Anti Science Anti Vaccine Conspiracy hypothesis are spreading like wildfire on the internet

The vaccines are not a cure.

@@justacat.1428 the vaccine should be mandatory

First time ??? Ahem .. antivax groups

@@trader2137 I'd be interested to read about it can u link please

Last year they were f*kicking hounding like dogs for vaccine and now when they are out they are like No, it has this that. It’s like abusing the same doctors and scientists whom we once praised as corona gripped the world

I couldn't agree more.

🤣💀

Welcome to the world of Politics. Adventurer!

Have to vote them out.

The efficacy rates of vaccines are ZERO, although that's from the pov of health, from the pov of profit generation they're outstanding as they generate huge profits from vaccine sales and ongoing pharmaceutical usage after vaccine injury. Read "tobacco science and the thimerosal scandal" for horrifying truths about these big pharma grubs. Merck knowingly killed 120 000 Americans with their deadly headache pill.

@@TheKwod Go take your meds, you sound coocoo for coco puffs.

@@CodyKendall1 I have an IQ over 140, I've studied philosophy and science for over 15yrs, bought and read over 100 books on philosophy, science, history etc. I've also probably read over 10000 articles over the yrs.

@@TheKwod Do you watch Rick and Morty?

@@TheKwod "bro please trust me"

LOL really at dumbing down you mean?

You mean data visualisations

But how can you blame a mayor for comparing the vaccines when the entire nation is comparing vaccines lol The SinoVac has efficacy fate ranging from 51%-84% in various countries, yet US media exclusive says 51%. Pfizer/BNT and Moderna, however, never allowed raw data of each individual country to be released to public.

vox is left wing

@@thedreadedsyntholbaby763 what do you mean

Exactly a sign of good leadership and a good attitude

i like that type of people. its amazing

@@brianbrauchler4375 thats so true and accounts not only for science but for political communication too as far as I see it

Well, unfortunately he now has a good chance of being seen as a weak leader because he switched positions. Human psychology, unfortunately, does not lend itself to electing actual good leaders in a democracy. Actual good leaders will sometimes do something you don't like because their decision is bad but the one doing the least damage. That's not going to be popular. Sometimes new information emerges and people will resent having to switch gears. That's why I find it so absolutely vital for politicians to communicate to the people exactly on what basis they made their controversial or disliked decisions and that didn't happen in Switzerland, where I live, and many other nations. And on that basis, mistrust grows and when the knowledge has grown and the understanding of what does and does not help is better, people will no longer follow your new rules because you've crapped on your credibility... Perhaps this is just me because I'm autistic but I would have preferred it if they had come out from the beginning and said "Listen, we are being given very bad estimations from the experts about this new virus right now. We will buckle down with temporary, very strong measures to get a clearer picture. Expect us to come back in a month and either double down or do something completely different." I would have preferred this. It would have given me confidence that the leadership actually is on our side. I have no idea whether that would work for the majority of neurotypical people though.

Exactly. Most of them would never admit they were wrong and would go on with what they think is right.

He's still a lying scumbag as if you read the email he sent, he said he always planned on accepting J&J when live on camera, he said he wasn't accepting anything but the best.

Especially an old white guy.

u mean some past us president for instance?

I mean if it’s not for this video I wouldn’t know either. Kudos for who ever that overcomplicates this numbers for us.

OK BUT WHAT ABOUT the conspiracy videos i saw back in 2005 (when msn was still around) that said they will create a MAN MADE VIRUS and then roll out VACCINES all for hidden agendas HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THAT ?????

keep taking those boosters bud lol

Lies are so much easier to believe when they come with pictures!

@@c.a.g.3130 then show us your proofs with pictures and data from different sources and so we'll know why the video is a lie.

But how can you blame a mayor for comparing the vaccines when the entire nation is comparing vaccines lol The SinoVac has efficacy fate ranging from 51%-84% in various countries, yet US media exclusive says 51%. Pfizer/BNT and Moderna, however, never allowed raw data from each individual country to be released to public.

Sputnik V is at 50% lol

@@OHOE1 source? Your hate?

Agreed, amazing video! There's still a small mistake in it. At 2:40 she says that the efficacy says how much less likely a person is to get COVID 19 "each time they are exposed to" the virus. The whole point of the video is that this is not the case, because the efficacy number only makes sense in the context of the specific study it was derived from. They were x percent less likely to get COVID 19 "over the course of the study". These kind of "linguistic inaccuracies" are unfortunately exactly the reason why there is so much confusion.

