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.
Why link to a blog repost rather than linking to the source directly?
There are those who fear the "cancel culture" will not speak out in opposition.
There are those who have lost home and family, licensing, professional degrees, and employment when they speak out in opposition to the accepted vaccine.
"Statistics don't lie,.. but statisticians do", through data manipulation.
Pure science doesn't exist when it is politicized.
95% effective.
I’m glad stepping on my brake pedal has a much higher rate of effectiveness than that.
Presented without editorial comment
With access to controversial data so that you can make up your own mind as to its efficacy
This is a thought provoker..
Only....your brake pedal is likely and actually that effective.
That’s the point of this article.
The means used to justify the effectiveness rate, of these shots, is skewed....per article and links.
The human immune system is at least 99% effective against the virus.
I know. I just thought the comparison was interesting to think about. Also, if the brakes fail, there’s an emergency brake. I guess that would compare to the hospital and the ventilator.
It’s the rabid demanding of that which cannot be compelled that puts my antenna up. Especially by random people on the internet with no standing or need to give anyone personal medical advice.
A farmer walks into the kitchen with a duck under his arm. He says, “Here is the pig I was telling you about.”
Wife say, That’s not a pig. It is a duck.”
Farmer says, “I was talking to the duck.”
Or go on a diet, get some exercise, and find a doctor that will treat you with medicines shown to be effective by folks not trying to make several billion dollars...
“Vaccine Makers Claim COVID Shots Are ‘95% Effective’ — But What Does That Mean?”
It simply means that the “jab’ is 95% effective at having adverse effects on one’s biological system.
A well written explanation.
From June 17 on OAN. I guess they got ignored.
Stop telling people what to do. You have no standing to give personal medical advice.
‘Pfizer just announced its COVID injection is “100% effective for 12-to-15 year-olds.”’
When a-n-y company dares to make THIS claim, you know they are immune from any liability!
I never saw the two numbers .7 or .74 but when someone asked me what the effectiveness of the vaccines were i told them about the same as your natural immunity. I guess i was right.
“Stop telling people what to do. You have no standing to give personal medical advice.”
What a coincidence—neither to the medical “experts”!
Even if it is 95% effective, why would anybody in their right mind take it to fend off a virus with a 99.98% survival rate?
I think everyone should get the shots or not depending on what they individually think about it. I think consulting with their primary physician is a good idea too.
Never buy the first model year or first year of a major redesign of a vehicle.
Never buy the first sub version of a major version of Windows.
Their both apt to be buggy.
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.