This is poor statistical analysis and is math used to advance an agenda. On its face it’s a bad vanity.
That being said all one has to do is look at Israel to determine population efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine. It is easy to spot.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Posted on 05/07/2021 3:18:12 PM PDT by ransomnote
Many FALSELY believe that having a Covid-19 vaccine with a 95% efficacy rate means they have 95% chance of staying healthy, and a 5% chance of getting sick. That would only be true if the often quoted efficacy rate referred to Relative Risk Reduction (RRR).
The Pharma companies, NIH, CDC, Fauci, Biden Administration appear to be satisfied that the public is not aware of what 'vaccine' claims like ‘95% effective’ actually mean.
Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) would have to be calculated to know the percent reduction of risk of illness following vaccination. I haven't seen any commentary in all the advertising which uses ARR statistics.
To calculate ARR, the % of persons expected to become ill following vaccination is subtracted from the % of persons who would have become ill if they hadn't had the vaccine.
Using Pfizer's data, without a vaccine people have a .93% chance of becoming ill with Covid-19 in the next 2 months (duration of Pfizer’s study).
According to Pfizer, if they have the vaccine, their risk of illness over the next 2 months drops from .93 of one percent, to .05 of one percent (rounded). We don't know how many would have become ill if the study continued beyond 2 months so that theoretical 'protection' has a time frame.
A nice walk through of the math involved is provided by a former math professor who doesn’t have a dog in this fight, he just wants people to understand math because…well…you can take a math professor out of the math lab but you can’t take the math out of the professor.
Prof. Richard Zucker illustrates his point first by walking through calculations for Measles, and then through the same calculations for Covid-19.
Measures of Vaccine Effectiveness - YouTube (17 minute video)
He compares this value with prior Measles vaccinations, in which you would have to vaccinate 1.3 children to protect 1 child from the disease. He shows through his calculations, using Pfizer’s data, 113 people have to be vaccinated to protect 1 person from becoming ill with Covid-19.
(IMAGE BELOW from Professor Zucker's video)
I think the the number of persons vaccinated required to "protect" one person from Covid-19 must be continually increasing, because many have already had Covid-19 and the risk of becoming ill from it is decreasing, and presummably the vaccinated are a little less vulnerable to illness as well. I've not seen any calculations about the percentages of people harmed by the 'vaccines'.
Those pushing for ‘herd immunity,’ and reasoning as if only vaccines can provide immunity, often state that the non-vaccinated are ‘holding us back’. In reality, because the risk of getting Covid-19 to those who have not yet had it is under 1%, the public health benefit of any vaccine of any efficacy rate is also going to be under 1% to those who haven't already had Covid-19.
Those who have had Covid-19 already have antibodies and do not benefit from vaccination, according to physicians like Dr. McCullough, who has worked with a team of physicians who developed a treatment protocol that reduces deaths from Covid-19 among the vulnerable by 85%. You may read about (print out) their medication protocol or watch the first 7 minutes of the video at the link below:
Now the public is being wooed with prizes and treats if they get vaccinated. 100$ savings bonds (WV, for ages 19 to 35), beer, nightclubs, museum passes, and other perks await the vaccine submission.
What's Behind Vaccine Hysteria? - American Thinker
The Yankees and Mets announced the stadiums will once again be open, but the vaccinated will ‘get’ to sit next to each other and the unvaccinated will have to socially distance. Yet we’re talking about a less than 1% chance of illness in the vaccinated section compared with a less than 1% chance of illness in the vaccinated section seated outdoors, all wearing masks.
Continued employment is a perk looming on the horizon. Commerce and travel, all of it tied to less than 1% difference with or without the vax.
Bills GM to cut players who refuse The Vaccine… [Buffalo]
The young and the healthy are likely the dominant demographic in a baseball stadium, so the risk of illness at a football stadium is actually smaller than Pfizer’s 2 month trial data .93% risk. So the benefits of vaccination would be smaller still.
The unvaccinated could get Covid-19 in the next 2 months, and if so, they are likely to recover and if particularly vulnerable (elderly, immune suppressed etc.), can use available treatments which are 85% effective. If those physicians and researchers who claim immunity is lasting are correct, why should those who've already had Covid-19 undergo the compounded risks of vaccination as they receive repeated ‘booster’ vaccination?
Why is there no real risk-benefit analysis in the push to vaccinate everyone with experimental products? The CDC’s documentation indicates boosters will not have to undergo the testing that the initial vaccines underwent.
The vaccines have risks, some of which are unknown and may result in ADE or other autoimmune illnesses. The vaccine trials were too short to tell us if they are safe, for whom, or for how long.
There’s evidence that the ‘vaccines’ promote the production of spike proteins that are themselves toxic to human health, and those vaccinated will not have a way to halt the production of those spike proteins in their bodies. I’ve heard (been shouted at) that the spike proteins won’t endure past a few days, weeks or months, but that assertion is insufficiently tested to promote as fact.
Some trolls gleefully post that the vaccines will likely be reclassified as ‘FDA approved’ within months to reduce the public’s ‘vaccine hesitancy’; not that the ‘vaccines’ will undergo the needed 10+ years of extensive testing for standard ‘FDA Approval’, but that they will simply be ‘reclassified’ for marketing purposes.
Pfizer asks FDA for full approval of coronavirus vaccine (msn.com)
Those trolls brag that once FDA approved, the fake vaccines can then be made mandatory. Imagine the quality of your life if the thought of other Americans receiving experimental vaccines against their will, in violation of their human and Constitutional Rights, made you felt superior and proud.
The Biden Administration will discover that the American public has, can and will say “NO!” to the destruction of freedom in our nation. Every day, more are waking up and seeing through the propaganda.
Vaccine specialists like Geert Vanden Bossche are warning that mass vaccinating a population in the middle of an outbreak, as we are told we are living through for a year now, is expected to lead to the development of stronger strains that we would face had we waited for natural herd immunity and treated the ill instead of withholding FDA approved medications. I hope he and the others saying this are wrong.
Given the hard salesmanship, the stripping of our rights, censorship, the violations of the Nuremburg Code of 1948 regarding informed consent, and threats/plans to institute shunning and steady advancement of vaccine passports, I believe the warnings are true.
I don’t believe the stated reason for the vaccinations, presumably Covid-19, explains the dictatorial grasping manner the Biden Administration is trying to treat us like livestock and ‘have us’ mass vaccinated. These bizarre tactics are not medically driven.
Want more proof?
New study from the UK government predicts 60-70% of future Covid deaths will be of those who had the 2nd shot of vaccines....
Of course we're hearing about 'variants' and the experts don't agree on whether or not our natural immunity to Covid-19 or 'vaccines' will protect us.
There are reasons why vaccination may not provide the benefits to public health claimed by manufacturers, the CDC, Fauci, and the co-owners of Moderna's patent in the NIH.
Italian Researchers: Vaccines Will Not Work Because SARS-CoV-2 Is Also Entering Bacteria (freerepublic.com)
The push for vaccination, 'vaccine apartheid', vaccination passports and vaccination risk censorship is not based on science.
Calling another FReeper “dude” is even worse than complaining about signal/noise ratio.
**********************************************
I hear you, dude.
Maroon... DOD IC has been my gig for ~40 years - you’re a speck on the radar... Tell FR your credentials....
Yea, but do you? Really?
Tell FR your credentials....
I was born in the wagon of a travelling show
My mama used to dance for the money they'd throw
Papa would do whatever he could
Preach a little gospel
Sell a couple bottles of Doctor Good.
That's crazy talk, Stands With a Vax.
Learn about the white man's medicine.
#SlapahoeTribe
*
Good Lord Almighty.
All MOD's got to do is utter the word "Vax" in a post and it plumb rains fruits & nuts. (With Doctorates and 40 years in DOD no less.)
....if you buy that stuff either.
Biden shill spotted.
Many FReepers are older and in high risk categories. Hopefully they will reject misinformation such as this and get vaccinated if they haven’t already. We younger right-wingers want you guys around as long as possible. God Bless.
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. In the original trial they reported that 11 of the vaccinated group got covid and stated 94.5% efficacy which again was based on the fact that very few people in either group, vax or control, contracted covid.
“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.”
Here is some more of the math prof’s work which I have posted here before. This demonstrates, in my opinion, the most important part of the equation of risk vs. benefit.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ExGIFGeVgAQu0qz?format=jpg&name=900x900
This is poor statistical analysis and is math used to advance an agenda. On its face it’s a bad vanity.
That being said all one has to do is look at Israel to determine population efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine. It is easy to spot.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes. Look to Israel. Prayers up for Israel.
Regarding lockdowns and mandates, Dr. Yeadon has this to say:
Your using a classic red herring argument. The vaccines are independent of the I order policy. I find it reprehensible the border policy was changed but the virus spread under restrictive policy as well. It’s not as if closing the border will stop Covid.
My 73 yo sister got her second Pfiser shot 4/11
Sat. 4/24 detected very foul odors on everything in her house. Irrationally started massive clean-up and laundery at 2:30 AM. Finally called EMS and went to emergency rm. Tested for COvid...Neg. Told she had a cluster of mini-strokes (since walked back) due to blood clots (?). Large blood clot or tumor detected in heart (?) MRIs determined a hole between chambers in heart, possibly congenital, and finally said her problems were afib. Sense of smell returned to normal. Released 4/26 with meds
Thur 4/29 early AM expe rienced acute pains in ALL joints. EMS called again and back to ER. Tested for COvid...Neg. After getting medication pain was relieved and she was released next day.
Tues. 5/4 Another cluster of mini-strokes(?) speech and balance affected. Different, larger hospital this time. Tested for COvid...Positive! Many other tests with no diagnosis offered as yet. Placed in isolation for duration of stay. Released yesterday with meds.
No answer yet to whether the mass in her heart is a clot or tumor.
Is the here any wonder I trust NOTHING THAT IS TOLD TO ME BY ANYONE wrt COvid and the vaccines?
it’s a question...
you made it an argument by refusing to answer it...
Recommend me an article about computers and I’m interested. Otherwise, not so much.
From your link, what RansomNote says is spot on the same:
“What the 95% actually means is that vaccinated people had a 95% lower risk of getting COVID-19 compared with the control group participants, who weren’t vaccinated. In other words, vaccinated people in the Pfizer clinical trial were 20 times less likely than the control group to get COVID-19.”
Prayers up for your sister. Regarding your last statement...no wonder here and I’m on the same freequency as you. God bless.
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.