-
Posts
8,240 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Gawdzukes
-
Good read, only posted part of it https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/health/covid-vaccine-95-effective.html 2 Companies Say Their Vaccines Are 95% Effective. What Does That Mean? You might assume that 95 out of every 100 people vaccinated will be protected from Covid-19. But that’s not how the math works. By Carl Zimmer Published Nov. 20, 2020Updated Dec. 4, 2020 The front-runners in the vaccine race seem to be working far better than anyone expected: Pfizer and BioNTech announced this week that their vaccine had an efficacy rate of 95 percent. Moderna put the figure for its vaccine at 94.5 percent. In Russia, the makers of the Sputnik vaccine claimed their efficacy rate was over 90 percent. “These are game changers,” said Dr. Gregory Poland, a vaccine researcher at the Mayo Clinic. “We were all expecting 50 to 70 percent.” Indeed, the Food and Drug Administration had said it would consider granting emergency approval for vaccines that showed just 50 percent efficacy. From the headlines, you might well assume that these vaccines — which some people may receive in a matter of weeks — will protect 95 out of 100 people who get them. But that’s not actually what the trials have shown. Exactly how the vaccines perform out in the real world will depend on a lot of factors we just don’t have answers to yet — such as whether vaccinated people can get asymptomatic infections and how many people will get vaccinated. Here’s what you need to know about the actual effectiveness of these vaccines. What do the companies mean when they say their vaccines are 95 percent effective? The fundamental logic behind today’s vaccine trials was worked out by statisticians over a century ago. Researchers vaccinate some people and give a placebo to others. They then wait for participants to get sick and look at how many of the illnesses came from each group. In the case of Pfizer, for example, the company recruited 43,661 volunteers and waited for 170 people to come down with symptoms of Covid-19 and then get a positive test. Out of these 170, 162 had received a placebo shot, and just eight had received the real vaccine. From these numbers, Pfizer’s researchers calculated the fraction of volunteers in each group who got sick. Both fractions were small, but the fraction of unvaccinated volunteers who got sick was much bigger than the fraction of vaccinated ones. The scientists then determined the relative difference between those two fractions. Scientists express that difference with a value they call efficacy. If there’s no difference between the vaccine and placebo groups, the efficacy is zero. If none of the sick people had been vaccinated, the efficacy is 100 percent. A 95 percent efficacy is certainly compelling evidence that a vaccine works well. But that number doesn’t tell you what your chances are of becoming sick if you get vaccinated. And on its own, it also doesn’t say how well the vaccine will bring down Covid-19 across the United States. What’s the difference between efficacy and effectiveness? Efficacy and effectiveness are related to each other, but they’re not the same thing. And vaccine experts say it’s crucial not to mix them up. Efficacy is just a measurement made during a clinical trial. “Effectiveness is how well the vaccine works out in the real world,” said Naor Bar-Zeev, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. It’s possible that the effectiveness of coronavirus vaccines will match their impressive efficacy in clinical trials. But if previous vaccines are any guide, effectiveness may prove somewhat lower. The mismatch comes about because the people who join clinical trials are not a perfect reflection of the population at large. Out in the real world, people may have a host of chronic health problems that could interfere with a vaccine’s protection, for example. ...
-
Maybe he should be better at hockey if he wants the 3rd line center position on my team. Face-offs would be a great place to start. You're face palming me because you think he's great?
-
Thus the I was drunk disclaimer. I didn't really give a flying f. Isn't alcohol great?
-
You're very wrong. Apparently you're just a troll and not a fan of the greatest team on earth.
-
I hear you. That's what we all face. I worked all last year (now I'm done) because I felt I had to in order to put the food on the table and a roof over my head. If we all did it right we would sacrifice ourselves and let economy die, as well us individually if it came down to it. But we don't. We're all guilty of thinking about ourselves. I'm not saying this about you personally so don't take it that way, I'm just saying we are all put in the position of sink or swim. You can do the right thing here, but it might make you so broke you end up on the streets or begging for help from family, or it might kill you too. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
-
NEWHOOOOOOOOOOKS FOR THE WIN!!!!!
-
You said Jared mccann spoils that, but I'll let it slide because he was a bonus pick. Something about sliding and it was a bonus pick. In my mind it's stupid to judge draft picks when many of them don't turn out anyway and we're not GM's either. I mean it's clearly easy to see the result 6 years later but that doesn't an expert make. It wasn't really a response to you particularly just to all the people that think they can draft better and the idea that GM's draft bad hockey players because they are idiots, trying to ruin the team, and Joe Blow and his wifi connection could do better. In my defence I was drunk and had no knowledge of any previous posts regarding said post.
-
I wouldn't even go in. You should get laid off. It's not worth it if you feel that way.
-
Just trying to emphasize how everyone thinks they can draft better than the pros based on hindsight and internet articles.
-
Jezuss Christ, how many times can I tell you I'm a better drafter than you?
-
I've been following this back and forth and I gotta say I don't know what planet people have Rathbone ranked higher Juolevi but it shouldn't be this one if they're able to read simple passages and apply simple logic. There is definitely a reason Juolevi is lined up on a starting pair and Rathbone isn't. Also Millsy is right in that the coaching staff and JB are literally saying that exact same thing in the media, not to mention the vast difference in experience. I would say this is a very uneducated take.
-
So many people use this as a way to take a jab at Benning. I like you prefer to believe if a deal comes up that makes sense for our club he'll definitely pursue that 100%. Pretending everything is impossible just because their own desired moves are not realized is no reason to be close-minded in my opinion.
-
Everyone is having problems rolling these vaccines out.
-
[PTO] Travis Hamonic with Canucks
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
I like the looks of that. -
NHL season to start Jan. 13 with 56-game season
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in General Hockey Discussion
It's all about money. I've been to three of these games. The hockey part is an absolute joke. Good thing I like beer. -
2021 IIHF World Junior Championship Thread
Gawdzukes replied to grandmaster's topic in General Hockey Discussion
FINLAND destroys Sweden. Was that Costmar getting annihilated in his own end? -
What a goof. Obviously this guy ate his own brain, he mistook it for Carrot Cake. It just goes to show you what this pandimic can do to a person. This guy has a fragile mind and it cracked. Probably because he's fatter than the earth. Obviously this guy doesn't care about anything besides his belly.
-
Politics are for the weak of mind.
-
NHL season to start Jan. 13 with 56-game season
Gawdzukes replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in General Hockey Discussion
OMG I hate outdoor games. Such a farce, the hockey is just $&!#e. -
What an idiot. I used to love him but now he's just a fat phuck. He's probably just mad because masks stop him from shovelling muffins down his throat.
-
This is why politics are for dumb and rich people.