Yeah, and only 4 people had it happen with the vaccine. Was it 4 out of 4? Or 4 out of 40,000? Those are two very different numbers and their relationship to "zero percent" is also very different.
The article didn't mention the total number given the vaccine or the placebo, it just said that 4 was roughly the same as the general population. That means that neither 4 nor 0 have any meaning in that situation, as they are both within the margin of error, unfortunately.
I want to know absolute totals for both numbers before I make a judgment. Bell's Palsy can be expected to affect around 1 in 30-40,000 people in a year. If the sample size was even as small as 1000, 4 is still within the margin of error for biological effects. If it was 200,000 people, I'm actually more interested in why no one had it in the control group.
I didn't skip that, and I won't be taking this vaccine, but your argument has one major flaw.
You are comparing fatality rate to the rate of side effects. All other things being equal, I would prefer bell's palsy to death. I think everyone would. You can't compare those two frequencies when they are of drastically different severity.
Again, for this disease literally no one even knows what to do because they are lying about the numbers so badly, but just in general you shouldn't compare those two numbers.
All I'm saying is that 25 yo healthy female has basically zero risk of dying from Corona, but is taking on an unknown risk of infertility, and 0.5% risk of serious side effects from the vaccine.
Doesn't it seem like she would be better off asking to be infected with the virus?
It would offer the same immunity without the risk.
That's pretty fungible though.
Zero percent had it happen with placebo.
Two of people got Bell's within 9 days of getting the vaccine.
When they say it is roughly the same rate, did they look at your chance of getting it within a 9-day timespan, or some other timespan?
With numbers like 2 and 4 of course it isn't proof of anything but the article also said that
Which is quite alarming, considering at 25 year old female has a 0.0002% chance of dying if infected by the actual virus.
Why the hell would they ever want this stupid vaccine?
It would make more sense to offer them to be infected with the actual virus.
Yeah, and only 4 people had it happen with the vaccine. Was it 4 out of 4? Or 4 out of 40,000? Those are two very different numbers and their relationship to "zero percent" is also very different.
The article didn't mention the total number given the vaccine or the placebo, it just said that 4 was roughly the same as the general population. That means that neither 4 nor 0 have any meaning in that situation, as they are both within the margin of error, unfortunately.
I want to know absolute totals for both numbers before I make a judgment. Bell's Palsy can be expected to affect around 1 in 30-40,000 people in a year. If the sample size was even as small as 1000, 4 is still within the margin of error for biological effects. If it was 200,000 people, I'm actually more interested in why no one had it in the control group.
You seemed to have skipped over this:
Which is much higher than the risk of death if you become infected with the actual virus if you are younger than 70 and have no co-morbidities.
I think most Americans would be better off becoming infected with the virus than taking the vaccine.
I didn't skip that, and I won't be taking this vaccine, but your argument has one major flaw.
You are comparing fatality rate to the rate of side effects. All other things being equal, I would prefer bell's palsy to death. I think everyone would. You can't compare those two frequencies when they are of drastically different severity.
Again, for this disease literally no one even knows what to do because they are lying about the numbers so badly, but just in general you shouldn't compare those two numbers.
Nowhere am I equating Bell's Palsy to death.
All I'm saying is that 25 yo healthy female has basically zero risk of dying from Corona, but is taking on an unknown risk of infertility, and 0.5% risk of serious side effects from the vaccine.
Doesn't it seem like she would be better off asking to be infected with the virus?
It would offer the same immunity without the risk.