ELI5: Help me demolish the claim that covid vaccines are 95% effective

lvysaur

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
2,286
Honestly, I don't know. But I can tell you about the Bell's Palsy lie.

Regarding Bell's Palsy, the media always repeats a lie: that the rate of palsy in the vaccine group is "the same as in the background population"

This is a fraudulent comparison because "background population" are people who developed palsy over their entire LIFETIME. The vaccine group developed it over 1 month of vaccine testing. Since the "average background person" is roughly 40 years old (40 years x 12 months/year = 480 months), this makes the vaccine recipients 480x more likely to develop Bell's Palsy.

If they were honest, they would compare palsy rates in the vaccine and CONTROL groups (that's the literal purpose of a control group, for comparison). But the control groups have zero palsy, so they have to twist and mentally acrobatic themselves into this lie.
 

BRMarshall

Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
237
Robert Barnes / VivaFrei and Dershowitz are going to have a debate on this too, upcoming on VivaFrei's youtube channel.
Thank You for this information.....I enjoy the Barnes/Frei exchanges and absolutely loath Dershowitz attacks upon our freedom as regards vaccinations, but his arguments can be stopped...

Here hs is with Viva Frei
 
Last edited:

amd

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
864
Correct. The Russian vaccine is 95% effective, considering the rush (bypassing key testing) to make these vaccines it seems like a propaganda target.

Besides, why do we continue framing issues from the propaganda point of view?

We don't have to prove it is 95% effective or not when there's ample evidence in court rulings of the criminal behavior of the pharmaceutical companies (CDC whisteblower William W. Thompson and Vioxx examples).

And vaccine manufacturers have legal immunity from prosecution. And we know on who's side the government is on (prosecutor for criminal cases).

42 U.S. Code § 300aa–22 - Standards of responsibility
"No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings."

What part of not having isolated the virus is still not clear?

What tests are they using to prove Covid-19 infections and vaccine effectiveness against Covid-19?

We can't play their game of equating emergency with (criminal) recklessness.

We won't have an effective vaccine against the flu, just as we can't have an effective vaccine against a coronavirus.

Variation in RNA Virus Mutation Rates across Host Cells
"It is well established that RNA viruses exhibit higher rates of spontaneous mutation than DNA viruses and microorganisms. However, their mutation rates vary amply .."

"RNA viruses show high rates of spontaneous mutation, a feature that profoundly influences viral evolution, disease emergence, the appearance of drug resistances, and vaccine efficacy. However, RNA virus mutation rates vary substantially and the factors determining this variability remain poorly understood."
 
Last edited:

Tim Lundeen

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2017
Messages
396

 
Joined
Dec 8, 2018
Messages
893
Location
The Netherlands
In Europe, you have a 99.94 - 99.98% chance of survival even based on the dodgy government statistics which conflate "death with" with "death from".

Consider that animal trials were largely skipped, that there were no true control groups in the human trials (only groups that took a different vaccine), and that the studies didn't run nearly long enough to ascertain long term risk. That fraudulently generated and shamelessly inflated 95% vaccine success rate takes another major hit when you realize that these so called vaccines were never tested on the target demographic-- the old and sick-- but only on the young and healthy.
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
Help me show this.

Look at the trial data. The groups were something like 22,000 apiece. They only made that claim off of 95-160 cases of COVID, total. 95% of "Covid" cases happened in the placebo group. They were using PCR tests that have their own issues, but still.

And there's no true "Placebo" group, I think the other group got the meningitis vaccine.

So, there were something like 150 cases in the meningitis vaccine group vs. 10 in the experimental mRNA so called "Covid" vaccine group. But doing the math, you still had 21,850 people in BOTH groups that didn't test positive for COVID, and 10 in both groups who did. This is more like a 0.3-0.5% effectiveness, if it's even statistically significant. And, apparently, the trials are still ongoing. So that "effectiveness" number could change.
 
OP
ecstatichamster
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
10,501
Look at the trial data. The groups were something like 22,000 apiece. They only made that claim off of 95-160 cases of COVID, total. 95% of "Covid" cases happened in the placebo group. They were using PCR tests that have their own issues, but still.

And there's no true "Placebo" group, I think the other group got the meningitis vaccine.

