Not knew information, but this is a very good explanation of the difference between absolute and relative risk reduction and how to calculate them.
The real shocker is that once you calculate the absolute risk reduction, you realise that well over 100 people must receive the Pfizer jab (with all the attendant risks) in order for just one person to benefit. Even the BMJ has reported on absolute risk reduction, but when I mention this to people, they still look at you as if you’re bonkers.
They look at you like that, J, because they don’t know this stuff. Standard though it is, no-one amongst the talking heads is saying much about it. I wonder why most of them have gone so coy about it suddenly. Could it be something to do with the wave of suppression and censorship which has been pushed deliberately through the whole public speech about this - obvious - scam? With serious, unignorable consequences for anyone who stands up and starts speaking the forbidden truths, and plenty of slag-stained victims on high-profile show to iron in the message.
Meanwhile, 50% looks so much more reassuring than 0.7% to the innumerate majority, including the mediawhores, so that’s what they latch onto it and start bloviating, earning extra brownie-points from the gangsters-in-charge in the process.
PS: the comprehensive suppression-under-threat of Joe Mercola’s output illustrates the censorship thuggery being practiced on anyone who promotes ‘forbidden’ truths.