It's lies. You'll still get covid it just reprogram your immune system to fight it (and all other viruses) differently. It's a retrovirus not a vaccine. Genetic manipulation is pure evil

Actually an average person is now dumber. You/we all should have this info already and vid could have been summarises in 3 mins.

He’s a good mayor.

He didn't change his mind. He found what he said was wrong and then lied about about saying it.

@Meedeeuh Areliars uh oh, bot moment

A friend that I referred to her just received $7,050 profit after 10 days of investing....I became jealous.. lol 😂

1 4 8 4 2 0 0 5 3 9 4 🇺🇸

I really like that analogy.

Interesting that they say that but misinterpreted the meaning of the efficacy rate. The efficacy rate applies to the sample or population you're studying. Saying a vaccine reduces each person rate of getting COVID by 95% is incorrect. You can't assume it has a homogenous effect on each person that's vaccinated. There may be people with X quality/condition/gene that it produces much lower rate of protection for and for others it is 99.9% effective. This would be like rating the rate of miscarriages (~20%) and saying each woman's chance of having a miscarriage is 20%. That's not true because we know that the rate is higher for older women, for women who've previously miscarried, etc... But there are also other underlying factors at play that we're unaware of--these prevent us from knowing exactly what are any one women's chances of miscarrying. Similarly, there are likely some people for whom these vaccines are less effective, but we don't yet know what sets those people apart. To be fair, that doesn't undermine their thesis of this video. But there's a pinch of hypocrisy in there because they emphasize the importance of understanding statistics while themselves misunderstanding the statistics.

@@SD.... so then what does it actually mean?

@@SD.... The only thing you didn’t talk about was the “gene” or whatever. Which is kinda the most important part of what you just said...

Most beautiful words I’ve ever heard ❤️

it would be superb

Too bad the biggest issue is lack of belief and trust in the media lol.

Informative calming information unfortunately doesn't sell

If only life was that easy.

I chose the new technology of mRNA vaccines.

Right that's why some efficacy trials are so difficult because they may take years before we see individuals reach the primary endpoint in the study. Say for example the goal is to see if a medicine prevents heart attacks. The study actually couldn't and shouldn't prevent an individual from choosing to exercise and live a healthy life, just as it shouldn't prevent someone from doing the opposite. However, the study should then mention if individuals were interviewed and rated their levels of activity for better points of comparison. As the goal is to make the variables as similar as possible. I do love that there's systematic review of health trials that look at and evaluate if it's ethical to continue placebo groups in the study. Basically for some trials, if there's significantly better health outcomes in the treatment group, there's a potential that the placebo group will be given the treatment to start improving their health.

A small price for salvation

with money you can.

The variables are not equal in each clinical trials because they are conducted in different countries. Countries with high density population like Indonesia will get infected more simply because they live closer together. It doesn't mean they are less effective. Sparsely populated country with huge land like USA will do well in clinical trials due to huge land and not vaccine.

@@cyber1991 pfizer and moderna also tested their vaccines when the virus is at the bottom end of the curve vs J & J and testing it at the peak of the pandemic. Different conditions, different results. Pfizer. Pfizer and moderna tested it with the general population, Brazil tested sinovac on medical workers who were exposed 24/7 to the virus. Again, different conditions make different results. That is what this video is trying to explain.

covid gives it too

Answer: 'news' outlets have an ulterior motive and it is not to deliver the truth.

they love creating a fear theatre

@@jasonshin9004 No, they not. 162/8 = 20, so 100/20=5. 100-5=95. 95 percent of effectivnes. This effectivness does not change with the high number of cases or low. If the pfaiser vaccine was tested later. There would be not 162/8 but 1620/80.

The other outlets are in lock with the Fear Campaign getting people vaccinated in a rushed fashion. The Pandemic has been a boom for scamming since increasingly the results of tests, the actual cause of death of people, and over priced costs has been passed the taxpayers. There are reports of people who never took the tests receiving a positive results, some tests not 100 percent accurate, people dying for other reasons labeled pandemic casualties too. Also, some state officials have intentionally reduced the extent of the Pandemic (Florida) or exaggerated them (Northeast), for all the numbers that the media announces reduce 10 percent minimum.

"News" outlets don't explain anything that doesn't support their preconcieved agenda. Same with global "warming".

