Merely a Convenient Assumption

from John Dee’s Almanac

What Does 90% or 95% Effective Mean?

When vaccine manufacturers via the media and/or the voice of Her Majesty’s Government claim a vaccine is “90% effective” (or even “95% effective” in the case of Pfizer’s product) please do bear in mind that this an estimate of relative risk as opposed to absolute risk, and can be somewhat misleading for the general public who will interpret this as “if I have the vaccine I’m 90%/95% certain of not getting COVID” – this is not what “90%/95% effective” means.

Pfizer’s famous “95% effective” claim is, in fact, a measure of relative risk. A total of 8 of their vaccinated group of 18,198 participants went on to develop COVID-19 (0.044% risk), whereas a total of 162 of their un-vaccinated group of 18,325 participants went on to develop COVID-19 (0.88% risk). The relative risk reduction calculation is thus 100 x 1-(0.044/0.88) = 95%, whereas the absolute risk reduction is a mere 0.88 – 0.044 = 0.84%.

Thus, if you were a vaccinated subject in Pfizer’s trial, there was a 99.96% chance you didn’t develop COVID-19.

If you were an un-vaccinated subject there was still a 99.12% chance you didn’t develop COVID-19, the difference being the absolute risk of 0.84% i.e. vaccination by Pfizer’s product actually reduces your personal risk by less than 1% and not 95%!

This, of course, assumes equal risk of exposure to the virus by both groups of participants but this is merely a convenient assumption – no clinical trial can ever hope to measure thus.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: