Won’t be long until they will also be forced to introduce the phrase leaky vaccine. They are imperfect and leaky, and the leaky part is what’s really going to be the issues.
The Pfizer vax is 95% effective if you go by the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) calculation, which is what is highlighted. But if you go by the Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) it's only 0.84% effective.
The first considers only infected individuals in the test and control groups, while the second considers the entire population of both groups. Here's a chart.
They are also saying that those over 50 without the needle are less likely to die of the virus than those that have had 2 shots?
Also they state this is an imperfect vaccine yet then try and tell the public it's 95% effective, well which way round is it?
It's a ticking time bom - b if you ask me. I've already lost a friend after the needle due to a heart attack, can it be linked, unlikely.
The injection was already a form of IQ test. Now it is even more obvious. "Effective but imperfect"? FFS.
Won’t be long until they will also be forced to introduce the phrase leaky vaccine. They are imperfect and leaky, and the leaky part is what’s really going to be the issues.
The Pfizer vax is 95% effective if you go by the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) calculation, which is what is highlighted. But if you go by the Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) it's only 0.84% effective.
The first considers only infected individuals in the test and control groups, while the second considers the entire population of both groups. Here's a chart.