Quote:
Originally Posted by Velvet
I follow you, but, it seems you are not following me and I will try not to insult medical studies at the same time. The 90% is not what I am talking about. I am talking about the very small number of people that they are reporting on so far: 94 out of 43,000. Doesn’t matter what you compare it to, seatbelts or otherwise, it is still 94 people who got infected out of 43,000 people in the study. We don’t know about the 42,906 others.
|
Of course we do. Read the protocol. I provided the link. The other 43K did not get clinical Covid. They are just like the people in the seat belt study who did not get in a car accident. Next you might come back and say, why didn't they do blood tests to see if people got sub-clinical Covid not depend on symptomatic cases for analysis. Because blood tests look for antibodies and all or nearly all who got the vaccine should have antibodies from the shot.
This is why the study has to have huge numbers, to detect differences in an event with a low frequency in a general population. The other reason for large numbers is to find rare side effects. Obviously the bigger the test group the better chance of finding a rare event. In this study where about 22K got the pair of shots no significant side effects have been reported to the public. This is a public relations report from Pfizer not a sworn statement with complete data as they will be submitting to the FDA. But I think Pfizer would play it straight and be as honest as a corporation can be as if it turns out they were hiding or minimizing adverse outcomes it would be a serious blow to their image.