So, there were something like 150 cases in the meningitis vaccine group vs. 10 in the experimental mRNA so called "Covid" vaccine group. But doing the math, you still had 21,850 people in BOTH groups that didn't test positive for COVID, and 10 in both groups who did. This is more like a 0.3-0.5% effectiveness, if it's even statistically significant. And, apparently, the trials are still ongoing. So that "effectiveness" number could change.

okay so to simplify I'm going to use a thought experiment.

20,000 get the vaccine
20,000 get a placebo

100 people in placebo group get Covid
5 of the people in the vaccine group get Covid.

Is that the basis for 95%?

Your point is a good one, that the number of people who got Covid was very very small compared to the number in the test group, and therefore the 100 people (in my thought experiment which I think is pretty close to the "real" trials) is not significant statistically. Sure it is 95%, but the significance is probably near zero.

If 10,000 people got Covid in the placebo group, and only 500 people got it in the vaccine group, that would be significant, yes?
 

amd

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
864

EMAIL EXCHANGE WITH UK MHRA - Exposing the genomic sequence of SARSCov2

I set about proving that the vaccine has been created from a computer generated genomic sequence & not one isolated from an infected person ..

The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine was approved by UK MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) & I initiated a polite exchange of emails with them as follows:

Q: "I would like you to confirm that the DNA template has come from a computer generated genomic sequence first notified to WHO by China rather than an isolated virus from an infected person."

A: "The DNA template used does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person."

A: "The DNA template(severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, GenBank: MN908947.3) was generated via a combination of gene synthesis and recombinant DNA technology."
 
OP
ecstatichamster
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
10,501
in other terms, using my thought experiment, 100/20,000 = 0.5%.
5/20,000 =.00025
so the absolute risk reduction is very very very small. Is this a relative risk misdirection problem?
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
okay so to simplify I'm going to use a thought experiment.

20,000 get the vaccine
20,000 get a placebo

100 people in placebo group get Covid
5 of the people in the vaccine group get Covid.

Is that the basis for 95%?

Yep, that's the whole basis. And that difference could be massively reduced or even entirely wiped out if the trials went on for a few more months.
Your point is a good one, that the number of people who got Covid was very very small compared to the number in the test group, and therefore the 100 people (in my thought experiment which I think is pretty close to the "real" trials) is not significant statistically. Sure it is 95%, but the significance is probably near zero.

If 10,000 people got Covid in the placebo group, and only 500 people got it in the vaccine group, that would be significant, yes?
That would be massively significant. In fact, it would probably be the biggest difference of any health intervention in history.
 

boris

Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,345
Covid-19 vaccine candidate is unimpressive: NNTV is around 256 | The BMJ

Dear Editor

Pfizer’s vaccine “may be more than 90% effective.” (Mahase, BMJ 2020;371:m4347, November 9) Specific data are not given but it is easy enough to approximate the numbers involved, based on the 94 cases in a trial that has enrolled about 40,000 subjects: 8 cases in a vaccine group of 20,000 and 86 cases in a placebo group of 20,000. This yields a Covid-19 attack rate of 0.0004 in the vaccine group and 0.0043 in the placebo group. Relative risk (RR) for vaccination = 0.093, which translates into a “vaccine effectiveness” of 90.7% [100(1-0.093)]. This sounds impressive, but the absolute risk reduction for an individual is only about 0.4% (0.0043-0.0004=0.0039). The Number Needed To Vaccinate (NNTV) = 256 (1/0.0039), which means that to prevent just 1 Covid-19 case 256 individuals must get the vaccine; the other 255 individuals derive no benefit, but are subject to vaccine adverse effects, whatever they may be and whenever we learn about them……We’ve already heard that an early effect of the vaccine is “like a hangover or the flu.” Will vaccinees who are later exposed to coronaviruses have more severe illness as a result of antibody-dependent enhancement of infection (ADEI), a known hazard of coronavirus vaccines? Is there squalene in the Pfizer vaccine? If so, will vaccinees be subject to autoimmune diseases, like Gulf War Syndrome and narcolepsy that have been associated with the adjuvant?

We already know that current Covid-19 vaccine trials are unlikely to show a reduction in severe illness or deaths. (Doshi, BMJ 2020;371:m4037, October 21) Will they be like seasonal influenza vaccines, which have not proved to be lifesavers, and may even have increased overall mortality in the elderly? (Anderson et al, Ann Intern Med 2020;172:445) We need a lot more time and a lot more data, especially in view of massive uncertainties about Covid-19 case definitions and statistics.

