I only posted the video as context. Sometimes it helps to see what motivated someone to write a paper.So the above graphic is just an example to help the reader understand the difference between ARR and RRR.
Roger that. Understood.
Here's the actual numbers from the trial. Interesting. I can see why they decided to not include ARR in the FDA approval process or communicating risk to the public. Who wants to get injected with a drug for which we have no long-term safety data if it only has a .007 chance of actually preventing an infection in an individual!
View attachment 107947
PS - I didn't watch the video. I can absorb information *much* faster by reading text so I spent my time reading the PDF from the study and gave the video a skip.
PPS - If I was going to watch a video, I think it would be something along the lines of learning how to speak Mandarin.
You and I have both tried drugs for our conditions and found that the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. This well-cited article explains why:
Risky Drugs: Why The FDA Cannot Be Trusted
by Donald W. Light A forthcoming article for the special issue of the Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics (JLME), edited by Marc Rodwin and supported by the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, presents evidence that about 90 percent of all new drugs approved by the FDA over the past 30 years are...
ethics.harvard.edu
Media reports have stated that the incidence of Bell's palsy among participants of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccine trials is comparable to that observed in the general population. The FDA briefing on the Pfizer-BioNTech trial stated “observed frequency of reported Bell's palsy in the vaccine group is consistent with the expected background rate in the general population”, although this statement was removed from the subsequent FDA briefing on the Moderna trial. However, this reporting is based on a misconception, driven by a subtle distinction between rates and proportions, that has persisted in the lay media. The estimated incidence rate of Bell's palsy in the general population ranges from 15 to 30 cases per 100 000 person-years. Since the 40 000 vaccine arm participants were followed for a median of 2 months, the combined safety population receiving vaccine across the two trials represents roughly 6700 person-years of observation time for an expected incidence of Bell's palsy of one to two cases, in line with the single observed case in the combined placebo arms. Therefore, the observed incidence of Bell's palsy in the vaccine arms is between 3·5-times and 7-times higher than would be expected in the general population. This finding signals a potential safety phenomenon and suggests inaccurate reporting of basic epidemiological context to the public.