomnote

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.


4 posted on 05/07/2021 12:49:09 AM PDT by Cathi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Cathi
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%.

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.

5 posted on 05/07/2021 3:27:20 AM PDT by stig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson