No, there’s nothing misleading about it at all. If Pfizer itself says that the “vaccines” don’t make you immune, don’t stop infection and don’t stop transmission…where are you getting your information from?
The only misleading statistic is the “95% effective” number that gets thrown around.
The absolute risk reduction is LESS THAN 1%.
You’re just a willing mark at this point. There is just no way to justify the risks these shots present.
Yes, sp free, you've made it very clear you don't understand the science but are proudly going to keep talking despite that.
Give yourself a cookie.
I do encourage peoples that are old (or oldish, like 50+, the ones who actually dies of it) and peoples with weak immunity system to get it. They need the protection. Once vaccinated they should be protected. End of story. Its not about "free riding".
It is though. You may not be thinking about it that way, but you are basing your risk calculation on the fact other people get it so you don't have to.
I think its ludacris to want KIDS to get it. I think its out of bounds to try to get 18-30s to get it too. The death risk for them is ridiculously low. Most don't even have any symptoms. I even read something about kids having more chances to die from the flu than covid.
The flu does tend to be riskier for infants and the very young as far as we can tell. But again, you are encouraging everyone to make an individual choice based on death (and death only) because your individual risk may be better if other people take on more risk for you instead. (And these kids.)
You are a moron! 90% efficacy means 10 folks out of 100 will fall through the crack and get infected. The difference is those 10 folks will mostly not feel very sick with COVID.
Get your facts straight before you spout off nonsense and bullshit.
No, the fact is more or less correct. They don't like people using the virus efficiency calculation (because it sounds like a good number) so they use the absolute risk reduction from the trials as if it is a more valid measure. Misleading, yes, but not an incorrect fact.
The problem is those 18 to 30 who you want to leave out will carry the virus and possibly cause mutations and spikes in the fall. We do not need another full lockdown. Do your part if you actually want to see an end to the lockdowns.
I think he has already said that he just ignores the lockdowns and sees who he wants anyway, so that isn't really a good argument.