3 ms·

Again, you are completely wrong and simply spouting vaccine conspiracy nonsense. It is very clear from the study that those "suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19

Again, you are completely wrong and simply spouting vaccine conspiracy nonsense. It is very clear from the study that those "suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19 cases" are those who reported one flu-like symptom but had a NEGATIVE PCR test. A very detailed explanation of why you are wrong to want to include those in the efficacy percentage number can be found here: https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/refuting-peter-doshi-s-claims-doubting-trustworthiness-meaningfulness-of-covid-vaccine-results https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/refuting-peter-doshi-.... It is not clear whatsoever that the study was bullshit, and the results speak for themselves. An anecdote about your Prime Minister is meaningless and occurred AFTER this initial study period when the variants had changed the landscape and these numbers were no longer applicable.

dukeofdoom 4y ago
Since you are still claiming that it was 95% effective. Can you give a time estimate for how long that efficiency lasted? This study concludes " Primary immunization with two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 vaccine provided limited protection against symptomatic disease caused by the omicron variant. " https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2119451#:~:text=Vaccine%20Effectiveness%2C%20Omicron%20Variant&text=Among%20those%20who%20had%20received,after%2025%20or%20more%20weeks https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2119451#:~:text=.... Why are they wrong? I read the article you cited. Here's the problem as I see with it. "Among 3210 total cases of suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs 1816 in the placebo group" The pfizer results are dependent on the accuracy of the PCR test. "The false-negative rate for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing is highly variable: highest within the first 5 days after exposure (up to 67%), and lowest on day 8 after exposure (21%)." https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2020/05/18/13/42/variation-in-false-negative-rate-of-reverse https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2020/... 1. Even if the PCR test FNR was just 2% then some covid positive people were missed that need to be accounted for. 1594 * 0.02 = 31 were false negative in the vaccinated group 1816 * 0.02 = 36 were false negative in the unvaccinated group. 8 + 31 = 41 162 + 36 = 198 41 / 198 = 20% => Then the pfizer vaccine efficiency falls to 80 If the PCR test FNR was 10% Then we need to add 159 and 181 respectively 8 + 159 = 167 162 + 181 = 343 167/343 = 48%. Efficiency falls to 52% Real world FNR for a PCR test is estimated to be between 2-30%, but can be much higher depending on which day you get tested. https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/false-negative-how-long-does-it-take-coronavirus-become-detectable-pcr https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/false-negative-how-long-do... https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2020/05/18/13/42/variation-in-false-negative-rate-of-reverse https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2020/... 2. PCR tests do not show previous infection. Meaning that Pfizer PCR testing would miss all those people that had "flu-like symptoms" had covid, and recovered prior to getting tested. Did the pfizer study accounts for such likely scenarios? Finally, why were there so many people with "Flu-like symptoms" in the pfizer study yet they did not have covid or the flu? Since we know that flu infections were at record lows during the last two years. Any explanation for this?

dukeofdoom 4y ago

Since you are still claiming that it was 95% effective. Can you give a time estimate for how long that efficiency lasted? This study concludes " Primary immunization with two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 vaccine provided limited protection against symptomatic disease caused by the omicron variant. " https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2119451#:~:text=Vaccine%20Effectiveness%2C%20Omicron%20Variant&text=Among%20those%20who%20had%20received,after%2025%20or%20more%20weeks https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2119451#:~:text=.... Why are they wrong? I read the article you cited. Here's the problem as I see with it. "Among 3210 total cases of suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs 1816 in the placebo group" The pfizer results are dependent on the accuracy of the PCR test. "The false-negative rate for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing is highly variable: highest within the first 5 days after exposure (up to 67%), and lowest on day 8 after exposure (21%)." https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2020/05/18/13/42/variation-in-false-negative-rate-of-reverse https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2020/... 1. Even if the PCR test FNR was just 2% then some covid positive people were missed that need to be accounted for. 1594 * 0.02 = 31 were false negative in the vaccinated group 1816 * 0.02 = 36 were false negative in the unvaccinated group. 8 + 31 = 41 162 + 36 = 198 41 / 198 = 20% => Then the pfizer vaccine efficiency falls to 80 If the PCR test FNR was 10% Then we need to add 159 and 181 respectively 8 + 159 = 167 162 + 181 = 343 167/343 = 48%. Efficiency falls to 52% Real world FNR for a PCR test is estimated to be between 2-30%, but can be much higher depending on which day you get tested. https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/false-negative-how-long-does-it-take-coronavirus-become-detectable-pcr https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/false-negative-how-long-do... https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2020/05/18/13/42/variation-in-false-negative-rate-of-reverse https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2020/... 2. PCR tests do not show previous infection. Meaning that Pfizer PCR testing would miss all those people that had "flu-like symptoms" had covid, and recovered prior to getting tested. Did the pfizer study accounts for such likely scenarios? Finally, why were there so many people with "Flu-like symptoms" in the pfizer study yet they did not have covid or the flu? Since we know that flu infections were at record lows during the last two years. Any explanation for this?