Sort of. "We always intended to distribute the J&J vaccine...we just had enough at the moment." Riiiiiiiggghhht

The sad truth is that our "Developed World" didnt send a single dose or vial of vaccines to the developing world. Meanwhile India is vaccinating not only their own people but others too. The Video by "Startup Division" - "How India would vaccinate the entire world" really shows how far India is in terms of Vaccinating the world.

Except he didn't back down. He was enlightened.

The real question is, why is nobody advertising the best vaccine out there: Moderna. Fizer is too expensive. AZ is a chimp virus with low effectiveness. Too much money and politics in this crisis.

@@GemsOfIndianRight is the US obliged to help other countries?

*Indian made Covaxin 81% but western media will never show you this*

@@infotainmentchannel1800 who asked?

@@infotainmentchannel1800 maybe because it's not available here...?

@@infotainmentchannel1800 yeah that's why y'all are burning bodies on the streets now

Sputnik V is dancing too.

OK BUT WHAT ABOUT the conspiracy videos i saw back in 2005 (when msn was still around) that said they will create a MAN MADE VIRUS and then roll out VACCINES all for hidden agendas HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THAT ?????

They're funded by CNBC

Best video explaining the differences in vaccines trials at 3:42 and also the objectives of mass vaccination.

@JayZeeDoubleYou The joke being Vox made money; you did not.

@@ronnie9891 it’s just explained by the fact that a pandemic happening some time in the future is quite likely, a vaccine being made against it is just as likely. Then you can put whatever conspiracy narrative you want on it

I applied for the Pfizer trial. I was rejected because I was too low risk. The recruiter asked "are you SURE you aren't going to bars?" The Pfizer trial you had a 66% chance of getting the vaccine and 33% chance for the placebo.

1st clue:vaccines take 7 - 12 yrs before public availability 0 virus International protests are forever increasing Millions AWAKE

mRNA vaccines have been in development for 30 years. What changed is they finally got the funding they needed to get it to market.

@@theyredistortingyourrhythm. lol this is not the 80s anymore buddy

Never will be forgotten.... nor they’ll be remembered...

Watch the video again until you understand it.

@@gribbler1695 “95% less likely to get sick.” Lie. Literally everyone I know that got the shots got Covid. The government even changed their tune from not going to get sick to you won’t get as sick as someone who was unvaccinated. Remember when the president gave a press conference and said it was the unvaccinated getting and spreading Covid? More lies. Keep watching the video with your head in the sand.

The death rate from Convid itself is merely 0,1-0,3 %

@@luckyapple2655 those that have permanent health effects is high though

@@thepittstop do the math 99% survival rate. Vaccine 66% effective for 0.2% chance of risk.

@@ethanjohnson8534 that's not how the vaccine works...

@@thepittstop Vaccine works for short period of time how many times people have to get vaccinated ? It is not a cure 😂 our body's immune system is cure.

no, he should just fire his public health advisor or it could be a poltical move to attract attention to show his voters that he cares about them.

Yeah, NOW people start questioning the people who effectively control our lives😂😂😂😂😢

Like those scientist that make bullets and bombs? Thanks to scientist, man now has the power to obliterate the world. Should we thank them for that?

@@krane15 you can expect to live beyond age 35 because of science.

@@davidwebster5235 luuuul thanks for that comment

@@davidwebster5235 I do. But what of your children, and their children? Ever hear of greenhouse gasses and the melting polar ice caps releasing all those lovely viruses into the atmosphere. If the rising coastline doesn't get them, the viruses will. Chemical warfare, biological warfare, nuclear warfare. For all the good science does, the destruction and devastation it leaves behind is far worse. Thing is, they're still at it. Likely in their laboratories cooking up microbes that kills people even as we speak. Science is a double-edged sword my friend.

@Tee Better for who, those chosen few who go on to live in a bunker? Certainly not better for the masses.

Well if you think of that Government didn't do this like a regular like Giving us Seminar Or meeting about what vaccines for covid actually do.. because the GOVERNMENT more likely busy of Income ... Military Capabilities and any kind of problem .. they keep prioritizing The previous needs and problem instead of current situation.. they might be focused on Virus and vaccines.. but the government was more Focused on developing the counter more... That is why.. other people didn't know what a vaccines can do to help them .. and confused of numbers percentage... Because none of them where properly Explained.. and also being practical Food water and is the most needs of humans Including medicines but in other countries Money and financial is the problem that is why they refuse to Get vaccinated.. the cost of this.. and other branch of government who Manipulate at Corrupt the Funds.. making the vaccine difficult to distribute smoothly... Combination of Poorly Educated in vaccines capabilities, other people constantly corrupting poor peoples especially with Government officials hiding A true motives making everything even worse.. especially The people it self.. honestly.. Some of our people in community too arrogant, ignorant and a huge ego.. which make things difficult

these were new vaccines that were rushed, there was very little data to share or be transparent about.

