Do the vaccines actually work?

An absolute risk reduction of 1% is NOT worth the risks.

They’re lying to you and you’re eating it up like a good boy!

Om nom nom nom!
 
These stats make for a compelling case against getting vaccinated considering we just don't know the long term effects.......

However the pro jab crowd will not acknowledge them in the least.

Their attitude is that if you don't get jabbed you are a threat.

A threat and a proponent of lockdowns and keeping businesses closed. I'll add in selfish POS!
 
These stats make for a compelling case against getting vaccinated considering we just don't know the long term effects.......

ARR (and NNV) are sensitive to background risk—the higher the risk, the higher the effectiveness—as exemplified by the analyses of the J&J's vaccine on centrally confirmed cases compared with all cases:
both the numerator and denominator change, RRR does not change (66–67%), but the one-third increase in attack rates in the unvaccinated group (from 1·8% to 2·4%) translates in a one-fourth decrease in NNV (from 84 to 64).

Of course their real point is the final paragraph.

Uncoordinated phase 3 trials do not satisfy public health requirements; platform trials designed to address public health relevant questions with a common protocol will allow decisions to be made, informed by common criteria and uniform assessment. These considerations on efficacy and effectiveness are based on studies measuring prevention of mild to moderate COVID-19 infection; they were not designed to conclude on prevention of hospitalisation, severe disease, or death, or on prevention of infection and transmission potential. Assessing the suitability of vaccines must consider all indicators, and involve safety, deployability, availability, and costs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: squeezer and lenny2
Not really, the article did not say vaccines don't work.
To be honest, that article (it is a "Comment" piece, not a peer reviewed study) is "much ado about nothing".

Using "ARR" (absolute risk reduction) absolutely makes no sense. RRR, relative risk reduction, is what we should use.
I'll give you an example - about 0.07% of the Canadian population is found to have colon cancer each year.
Now, let's say I invent a wonder drug that can prevent 90% of the colon cancer, would everyone agree that would be great?
So using RRR of 90% - everyone understands the number and what it means.
Now, if I tell you the ARR of this wonder drug is 0.06% - it just does not make sense to most people, and some may ask "so 0.06% is pretty insignificant, is it not?"

So just throwing out a ARR number without any reference would make no sense to most people and should not be used.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jalimon and lenny2
Not really, the article did not say vaccines don't work.
To be honest, that article (it is a "Comment" piece, not a peer reviewed study) is "much ado about nothing".

Using "ARR" (absolute risk reduction) absolutely makes no sense. RRR, relative risk reduction, is what we should use.
I'll give you an example - about 0.07% of the Canadian population is found to have colon cancer each year.
Now, let's say I invent a wonder drug that can prevent 90% of the colon cancer, would everyone agree that would be great?
So using RRR of 90% - everyone understands the number and what it means.
Now, if I tell you the ARR of this wonder drug is 0.06% - it just does not make sense to most people, and some may ask "so 0.06% is pretty insignificant, is it not?"

So just throwing out a ARR number without any reference would make no sense to most people and should not be used.

No, but as a public health measure, ARR gives you a sense of prioritizing resources. In other words, if your wonder drug costs something outrageous to the health system, the ARR becomes a more significant issue in terms of planning. That's their argument, as far as I can tell from the last paragraph. A real decision about "which vaccine is best" or how to deploy them would involve head to head comparisons of real world ARRs, since from a public health point of view, that is more significant than the narrower RRR coming out of a clinical trial.
 
Yes so that must be why the countries who have vaccinated large portions of their populations have had significant drops in covid cases and deaths. It must be just a coincide !
That must be why the USA who was terrible at managing covid is now reopening their economy since their vaccinated population is high.
Keep in mind that not all vaccines are equally effective. The chinese and Russian vaccines only have approx 50% efficacy vs Pfizer and Moderna which are around 90%+
Most stupid question EVER !
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: lenny2 and Valcazar
Yes so that must be why the countries who have vaccinated large portions of their populations have had significant drops in covid cases and deaths. It must be just a coincide !
That must be why the USA who was terrible at managing covid is now reopening their economy since their vaccinated population is high.
Most stupid question EVER !

Never ever underestimate the stupidity level when it comes to an amigo! When you think they've reached maximum stupidity they will surprise you and bring it to new heights, it is quite impressive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar