The conspiracy is that companies such as Pfizer and BioNTech manipulate data to convince you that their products are safe. Below is how you get approximately 95% efficacy from their data.

https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download

On page 24 of the attached FDA briefing document on the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine on Dec. 10th 2020, you will find a a table titled “Table 6. Final Analysis of Efficacy of BNT162b2 Against Confirmed COVID-19 From 7 Days After Dose 2 in Participants Without Evidence of Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection - Evaluable Efficacy Population”

In this table, you will see that the vaccinated and control group consisted of 18198 participants and 18325 participants, respectively.

Out of all the participants in this part of the study only 8/18,198 people in the vaccinated group and 162/18,325 people in the control group were considered COVID-19 cases.

162/18,325 cases in the control group comes out to be 0.884%. 8/18,198 cases in the vaccinated group equals 0.044%.

Absolute risk reduction is the difference between the control and the vaccinated group. That number being 0.884%-0.044%=0.84%. This is the scientifically, biologically and mathematically meaningful efficacy rate. In other words, this vaccine actually has less than a 1% chance of efficacy of protecting you against COVID-19.

So how are we told the vaccines are 95% effective?

You take the 8 cases in the vaccinated group and the 162 cases in the control group and add them together. Now you have a total of 170 cases with 162 being from the control group and thus 162/170≈95.3%. Now do this for every other row where they show you an efficacy rate and you will find that they calculate relative risk reduction which gives the impression the vaccine is much more effective than it actually is.

Relative risk reduction is scientifically meaningless because it doesn’t take into account the entire sample size in both the control and vaccinated groups. And besides, no one would take a vaccine with less than 1% efficacy rate so they lie to us saying something mathematically accurate (162/170 is indeed approx. 95%) but medically meaningless.

Now how do they measure the percentage of adverse events starting on page 33? They take the total amount of adverse events and divide that by the number of participants. Interesting how they correctly show us the amount of adverse reactions while twisting the data for the actual efficacy rate.