No its definitely more arrogance at this point. The info of this has been plastered EVERYWHERE. They just refuse to listen. There are actually people out there, who never stepped foot in a post graduate class, never stepped foot in a research institute and never conducted a clinical trial or anything. Yet will just stand right up to people who do and say they know as much or more than they do when their understanding is actually usually less than a highschool student.

If this was shared more then that would take away a big chunk of news all over the world, not what the media’s all about lol.

@@grenmoyo3968 and those same people bank on other people's ignorance when money and power is involved. History books are filled with prime examples.

right??!!!!

To answer your question honestly, you aren't hearing about this because people like the 95% and 94% numbers they are hearing about Pfizer and Moderna. If those percentages are going to convince someone to make a vaccine appointment then great. The only way to convince people the J&J is also a great vaccine is to remind them that it was tested with more aggressive strains and at a time during the pandemic when we had more cases per day than when the two mRNA vaccines were tested. But if we start talking about that, then people will put it together that the other two vaccines might not have such high efficacy rates if they were tested today, and those high efficacy numbers are the only way to get those people to get the vaccine. Bottom line, all of the vaccines prevent hospitalization and death. Take the first available vaccine you can get and we can all get through this together.

they don’t want us to know the truth

@@matthewvillanueva4661 who is ''they''? and why not??

@@imuurme they is the news and why not? Who knows why not?

I think subtitles will do the work

Redo the video? Um... you can suggest subtitles

most of the world's population don't have access or can afford any of these vaccines.

Tell him to learn English

@@JungleJim737 my dad came at 15 years legally and started to work as a migrant worker as soon as he got here. He has no education whatsoever. He put the food you eat on your table. Stop being insensitive to the people that came to this country and had no choice but come in work to sustain their families.

Ur special and not the good kind of special

@@saitamagonzalez922 what?

You're an absolute fool if you take any of these vaccines.

@@calephillips6151 I’m sorry for the grandpa you killed by refusing to wear a mask.

Wow you trust a video on UKposts are you being sarcastic

+10000000000000000

this video should be shared in Facebooks group

strongly agree

I hope VOX read this

Why do yall watch vox?

@@alekstanton4715 Spanish und Germans don't like subtitles. But smaller language groups often do prefer subtitles to dubbing. I know I do.

before dubbing the video, the americans should send their excess vaccines over to their allies that desperately need them :)

I would love to send this to my mother but she doesn't know english that well.

How old are you and how did you feel after the shot? I work in manufacturing and worry I wouldn't be able to work if it's has bad side effects.

It is all about the different trials. Sometimes numbers can be confusing but as scientists they have to tell the numbers they really get. Thanks to scientists we can end this up eventually.

Same here! I got mine last week and was worried when someone in the medical field tried to tell me JJ vaccine "didn't work..." I feel better after watching this video though!

@@GRAITOM I got the Johnson vaccine 2 days ago, and I've had no side effects, not even a sore spot in my arm. I'm 73.

@@GRAITOM It really depends on the person. I got both Pfizer vaccines and had very few side effects. Just a headache and some fatigue but that was about it. Oh and I'm 21 btw.

Impressive!

Do you have a source for this? Not that I don't believe you I want to read about it.

I think it was the same with SinoVac too. Edit- top comment originally said AstraZenica

@@reggieangus5325 yeah... bill gates warned us about pandemics years ago but he evil!!!!!!!!!! just know that a good way of manipulating people is making a big villain that needs to be defeated

Yep. And SinoVac is much less efficacious than any of the vaccines presented in the video against mild disease. Basically, it looks like pretty much any vaccine will keep you safe from serious outcomes.

My thoughts exactly

@Gaussianform Pfizer, moderna, J&J...

Vox study obsolete! ... latest US data show for the Pfizer and Moderna shots: 396 (7%) people with breakthrough infections were known to be hospitalized and 74 (1%) died.

I agree

But it's not really a vaccine it's a retrovirus the overwrites your immune system. Genetic manipulation

Except 1 problem. Why not have an independent study as the original numbers are unreliable? What's the reason for holding up an independent study?

