This all revolves around conservatives focusing on ARR instead of RRR numbers on vaccine efficacy. Here’s a description I found of the difference from another article:

Let’s say a study enrolled 20,000 patients into the control group and 20,000 in the vaccine group. In that study, 200 people in the control group got sick and 0 people in the vaccine group got sick. Even though the vaccine efficacy would be a whopping 100%, the ARR would show that vaccines reduce the absolute risk by just 1% (200/20,000= 1%). For the ARR to increase to 20% in our example study with a vaccine with 100% efficacy, 4,000 of the 20,000 people in the control group would have to get sick (4,000/20,000= 20%).

  • magnetosphere@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    118
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can’t believe I’m going to bat for Pfizer, but apparently I hate deliberate, selective ignorance even more than greed. Oh well.

    Paxton said the claim was based on only two months of clinical trial data…

    It was a GLOBAL HEALTH CRISIS, you fucking morons. Millions of people died. Have you already forgotten how serious and urgent the situation was? Speedy availability of a vaccine was more important than lengthy, time-consuming tests.

    Ask your god-king Trump. He’s the one who threw bushels of money at pharmaceutical companies and ordered them to solve the problem quickly.

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Paxton’s claim is also a lie. We didn’t just invent vaccines a few years ago. They’ve been around for two or three generations now.

      Not like they were working from scratch as far as efficacy. All the ingredients are well known. The only thing new was the the particular mRNA, that’s like saying steaks need two years of clinic trials because it comes from a different family of cows, has slightly different DNA, like saying Coke needs two years of trials when they make a new flavor.

      Then after you take it, we can do the blood test after the injection and see the antibodies. What more is there to know?

      What’s the mechanism that they are claiming the vaccine can be harmful? Why is this vaccine unique as compared to any other, proven safe for decades vaccine?

      • magnetosphere@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m merely hoping for a competent judge who accepts logic and the scientific method. Not even a great judge, just a basically sane and reasonable one.

        I remember when I used to take that for granted. I’m having an “ignorance is bliss” moment.

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        Ελληνικά
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        If half the country wasn’t a bunch of anti-science religious dipshits, mRNA vaccines would be recognized as the greatest achievement of my lifetime.

      • somethingsnappy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Whole cell/virus vaccines have been around forever. Grog got some dirt on his hands while hunting ibex? Congrats, that’s a vaccine!

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t feel bad for going to bat for them. I have done some work for them. Pharm companies are True Neutral alignment. Condemn the things they do wrong, praise the things they do right.