You're obviously a superior life form with full knowledge of the truth.
Congrats.
Posted on 07/11/2021 10:56:24 AM PDT by ransomnote
[h/t Qiviut (Faith is the antidote to fear. Mindset: be a victor, not a victim.)]
Are Pfizer and Moderna misleading the public about the efficacy of their COVID vaccines by withholding the fact that there’s another way to parse their data — one that has more real-world significance?
In his introduction, Huff wrote: “Averages and relationships and trends and graphs are not always what they seem.” He added: “There may be more in them than meets the eye, and there may be a good deal less.”
Almost 70 years later, Huff’s admonition that a “well-wrapped statistic” can “sensationalize, inflate, confuse and oversimplify” seems more relevant than ever. For a pertinent modern-day example, one need look no further than COVID vaccine developers’ “headline-worthy” but misleading claims about their products’ “95% effectiveness.” As BMJ associate editor Peter Doshi and others have been confirming for months, these efficacy data are largely a matter of statistical smoke and mirrors.
Why are manufacturers’ claims about vaccine effectiveness misleading? Pfizer and Moderna declined to share with the public the fact that there is another way to parse their data that has more real-world significance.
Examining a statistic called absolute risk reduction — the number of percentage points that an individual’s risk goes down if they do something “protective” — the two companies’ COVID vaccines barely make a dent at all, reducing someone’s risk of experiencing COVID symptoms (the clinical trials’ endpoint) by less than 1%. This is the practical number that people are likely to care about most.
Knowing the paltry real-world impact of the injections on someone’s risk of developing COVID symptoms, how many people swayed by the misleading “95% effective” mantra might instead have decided to refuse the vaccines — products that have revealed themselves to be highly unsafe and, in some cases, fatal?
Unfortunately, topping its November efficacy claims for people 16 years and older, Pfizer just announced its COVID injection is “100% effective for 12-to-15 year-olds.” This announcement sets the stage for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) predicted authorization of Pfizer’s unlicensed vaccine for the adolescent market.
Parents who know that COVID rarely poses a threat to children and adolescents may already be planning to keep their kids away from the experimental shots, but there are other reasons for taking Pfizer’s latest grandiose claims with a grain of salt.
Ping: This is a simpler, more shareable description of the distorted impression given by Covid “vaccines” efficacy claims.
I have a ring on my finger which to date has been 100% effective in keeping elephants away. Seem to do well at keeping my wife away, too.
In real world observation, we can see it’s no where near 95%.
Effective in adverse effects
Effective in adverse effects
THAT ^ !
Billions and billions and billions of dollars in profit for these vaccines. And yes you will “require” a booster every year... forever.
The vaccines are largely useless for anyone not in the high risk category for Wuhan flu death.
No, I’m not antivax nor do I subscribe to the conspiracy theories promulgated by Qcultists that post mostly crap science.
This is just a practical observation.
It’s like amplifiers that go up to 11...
Ugh. The claim is that the vaccine is 95 % effective in preventing SYMPTOMATIC infection. And it is.
it is NOT a vaccine.
it was made BEFORE the putative release.
Dr. David Martin on Spike Protein Depopulation Patents Since 2002
Dr. David Martin on the CDC's, FauXi's, Daszak's, and Gates' plans
Bill Gates on the Side Effects and his DNA operating systems
You're obviously a superior life form with full knowledge of the truth.
Congrats.
Wow! WordPress sources a blogger that spins in circles!
Risk for general population (placebo group): 0.74%
Risk for immunized: 0.07%
“Unreported absolute risk reduction measures of 0.7% and 1.1% for the Pfzier/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, respectively, are very much lower than the reported relative risk reduction measures.”
Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trials.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7996517/
95% of “experts” are lying sociopaths.
This “absolute risk” math can easily be debunked. It is missing a core variable: time.
The trial covered 28 days post vaccination. Sure only 0.7% developed COVID over that time, but how many would over a full year, or a full decade without the vaccine?
Do those numbers and all of a sudden the same “absolute risk” calculation is preventing a huge number of cases.
“absolute risk reduction measures of 0.7% and 1.1% for the Pfzier/BioNTech and Moderna”
Remind me again what the risk of side effects, or medical errors is ?
Please
95% of people will die from it? (they hope).
Slightly overweight in middle-age it’s enough to make you a risk factor. I have had three such friends die from Covid. Get the damned vaccine.
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.