@@Supremax67 and it is not about reliability, it is about the timing. Wait a bit and independent studies will appear soon, maybe in a couple of months

@@macclesfieldman -- K. A couple of months. It's not like the results are urgent, or anyone is dying or anything.

Agree

traduce el video y explicaselo a tu familia, no seas pendejo

@@lossimpson1333 hahaha

I agree and I applaud you for from the sound of it translating for your family! 😁👍 parking many people only care about hearing the headlines and don't actually care about listening to the in-depth Nitty Gritty science details so good on you

@@gordongoodman8342 if you're serious then then at least you'll be a good demonstration of natural selection weeding out those who won't survive...

And even the experts get it wrong sometimes

Does it count as a sacrifice if you don't know you're doing it?

@@spacetoast7783 did you know all the soldiers that fought in ww1 ww2?

@@juliuscaesar894 Yes, I knew every single one of them. What is your point?

@@spacetoast7783 how tf is possible to not know what are you doing if you sign up for the trials of a vaccine? Even if they give you the real one you can still have secondary effects that can lead you to death so in whatever case you KNOW what you get into.

Placebo means that you were not given a shot, or given a shot that contained no effect. Participants wouldn't know whether they received the shot or not. But prior to signing up for the experiment they were informed that they will be randomly assigned. Both having received the placebo and the shot have their own dangers. While the vaccine was being studied, there were unknown side effects that researchers were not aware of, thus those who received the shot were also risking their lives. It also wouldn't be correct to say that those who received the placebo died from it, because they actually died from contracting COVID in the community and not having received a vaccine to protect them from it. No one has been purposely been infected with COVID in any of those vaccine trials.

BIG FACTS! Don’t care which vaccine it is we just need to help stop the hospitalization and deaths

The people making the vaccines aren't really experts in pedagogy, they're just good at what they do in the labs I guess.

They have said this all along.

So, you are also one of those people that did not know what a vaccine was, before the pandemic?

@@kallekallessons I use to work in a lab and this is very true. The researchers are the experts we just apply their research to solve the problem and call it a day.

Yea

@The Hot Box Tell me lies tell me lies tell me sweet little lies

@aaa aaaowski There may be different variants to the virus but that isn't any reason not to take the vaccines.

@aaa aaaowski but didn't this video already proved how Johnson and Johnson vaccines already defeated new strains? 🤔

@aaa aaaowski it does nothing of the sort - it simply explains what is meant by the numbers, that the numbers may not be directly comparable, and that the most quoted number may not in fact be the best measure anyway. How effective the vaccines are against variants is yet to be determined in many cases; its been shown that some vaccines are not as effective in terms of immune response, but in terms of preventing serious disease, transmission, etc its a little unclear, but is obvious is that there is some crossover and that is better than no vaccine at all. This is an excellent video which clearly explains the terms for laypeople, and has nothing to do with "putting money into the pockets of big pharma" or any other nonsense.

I feel for the poor souls that get their information from Vox of all places. How lazy could you possibly be to get your information from this sad excuse of a source.

It’s a video on UKposts

@@OPERATOR-oq1le 😭😂

@@OPERATOR-oq1le So? Journalism can't be done in a video format?

@@Sujay95 journalism hahahahahahaha

@@OPERATOR-oq1le oh wait I just noticed your pfp. Makes sense now.

What you thought you said: That city/state official is nice. What you actually said: That military officer is nice. Should look up what "Major" is.

@@Gyrannon 🤣sorry, corrected

Yeah but initially he publicly rejected J&J vaccines stocks, saying the other two brands are the best. Then later posted that the only reason they rejected the vaccines are due to abundance of stocks and not his misunderstanding.

@Meedeeuh Areliars Thank you for that great display of intelligence.

You also need to account for the possibility that he understands the science but also understands that his constituents don't understand the science.

I don't think this was 100% the case. It's also that A&W is associated with smaller drier burgers so you wouldn't really want a thick patty just by association alone. I'm not fond of Mcdonald's either so might not be a good judge.

Well numbers must be very hard for Johnson & Johnson........ Not a great track record on their products.... And their baby powder didn't turn out too well did it.. 25 years later.. bingo

@@paulgentile1024 I don't know what this has to do with anything. This is just purely slander.

@@ragnarocking if you can't get baby powder right I wouldn't trust their vaccine... That's why they're being sued for mucho 💰..put it together and you'll figure it out

5 out of 4 people have problems with math.

Hi René, you should be able to watch with Spanish captions now. Thank you for the note!

@@Vox Oh, wow, this is great! Thank you very much for listening! 😎

@@Vox I am not in need of spanish translation personally, but checking right now there is only "English (auto-generated)" option there. Is it really working? Edit: everything is working already, no need to point that out

@@santiagodelteide2860 I have mine working, must be a problem on your side

@⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻ not yet.

What is wrong with it?

But they wont :D

Govts busy in selling their own vaccine and minting money

Anarchism-capitalist here - the gov shouldn’t exist at all. We can see that private companies are more efficient than a slousy tyrannical government ☺️

This didn’t actually provide any substantial information or evidence

@@9xtryhx230 I feel like Anarchism would only work if everybody was willing to work with each other and be nice

I never get vaccine never will I don't trust it

They just outright stated that they are not worried about infections or transmission, just the symptoms. That is the perfect storm for ineffective vaccine syndrome.

The only infectious disease on this planet is your infectious stupidity.......

@@wilfordfootball79 ummm, even your name here presents you with a problem...good luck entering ANY other country, let alone boarding a plane,

@@XD-te6vj he does not even have money to go out lol

I'm also in Aus and thinking of taking Astrazeneca. Came to close to getting infected when a positive case got on my train a few weeks ago! Really don't want to risk it again and want to get this over with.

@@apolloparkway9532 oh my be careful. My doctor recommended me intake biontech to be honest he said better.

Right decision I just send both my son and daughter to take the AZ 21 &22 yo

My family were all heavily exposed to Delta Covid a month ago. Half of us had AZ, half biontech. None of us became infected. Side effects were much worse on the AZ though. If you're in a public facing job or there's a big surge about to happen in your area, then get the AZ now. It's unpleasant but it works. If you are in a position where you don't really go out at all and case numbers in the area are low, then wait and get the other one.

@@devk6494 i literally just got vaccinated today finally. Pfizer by the way as my doctor recommended i take.

Yea, it's pretty hard to get all those tiktok videos finished...

@I am Phil McCrevice And I Love Big Brother ?

@I am Phil McCrevice And I Love Big Brother okay.

@@gordongoodman8342 My heart goes out to you and others like you who have somehow begun believing that the world is somehow corrupt enough to orchestrate some giant scheme against you.

@@realcupojoe experimental gene therapy

This isn’t UKposts, this is Channel on UKposts explaining it.

@@antman7673 how does it feel to be the most intelligent person on earth?

@@ess4193 i think it feels very good

@@antman7673........ Without UKposts there would be no channel.

Some of it is true, other parts are very far from reality. It says for instance "95% less likely [to get infected] EACH TIME THEY ARE EXPOSED TO COVID-19". This is not how the immune system works. On the contrary, if you were exposed once but didn't get infected because you are already immunized, you have EVEN LESS chance to get infected next time.

politics

@@MrHarryHumper exactly

Sinovac is not effective,tho. My country mainly use Sinovac in the beginning and now we have to find alternatives option because when they went to check after 2 doses, the immunity is low or not appear at all.

you forgot about the Astra Zeneca vaccine

Chinese will not present their data, basically saying you don't need to know, trust us. No thanks !!!

Lol, 162/8 = 20, so 100/20=5. 100-5=95. 95 percent of effectivnes. This effectivness does not change with the high number of cases or low. If the pfaiser vaccine was tested later. There would be not 162/8 but 1620/80, still 95%.

Better than nothing, yet typical to backtrack and not admit error. We'd be in a much better position if leaders, who as humans are fallible, would own their mistakes instead of spinning tiresome excuses.

@@Korovkin_Pavel I think you missed the point. They are talking about chances of someone's exposure to covid. If the trial were conducted when cases were less (as in case of Pfizer/Moderna), you are less likely to get in contact with someone who has covid and hence you have less chance of getting infected yourself. So the numbers for efficacy might change depending on when and where the trials are conducted as exposure to virus is the primary factor in getting covid.

The problem is the simple message he put out at first was "the J&J vaccine is not good enough" and that's what people will have heard. It's spreading misinformation and honestly he has a responsibility to correct it and own his mistakes, to try and undo that damage. At the end of the day, people need to get vaccinated so there's greater immunity in the whole population, and his "no, only the best" statement is going to make people reluctant to take the J&J one - especially if his later statement doesn't directly address what he said, so it comes off like spin and makes people suspicious. Better to be honest

@@Korovkin_Pavel Those were for different strains. Watch the video again bro

@Serpent King why do you think we can't trust them? Vox does a good job with researching their content.

@Serpent King Imagine trusting Fox News and Qanon

check out cavanagh connor and company

I prefer the onion news network

You can't believe anything Vox tells you! I heard that on a different UKposts channel, and I believed it! Hm wait a sec

The real question is, why is nobody advertising the best vaccine out there: Moderna. Fizer is too expensive. AZ is a chimp virus with low effectiveness. Too much money and politics in this crisis.

@@psychologienerd7546 Did you even watch the video?

@@mr_slidey bot, report

@@mr_slidey nope, not worth my time. I know the contents anyway. a very shallow analysis, thats why it gets views, one has to be shallow

@@Gasmanz it's a robot, already said this

Lol your a 🐑 for sure

@@goatimus6676 Cthulu will always have my support.

@@goatimus6676 let me guess. You also think vaccines don't work just because someone on Facebook told you?

@@goatimus6676 and uve got the brain of a 🐑

@@merco3626 ooh nice comeback...took you long enough!!!

YES EVERYONE MUST GET THE UNTESTED VACCINE IMMEDIATELY

You do realize that “efficacy rate” automatically means “clinically tested with thousands of ppl” right?

@@farmerx165 holy cr*p what an unintelligent remark

@@Synthed indeed

@@farmerx165 how can you be so purposely ignorant

they explained nothing

@Meedeeuh Areliars STAHP

It’s MSM confusion. None of these are approved. All experimentation. But we are supposed to get them.

Aside from the original comment, you all are just miserable

actually the vaccine manufacturers are suspiciously not releasing what efficacy rate refers too w/ the covid19 vaccine, and this video is making assumptions on what it means. but yes, it does explain what efficacy rate means in general

Yes, against Omicron.

Poorly educated people in positions of power, and yet it’s the situation in multiple countries across the world. It’s like being back in school, the popular kids that can talk the talk get voted in

The scary thing is people willing to inject anything into their bodies as long as fear convinces them to.

wdym? he came out and said he was wrong

he said he was wrong and said yes to the Johnson and Johnson vaccine.

@@fredo3161 Haha sure like you eat those junk food to stay alive

Don't mention it

Fun fact it has a very low chance of killing grown adults is low

Jonas Salk the doctor who created the polio vaccine was a supporter of eugenics! He said vaccines could be used to create cancers and test on humans mrna. Don't believe me??? Go read his book THE SURVIVAL OF THE WISEST! We have been conditioned to believe vaccines are good when in all actuality we are being tested on like guinea pigs. Go read the book and will be more than happy to give citations upon your request.

🐑🐑🐑 🙄

@@jacobjohnson6766 Please cite them, and they have to be up to date and published in a peer-reviewed journal, not a book of a collection of empty op eds by a single brain.

that's exactly what caught my eye, too, it's just kinda cruel tbh

I guess it's a case of selecting twice the number of people than you have vaccine for rather than withholding vaccine from half the group.

soul for a soul

I am pretty sure before getting any vaccine they sign a paper that states "You might get a placebo, not an actual vaccine".

@@privatedaNiel These trials are subject to very high ethical standards. The volunteers for these trials would be made to understand exactly the sort of risk they were taking when signing up for it. I don't like to glorify people too much, but those people might as well be heroes. They understood what they were going in for, and some paid for it with their lives, so that the rest of us could return to a normal life. Of course, one could always sign up saying "hey, if I'm not in the placebo group, I get my vaccine, cool", but those aren't mutually exclusive positions. That risk will always exist.

