- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is this saying the vaxx reduces your chance of getting covid by 0.24%?
Posted on 12/2/21 at 9:57 am to Vandyrone
Posted on 12/2/21 at 9:57 am to Vandyrone
quote:
You have to be trolling here. The difference between those infinitesimal numbers is hardly worth all of this. These results just reinforce that it was never worth all of this.
Realllly pulling for that "if it saves one life..." moment
1
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:01 am to Lightning
quote:
Realllly pulling for that "if it saves one life..." moment
Exactly. Yes the results are statistically significant but at what fricking cost with numerators that tiny?
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:10 am to stout
quote:
Is this saying the vaxx reduces your chance of getting covid by 0.24%?
No. Depending on whether this is a cohort or case control study depends on whether you are going to look at relative risk versus odds ratio. But assuming the former:
The risk of getting Covid if you are vaccinated is 289/352878 = 0.000819
The risk of getting Covid if you are unvaccinated is 1144/352878 = 0.00324
Therefore, 0.00324/0.000819 = 3.96. So you have a 4x higher relative risk of getting COVID if you are unvaccinated according to these numbers. This is not cooking the book or fudging data. This is basic stats.
Now, the problem is when you have an even that occurs so infrequently. It’s reasonable to question the effectiveness of a vaccine in the real world even if it appears to have efficacy in studies.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:11 am to Penrod
quote:
It's saying that it reduces your chances of being infected by 74.74%.
Naw, fam.
quote:
Provide absolute risks, not just relative risks. Patients are unduly influenced when risk information is presented using a relative risk approach; this can result in suboptimal decisions. Thus, an absolute risk format should be used.
-FDA
Pre-Covid
LINK
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:15 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Now, the problem is when you have an even that occurs so infrequently. It’s reasonable to question the effectiveness of a vaccine in the real world even if it appears to have efficacy in studies.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:18 am to Vandyrone
sure, but risk continues beyond the 6 month window that they followed this cohort. This is a virus and disease that we're stuck with.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:18 am to TigerDoc
quote:
but risk continues beyond the 6 month window that they followed this cohort
But it’s harder to cook the books the longer the trial runs.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:19 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Now, the problem is when you have an even that occurs so infrequently. It’s reasonable to question the effectiveness of a vaccine in the real world even if it appears to have efficacy in studies.
3.96 x almost zero is still almost zero.
Is that worth a chance of myocarditis, tinnitus, blindness, death, etc caused from the vaccine?
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:22 am to TigerDoc
quote:
This is a virus and disease that we're stuck with.
Yes, exactly.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:23 am to TigerDoc
quote:
sure, but risk continues beyond the 6 month window that they followed this cohort. This is a virus and disease that we're stuck with.
What risk?
quote:
3.96 x almost zero is still almost zero.
This risk?
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:27 am to the808bass
Ah yes, invoke the CT.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:30 am to TigerDoc
The data is cooked. Anyone who is denying that is just fricking stupid.
You had 800+ patients in the Pfizer trial who were suspected to have Covid who never even got swabbed because the clinical testing providers were “understaffed.” Lo-fricking-l.
Compare that to 170 cases of confirmed Covid between both arms of the study.
The data should’ve been thrown out and they should’ve started over. But instead, we put our head in our asses and soldier on like it didn’t even happen.
You had 800+ patients in the Pfizer trial who were suspected to have Covid who never even got swabbed because the clinical testing providers were “understaffed.” Lo-fricking-l.
Compare that to 170 cases of confirmed Covid between both arms of the study.
The data should’ve been thrown out and they should’ve started over. But instead, we put our head in our asses and soldier on like it didn’t even happen.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:33 am to Vandyrone
Virtually everyone is going to eventually be exposed to sufficient quantities of this virus to pose risk of infection. The question is do you want to want to do it with vaccine immunity or without. As pointed out the absolute risk reduction isn't huge, but at a population level it's a massive effect.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:33 am to the808bass
Now Pfizer is in on your Moderna CT?
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:34 am to Statestreet
Everyone is over this shite.
Its never going to end, lets stop buying into the fear and tell Covidians to frick off and go hide in their she-shed.
Its never going to end, lets stop buying into the fear and tell Covidians to frick off and go hide in their she-shed.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:38 am to TigerDoc
quote:
This is a virus and disease that we're stuck with.
And somehow people like fauci are still walking the streets
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:44 am to onmymedicalgrind
Is my logic off? This would be like saying buying 4 Powerball Tickets increases my chances of winning by 4x?
Chances of me winning might be 4x greater, but still extremely rare?
Chances of me winning might be 4x greater, but still extremely rare?
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:44 am to TigerDoc
quote:
Now Pfizer is in on your Moderna CT?
You do understand they all use the same clinical lab providers? No? How retarded are you?
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:47 am to Statestreet
quote:
3.96 x almost zero is still almost zero.
Fair enough.
quote:
Is that worth a chance of myocarditis, tinnitus, blindness, death, etc caused from the vaccine?
To me it’s a pure numbers game. Depends on what the chance of getting those issues are with regular Covid or from the vaccine itself. Hard to tease that data out though.
Posted on 12/2/21 at 10:52 am to the808bass
Tell us more about your clinical lab provider CT.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News