Fauci was not the director of NIH. He was the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is one of the 27 Institutes and Centers of the NIH. Fauci was on the American public payroll for over five decades. He worked for the NIH. He lied about masks, the origin of Covid-19, and he lied about the covid vaccine. Here’s how….
While looking at the NIH website, I saw that they had a link to the NIH interim results from the clinical trial of NIH-Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. I had previously looked at the Pfizer trial results and not surprising, they were very similar. You would think they would be a little different but they weren’t. Here’s what they say…
Phase 3 trial of the investigational COVID-19 vaccine known as mRNA-1273 reviewed trial data and shared its interim analysis with the trial oversight group on Nov. 15, 2020. This interim review of the data suggests that the vaccine is safe and effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19 in adults.
The DSMB (data and safety monitoring board) reported that the candidate (the Vaccine) was safe and well-tolerated and noted a vaccine efficacy rate of 94.5%.”
How they came up with 94.5% is where the
big lie is! The thing that bothers me is that Fauci, NIH, and our government went along with it! Here are the numbers and the lying statistics.
More than 30,000 participants at 100 clinical research sites in the United States are participating in the study, which
launched on July 27, 2020.
They were to continue the study until 100 volunteers got covid but for some reason the numbers indicate that they ended the study when 95 people got sick.
They divided the volunteers into two groups of approximately 15,000+. One group got the vaccine and the other group got a placebo.
90 out of 15,000 got covid with the placebo.
That’s .6% (less than 1%)
5 out of 15,000 got covid with the covid vaccine.
That’s .03%
So less than 1% of either group got covid. The difference between .03% (Vax’d group) and .6% (UnVax’d) is .57%. There is less than 1% difference between getting covid with the vaccine or not getting the vaccine. So a normal person would say that there is less than 1% difference between getting the vaccine and not getting the vaccine. Then you might ask yourself, Is it worth it?
So how did the DSMB and Fauci come up with the 94.5% efficacy?
Here’s the big Lie! If you take the 90 that got sick with the placebo and subtract the 5 that got covid with the vaccine, you get 85. Then, 85/90=.944444, rounded to 94.5%. That right…funny math. It’s called “Relative Risk Reduction,” because .03% is a 94.5% lower number than .6%.
This article demonstrates how the relative risk reduction calculation obscures the magnitude of disease risk reduction in clinical research. The
absolute risk reduction is shown to be a more precise and reliable measure of treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical research studies. The absolute risk reduction reciprocal also measures the number needed to treat or vaccinate, and is a more accurate measure than the relative risk reduction for comparing risk reductions of clinical studies. Additionally, the article reviews consequences of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy misinformation disseminated through media reports.
The article concludes that relative risk reduction should not be used to measure treatment and vaccine efficacy in clinical trials.
Relative or Absolute risk?
There are many different ways to measure risk. Relative risk, sometimes called the risk ratio, is good for showing the difference between two groups
but can be misleading as it is independent of the original number of cases. The fact that there was less than 1%
overall difference between the Vax’d and UnVax’d groups should also be stated – we call this the absolute risk difference.
Even though everyone knew this, It was not reported as an Absolute Risk of less than 1% because who would take an unapproved drug with possible (probable) side effects for less than 1% improvement in chances of not getting covid . . . and as it turns out, all the other benefits of the vaccine turned out to be false like, it prevents transmission.