Somebody posted great post: For those vaccine lovers. COVID-19 Vaccine: Relative versus Absolute Efficacy COVID-19 vaccine trials appear to have caused huge confusion. Let’s clear this up. People genuinely appear to believe that the COVID-19 vaccines have undergone clinical trials and have been proven to be both safe and effective. That belief is simply wrong. Understand the Difference between Relative Efficacy vs. Absolute Efficacy Everyone was thoroughly impressed with the 95% effective claim. However, this was based upon relative risk reduction. That is the declared percentage difference between the vaccinated group’s 8/18310 chance (0.044%) of developing COVID-19 against a 162/18319 (0.884%) chance of COVID-19 symptoms without the vaccine. It should be noted this only refers to an alleged reduction of COVID 19 symptoms among those who have the virus. The tested endpoints do not demonstrate that the vaccine will either reduce the spread of infection or save lives. It should also be noted that these figures suggest the threat from COVID-19 is vanishingly small. Using Pfizer’s figures, the relative risk reduction = 100 [1 - (0.044/0.884)]. Which is 95%. Voila! This sounds fantastic and is a much better marketing strategy than reporting the absolute risk reduction. The absolute risk of developing COVID-19 symptoms without the vaccine is supposedly 0.884% and with the vaccine 0.044%. In absolute terms, the effectiveness of the vaccine is (0.884 - 0.044 = 0.84%). Would you consider 0.84% a decent 'efficacy' ? Oh, I know, everyone hates math... BUT 0.84% is barely a Perceptible “Efficacy”! The most important human phase of CV-19 vaccine trials just begun.

Direct warnings No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, solely due to the manufacturer's failure to provide direct warnings to the injured party (or the injured party's legal representative) of the potential dangers resulting from the administration of the vaccine manufactured by the manufacturer. Unavoidable adverse side effects; warnings (1) No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings.

@@truthteller9713 If you think that vaccine companies could be sued willy nilly, then why do you think that they'd invest billions of dollars and invest hundreds of the best scientists and doctors from across the world to make it?

i'm a guy..i like larger numbers...it makes me fell more manly..so Pzifer and Moderna is better

@@truthteller9713 To be fair, if it was so simple as to file class-action lawsuits against a drug or pharmaceutical company to make a drug that wasn't 100% effective with 0 side-effects, absolutely no new drugs or therapies would ever be developed by anyone. This is the same reason why there are many, many protections in place for professionals such as your dentist or your primary care physician that prevent them from being liable, to a degree, for harms they may have inadvertently caused to you during a procedure or from prescribing you a certain medication. I think we are all on the same page as far as how absolutely necessary the effectiveness and relative harmlessness of a vaccine MUST be to be acceptable for public distribution, however. You cannot **** it up for everyone and one would have to assume the companies know of the ramifications, in terms of PR and stock value alone, they would suffer if they didn't create a good product which is essential to get countries back onto their feet.

Well you still might avoid getting sick at all from having the vaccine. Every time you're exposed, it's a roll of the dice. The vaccine DOES improve the odds in your favor. That'll knock the wind out of its ability to spread for sure. No more exponential growth! Yeah I heard that if you cease getting the flu shot in consecutive years the next flu you get might be a doozy.

Most vaccines prevent sickness entirely. Even Flu shots. The reason why you can still get the flu is because there's a lot of different mutations of the flu and every flu shot only protects you against a certain spectrum of mutations.

Its basically training for your immune system

Vaccines do tend to weaken with time, so your chances can increase as time goes by. That's why there's boosters.

Everything over 90% is enough.

Eww

And I'm thankful for the virus they made

1st clue:vaccines take 7 - 12 yrs before public availabilty

and by the replies to your comment, the human race seems to be evolving into 2 distinct subspecies

@@richardreinhard8864 Finally a sensible comment and, yes, I couldn’t agree more! 😂

after

Or people just don't trust the research because they are all funded by the lying government?

@@srdjankovic But not all of them are? Government funding doesn't necessarily mean the government drives the research in any way. I actually think it is in their least best interest to skew the research that will show them their best bet in how to handle the pandemic. Even if it's not in good intentions, they will become infamous for their misjudgements and I don't think they genuinely want that for themselves.

So, a research including 170 people is enough for the whole world to trust these numbers? Really? - These vaccines are being tested in us directly from the lab, does that even make sense to anyone here? No other trials, directly to humans. That's the first question we should ask about, why are you testing in humans first hand?

@@alfredorivera6290 yes. Indeed it is.

Facts

boost this

Agreed!

I didn't know that, I always take my flu shot and (knock on wood) I haven't got a cold ever since, so 66% is great. Thank you

Actually it could in a bad prediction go down as low as 10%. Yah norm is 40-60%.

The fact it is proven effective against the variants is important too, because now countries with those variants can get one that is effective vs one that might be effective.

@@kevinyaucheekin1319 Yeah, the flu mutates too quickly, so you’ll never be able to get a vaccine with a very high efficacy rate.

@@marleyhorne7580 I hear about a new covid mutation literally daily. Do you have any critical thinking skills at all? Or do you just say whatever “feels” right and then assume it’s the truth