Relative Risk Reduction is not Absolute Risk Reduction
We were lied to.
Here’s a new paper from the prestigious Lancet. I’m surprised they haven’t been taken over by anti-science numptys.
We were told the mRNA vaccines would have 90%+ effectiveness, but this is Relative Risk Reduction (RRR). The real risk reduction (absolute risk reduction) is just above 1% in most cases.
Approximately 96 COVID-19 vaccines are at various stages of clinical development. ARRs (absolute risk reduction) tend to be ignored because they give a much less impressive effect size than RRRs: 1.3% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford, 1.2% for the Moderna–NIH, 1.2% for the J&J, 0.93% for the Gamaleya, and 0.84% for the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccines.
Read the paper yourself. There were other factors used to confuse the people and get them to take an experimental vaccine. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext
The search and hope for efficacy (a.k.a. unethical push) took priority over safety.
Safety is addressed as Phase 1 in clinical trials for a reason, but now it seems they are content skipping it altogether.
Think before do, not do before think.
https://leemuller.substack.com/p/good-people-divided-and-an-explanation
https://leemuller.substack.com/p/are-you-a-risk-taker