Here is the Pfizer clinical study from which they came up with the 95% efficacy if you want to follow along: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2034577
First, you might have heard your normie friends say "This vaccine is 95% effective. You should take it!"
Chances are, they dont really know what that means, but you can.
First lets ask the question "What do you think 95% efficacy means?"
Most people would answer "95% of the people will benefit from taking the vaccine, and stop them from getting infected". Lets see what it is.
This study (Phase 2 Pfizer clinical trial, which was the basis for the EUA) was conducted on 43,548 participants world wide. 21,720 of them received the vaccines. All data is reported 2 weeks after the second dose, up to 3.5 months.
In the placebo group 162 people out of 21,278 caught covid.
In the vaccine group 8 people out of 21,720 caught covid.
The test for COVID was done with what sounds like PCR test, but the exact words they use are "nucleic acid amplification–based testing (using a protocol-defined acceptable test)"
There is no reference to what protocol-defined acceptable test is, but my guess is they use 28 cycles for vaxxed and 40 cycles for placebo group. But no way to confirm this.
So even if we assume this is all authentic, the correct way to look at the data is: 162-8 = 154 people out of 21,270 actually benefited from the vaccine.
This works out to 0.7 % efficacy!
But they just ignore all the people who got the vaccine, and only consider the ones who fell sick. So out of 162 people, 154 people benefited from the vaccines - hence 95% efficacy.
If this is really the way they want to calculate this, then the number of participants for efficacy should only be 162+8 = 170 people. This means, a clinical trial focusing on only 170 people, not 43k people!
This is the big scam. They want to have their cake (43k participants) and eat it too (95% efficacy out of 170 people).
Either the efficacy is 0.7 % OR N=170 for efficacy.
Quality post. Unfortunately every turn of this thing is twisted which tells me everything I need to know.
Vaxx all the illegals at the Southern Border. They need it more than the average American!
It's all lies anyway, so this comes as no surprise. Thanks for the effort you put into the post.
Yeah, no respected scientist would accept one study with 170 people in question to come up with the efficacy rate. None. And yet here we are.
The time frames do not make sense either. More time is needed for vigorous studies.
Yeah, I forgot to emphasise on this. Typically Phase 2 is 24 months and this was the plan even in Pfizer's own docs.
And they destroyed the placebo group by informing them and offering them vaccines. So the study is pretty much useless now.
When I pointed this out in CovIdiots sub, the guy who was vehemently arguing that its a very extensive clinical study, actually started asking about HCQ and Iver lol
I knew the study was a joke, but not this much of a joke.
Math is racist
I'm not following your math. Admittingly, I have to take my shoes off the count beyond 10, but if you could take another Jab, at explaining this, it would be helpful.
You mean you want a booster shot?
Out of 43k participants (half of them jabbed):
number of people who caught covid without the jab is 162
Number of people who caught covid with the jab is 8
So the study concluded that the jab stopped 154 people from potentially catching covid, hence 154 out of 162 is 95% efficacy.
But they ignored the 21.5K people who had to be jabbed for 154 people to benefit from it. The real efficacy would be 154 out of 21.5k which is 0.7%
I got ya, I think.
Thank you for booster.
Dont forget to come back for the 3rd killshot 8 months from now.
Those are the lucky one that don't die within days to weeks.
[They] call them stubborn cockroaches.
this would be a good sticky
Ferret
Lives
Matter
Born out by the facts that more and more vakk'sd people are becoming sick, not through CV but from the experimental liquid inserted into them!
The whole thing is a scam.
I only explained the "efficacy" part of the clinical trial. If I write about how "safety" was tested one cannot help but cry.
Two people in the vaxxed group died due to heart complications, and both were ruled "Not related to the vaccine". If it was a legit trial, this alone would have prompted further clinical trials. Their logic (reading between the lines) is that 4 people died in the placebo group at the same time.
But thats not even the half of it. There were no baseline tests for things like blood clots (D-Dimer test before and after) or for spike protein creation. The damn experiment is about getting the body to create spike proteins, and there were no tests to verify how quickly it was getting created, in which parts of the body, or anything like that.
And finally, the serious adverse effects reported after the first 1 week has been so marginalised. Among the vaxxed, 27% reported adverse effects, and 21% reported related adverse effects. 64 reported lymphadenopathy. 59% percent reported fatigue and headache. If you read r/CovidVaccinated, almost every single person reporting there complains of brain fog, chronic fatigue, and its a constant thing not just transient.
Thanks for writing this up, a lot more people need to understand and not just blithely follow along because CNN and celebs tell them too!
Ever since I had my L2 vertebrae shattered in a helicopter crash (military) I also picked up 3 DVT's with one going PE and nearly costing me my life. So i'll be dammed if I'm taking an experimental juice which causes them!
So far I have 2 friends who have had some sort of bad flu, and one was overseas in South Sudan and ended up in hospital on oxygen for a bit. He is fine now and home, the other got better at home.
I now have 2 friends dead from heart attacks some time after the needle, and 3 more with serious heart palpitations, 2 of which ended up in the ER. One I spoke to recently has a resting heart rate of 125bpm which is crazy for a fit 30 something who is athletic in build.
And yet they scream get it!!
Oh yeah the "vaccines" are coming at "warp speed". Just stay out of the path.
Hard pass. You do you though handshake. I’ll stick to my 99.997% survival odds without putting experimental mRNA in my body.
I'm confused - Is Trump not speaking honestly? Newsmax
Look handshake, the odds of you being innocent and genuinely curious are incredibly small as to the odds of you being a shill are overwhelmingly strong. Your phrasing of the question is what gave you away.
Go read the virtual mountains of information as to why you should be hesitant of this garbage. It’s your body your choice, remember. As you are possibly learning here Trump’s base aren’t “brain washed cult members”. We actually study the source material instead of being spoon fed a narrative by the tv and social media.
I honestly thought this is part of the issue - which statements are 'truthful/honest' and not part of the great 'conspiracy' ?
Mountains of information... but only when it matches the belief the other side is inaccurate or playing to a 'narrative'
Which of the source materials indicate or show the statements by Trump during the rally are false? Are you calling former president a liar?
Watch 'Archer' much? "Phrasing" .. have a nice day officer - make sure to wear a mask
"Right which I’m 100% in agreement with. But I want to donate to Trump’s campaign. This whole situation is confusing/frustrating if the old establishment is being systematically dismantled."-- this you ?
Michael Yeadon and Richard Malone. In a time when telling the truth gets you censored/deplatformed and death threats. I’ll stick with entities who’ve been in positions to speak knowledgeably on the matter that has resulted in Silicon Valley silencing them.
Yes I’m not the only person damn curious about Trump’s donations going through Winred. I’m not in his campaign and cannot speak in an educated matter on the subject as to why he uses it or has to.