In a November 25, 2020 BMJ article, expert Peter Doshi points out that this is the relative risk reduction. The absolute risk reduction for the vaccine is actually less than 1%. This is typical of pharmaceutical marketing. They report injury risk from drugs, or biologics (vaccines) using absolute risk reduction, while reporting efficacy using relative risk reduction. In addition, similar to Moderna, Pfizer’s relative risk reduction efficacy rate is based on event in a cohort of 94 people in the placebo group who got mild cases of Covid-19 during the clinical trials, not on the total number of people registered in the trial.
The absolute risk reduction (ARR) of the COVID vaccines is less than 1%, (second source), and more than half of hospitalizations and deaths from COVID are occurring in fully vaccinated people. During the initial vaccine trials, the vaccine did not prevent severe illness or hospitalization.
“…a relative risk reduction is being reported, not absolute risk reduction, which appears to be less than 1%.”Peter Doshi, PhD, senior editor at the BMJ (British Medical Journal), and an associate professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. His research focuses on the drug approval process, how the risks and benefits of medical products are assessed and communicated, and improving the credibility and accuracy of evidence synthesis and biomedical publications. Doshi campaigns for greater transparency of clinical trial data and leads the Restoring Invisible and Abandoned Trials (RIAT) initiative, which aims to ensure clinical trial publications are accurate, complete, and data are publicly available.
In the Moderna trial, one participant in the mRNA-1273 group, a participant >65 years of age who had risk factors for severe COVID-19, was hospitalized due to oxygen saturation of 88% on room air 2 months after receiving the second dose of vaccine.” In the Janssen trial, in a post hoc analysis of all COVID-19 related hospitalizations starting 14 days after vaccination, including non-centrally confirmed cases, there were 2 cases in the vaccine group. Likewise, the Pfizer trial reported two serious cases of suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19, both in the vaccine group, where both vaccine recipients were hospitalized.
Understand how EFFICACY is calculated for vaccines and drugs
Dr. Cowan, among many others, explains that drug companies report the “benefit” of a drug or vaccine using “reduced risk reduction“, but they report injuries using “absolute risk reduction.” Absolute risk reduction should be used for both!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTrJ2KphH1I&t=1m06s
More people got Covid than vaccine makers officially reported; misleading data
20x as many trial participants had Covid-like symptoms as those who were diagnosed positive using PCR tests, but the much larger group had negative PCR tests. We now know there are large numbers of false positives and negatives with PCR tests. Cycle threshold information was not supplied. No sequencing was done to assure that PCR positive individuals actually had Covid. I don’t trust these data.
Both Moderna and Pfizer provided rudimentary information to the FDA to apply for Emergency Use Authorizations–much less than is required to issue a vaccine license, according to US law…despite what Drs. Stephen Hahn and Peter Marks at FDA may have claimed to sooth the public.
Lack of transparency – vaccine companies did not release all of the data from the clinical trials
We should demand that Kessler and the federal government release all of the data from the clinical trials and suspend COVID-19 vaccine use in any group not adequately represented in the clinical trials, including the elderly, frail and anyone with comorbidities.
We should demand full transparency in post-marketing data that reports all health outcomes, including new diagnoses of autoimmune disorders, adverse events and deaths from COVID vaccines.