[Illustrated] The Giant Trap of "90% Vaccine Efficacy" – The Statistical Trick the Media Will Never Report

"90% vaccine efficacy!" the news loudly proclaims. When hearing this number, most people imagine a magic bullet where "if 100 people get the shot, 90 are saved." However, that is an ingenious, perfectly legal "statistical trick" orchestrated by the media and pharmaceutical companies. This time, let's unravel the actual data from Pfizer's Phase 3 clinical trial published in the NEJM, the world's most prestigious medical journal, and expose exactly how they "dress up" their numbers. ■ The Reality of the Data (Infections per 1,000 People) The trial divided about 40,000 people into two halves. If we convert the results to a more intuitive "per 1,000 people" metric, it looks like this: Placebo group (fake shot): Out of 1,000 people, about 7.5 were infected. Vaccine group (real shot): Out of 1,000 people, about 0.4 were infected. Now, this is where the magic begins. ■ How the Media Reports It: The Trap of "Relative Evaluation (RRR)" Pharmaceutical companies and the media do not report these tiny numbers of "7.5" and "0.4" as they are. They focus on the "difference" (about 7.1 people) and calculate what percentage it decreased relative to the original 7.5. (7.5 - 0.4) ÷ 7.5 ≒ 95% (Depending on specific trial conditions, this is officially announced as around 90-95%) This is the true identity of the "Over 90% Efficacy!" chanted in the news. This is called the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR). It certainly makes it look dramatically effective, doesn't it? ■ The Reality: The Despair of "Absolute Evaluation (ARR)" Now, let's pull the camera back and look at the "big picture of 1,000 people." Out of 1,000 people, there are "992.5" healthy individuals who did not get infected even without the vaccine. The number of people actually saved by taking the vaccine is a mere "7" (approx.). When looking at the reduction in infection risk from the perspective of the entire group, it is a mere "less than 1%." This is called the Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR). There is an even more brutal metric: NNT (Number Needed to Treat). The formula asks, "How many people need to be vaccinated to prevent just one person from getting infected?" The answer is "120 people." In other words, for 119 people, the outcome was exactly the same whether they got the shot or not. Rather than explaining it with words, it's faster to see it with your own eyes. Click the buttons below to switch between the "World the Media Reports" and the "Real World." 👇 [RRR vs ARR Perspective Switch Simulator] 👇

[Perspective Switch] Clinical Data of 1,000 People

■ Conclusion "Out of 1,000 people, infections dropped by only 7 (Absolute Evaluation: 1% improvement)." If pitched like this, no one would buy the drug, and the government wouldn't allocate a massive budget for it. That's why they broadcast at maximum volume: "Infection risk reduced by 90%!" (Relative Evaluation). Numbers don't lie, but you can freely control the masses just by changing how you present them. It's exactly like the law. This world is designed so that the ones who create the "rules (the presentation)" always win. Blogger HTML Code (English Version) Switch your Blogger editor to "< > HTML View" and paste this code where the simulator should appear. All internal text has been translated to English.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

■ The "Hidden" Data: The Magic of Exclusion

Image
  Before we even reach the 90% efficacy claim, there is a more disturbing statistical maneuver hidden in the trial's methodology: Participant Exclusion. In the Pfizer Phase 3 trial, thousands of participants were excluded from the final "per-protocol" efficacy analysis after randomization. The stated reasons were "protocol deviations" or "missing data." However, when we look at who was excluded, a glaring anomaly emerges. Let us look at the approximate distribution of exclusions: Placebo Group Exclusions: ~500 individuals Vaccine Group Exclusions: ~3,500 individuals (Note: Use exact numbers from the specific FDA briefing document you are referencing if possible) Why were seven times as many people removed from the vaccine group after they received the shot but before the final counting? ■ The P-Value: Do the Math Yourself I won't just give you the answer. I want you to verify it yourself. Take these numbers: [Vaccine Excluded: 3500, Included:...
Read more

Episode 14: The Birth of the "Secret Treasury" — Why the Pension System was Actually Created in Japan

Image
 Welcome back to Bakuro-cho . Recently, a woman asked me: "Why was the pension system actually created?" My answer shocked her, but it is the cold, hard truth of history. In the mid-20th century, the bureaucrats of Japan’s Ministry of Health and Welfare (MHW) were looking at their rivals in the Ministry of Finance with envy. The Ministry of Finance controlled the nation’s taxes. The MHW wanted their own independent wealth. ■ The Great Bureaucratic Ambition The logic of the MHW Legions was simple and cynical: "We need a massive pool of money that we can manage and spend at our own discretion, without asking the Finance Ministry for permission." The solution? The Pension System. By forcing the entire working population to "save" for 40 years, the MHW created a massive, instant influx of cash. But they didn't lock this money in a vault for the future. They started spending the "contributions" immediately to build massive, unnecessary "we...
Read more