ALLAN S. CUNNINGHAM 13 November 2020

Competing interests: No competing interests

13 November 2020
Allan S. Cunningham
Retired pediatrician
image.png
 

Ras

Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2015
Messages
931
From what I understand about the protein being amplified, you can make anyone's RT-PCR positive after enough cycles.
 

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Yep, that's the whole basis. And that difference could be massively reduced or even entirely wiped out if the trials went on for a few more months.

That would be massively significant. In fact, it would probably be the biggest difference of any health intervention in history.

Btw, there is something much more revealing in the Pfizer trial that I did not catch until now. The trial started on July 27, 2020 and lasted until August 25, 2020. Basically 28 days. The total number of reported COVID-19 cases in the US on July 27, 2020 was 15,739,150. The total number of reported cases on August 25, 2020 was 22,934,522. So total new cases for that period in the US was 7,195,732, which comes down to about 2.2% new cases against the total US population for that period. Here is where I am getting the numbers for those statements.

Now, the placebo (or meningitis vaccine) group in the Pfizer trial got just 150 new cases out of a group size of almost 22000, so that's about 0.6% new cases for the non-vaccinated trial participants. Why is the infection rate of the placebo group in the trial more than 3 times lower than the infection rate in the general population for the same time period?!? There are two options here:

1) If the placebo group infection rate is taken as the more reliable number then the official numbers reported in the media about COVID-19 cases in the US is potentially inflated/misreported by at least a factor of 3. This means the actual COVID-19 case count for the US is about 6.85mil for entire 2020, compared to the 35.5mil flu cases in 2019. Even assuming mortality rate 3-4 times higher for COVID-19 based on these numbers we still get about the same total mortality numbers between COVID-19 and the flu.

2) If the official COVID-19 cases are taken as the more reliable number then the group selection/randomization for the trial was poor and the groups are not good representatives of the general population. As such, the trial results are invalid.

Neither one is a palatable option for the powers that be, but I don't see how this can be explained away. We should be watching the numbers for the other vaccine trials and if they are just as skewed as the Pfizer numbers then it adds even more to the pile of evidence that this whole thing is a scam.


@ecstatichamster @boris @fico @Tarmander @Ivysaur @Giraffe
 
Last edited:

Tarmander

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
3,763
Btw, there is something much more revealing in the Pfizer trial that I did not catch until now. The trial started on July 27, 2020 and lasted until August 25, 2020. Basically 28 days. The total number of reported COVID-19 cases in the US on July 27, 2020 was 15,739,150. The total number of reported cases on August 25, 2020 was 22,934,522. So total new cases for that period in the US was 7,195,732, which comes down to about 2.2% new cases against the total US population for that period. Here is where I am getting the numbers for those statements.

Now, the placebo (or meningitis vaccine) group in the Pfizer trial got just 150 new cases out of a group size of almost 22000, so that's about 0.6% new cases for the non-vaccinated trial participants. Why is the infection rate of the placebo group in the trial more than 3 times lower than the infection rate in the general population for the same time period?!? There are two options here:

1) If the placebo group infection rate is taken as the more reliable number then the official numbers reported in the media about COVID-19 cases in the US is potentially inflated/misreported by at least a factor of 3. This means the actual COVID-19 case count for the US is about 6.85mil for entire 2020, compared to the 35.5mil flu cases in 2019. Even assuming mortality rate 3-4 times higher for COVID-19 based on these numbers we still get about the same total mortality numbers between COVID-19 and the flu.

2) If the official COVID-19 cases are taken as the more reliable number then the group selection/randomization for the trial was poor and the groups are not good representatives of the general population. As such, the trial results are invalid.

Neither one is a palatable option for the powers that be, but I don't see how this can be explained away. We should be watching the numbers for the other vaccine trials and if they are just as skewed as the Pfizer numbers then it adds even more to the pile of evidence that this whole thing is a scam.


@ecstatichamster @boris @fico @Tarmander @Ivysaur @Giraffe
that is very observant. Nice find
 

Aad

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2019
Messages
431
Israel and UK are leading the way in vaccinations, they started exactly 1 month ago, but both these countries are now seeing a HUGE surge of new covid-19 cases and hospitalizations, more so than back in april 2020. Hospitals in the UK (especially in England) and in Israel are now being overwhelmed.

Those vaccines are creating new, unprecedented covid-19 surges beyond everything we have seen thus far.

Glad I'm seeing the link.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom