Max if you read my earlier comments you would have seen that I had already said that my 20.5 times more in the unvaccinated group was not appropriate and a misleading statement. If you looked at some of my sample readings both RRR and ARR have been often used before covid and there was an active debate about the use of those numbers and in drawing conclusions within the medical community. The CDC recommends that both be reported in clinical trials.
...
Both sides in the debate have misused statistics to support a stance.
Of course the CDC recommends that clinical trial medical literature include both ARR and RRR in scientific literature.
But we're not talking about that.
We're talking about mainstream communication that decided to use RRR to describe the effectiveness of the vaccine.
It's the Pfizer-led, CDC-endorsed, government of BC press releases and mainstream media communication that communicated only the RRR - without precedent, against common sense usage of the word 'effectiveness', and totally devoid of any explanation of ARR vs RRR.
I feel strongly about this because the video I posted above got me landed in Facebook jail for sharing anti-vax misinformation.
So I'm with dasmo on this -- I have a hard time with the 'both sides are wrong' argument.
One side intentionally misled people on the effectiveness of the vaccine. The other side was vilified for trying to point it out.
Edited by max.bravo, 25 March 2024 - 04:53 PM.