That is a literal descritption of how they calculate their "vaccine efficiency" :)

If from 100000 vaccinated 1 get ill and from 100000 unvaccinated 2 get ill, they declare that vaccine efficiency is not 0.001% which is real value, comparing to natural immunity efficiency of 99.999%, but insane and wrong 50%. Results where picture is opposite, like 2 vaccinated get ill vs 1 unvaccinated get ill is just dropped as "unreliable". Some could just exclude ill test objects from vaccinated group to keep figures nice.

Talking wider, that "vaccine trials" are completely unscientific. They pose that vaccine is only input factor in experiment, but it is a lie. There are two factors - much more powerful natural immunity and weak vaccine. They, as usual do not isolate vaccine factor from natural immunity at all, eventually measuring just a variations in natural immunity and not a vaccine effect, and it is in a case they do their meaningless measurements honestly and don't just fake results. It is like measuring a level of two signals where one is many orders of magnitude more powerful and noisy than other without any attempt to use a filter to pick out a weak signal. To make a scientific experiment they have to take test subjects without natural immunity at all and show that 100% test subjects from control group get ill and only 50% test subjects from vaccinated group get ill. Only in that case they could declare 50% efficiency. If a single test subject from control group does not get ill, it means that they should isolate vaccine effect from some other unknown factor, along with natural immunity and repeat their experiment again.

That is a literal descritption of how they calculate their "vaccine efficiency" :)

If from 100000 vaccinated 1 get ill and from 100000 unvaccinated 2 get ill, they declare that vaccine efficiency is not 0.001% which is real value, comparing to natural immunity efficiency of 99.999%, but insane and wrong 50%. Results where picture is opposite, like 2 vaccinated get ill vs 1 unvaccinated get ill is just dropped as "unreliable". Some could just exclude ill test objects from vaccinated group to keep figures nice.

Talking wider, that "vaccine trials" are completely unscientific. They pose that vaccine is only input factor in experiment, but it is a lie. There are two factors - much more powerful natural immunity and weak vaccine. They, as usual do not isolate vaccine factor from natural immunity at all, eventually measuring just a variations in natural immunity and not a vaccine effect, and it is in a case they do their meaningless measurements honestly and don't just fake results. It is like measuring a level of two signals where one is many orders of magnitude more powerful than other without any attempt to use a filter to pick out a weak signal. To make a scientific experiment they have to take test subjects without natural immunity at all and show that 100% test subjects from control group get ill and only 50% test subjects from vaccinated group get ill. Only in that case they could declare 50% efficiency. If a single test subject from control group does not get ill, it means that they should isolate vaccine effect from some other unknown factor, along with natural immunity and repeat their experiment again.

That is a literal descritption of how they calculate their "vaccine efficiency" :)

If from 100000 vaccinated 1 get ill and from 100000 unvaccinated 2 get ill, they declare that vaccine efficiency is not 0.001% which is real value, comparing to natural immunity efficiency of 99.999%, but insane and wrong 50%. Results where picture is opposite, like 2 vaccinated get ill vs 1 unvaccinated get ill is just dropped as "unreliable". Some could just exclude ill test objects from vaccinated group to keep figures nice.

Talking wider, that "vaccine trials" are completely unscientific. They pose that vaccine is only input factor in experiment, but it is a lie. There are two factors - natural immunity and vaccine. They, as usual do not isolate vaccine factor from natural immunity at all, eventually measuring just a variations in natural immunity and not a vaccine effect, and it is in a case they do their meaningless measurements honestly and don't just fake results. To make a scientific experiment they have to take test subjects without natural immunity at all and show that 100% test subjects from control group get ill and only 50% test subjects from vaccinated group get ill. Only in that case they could declare 50% efficiency. If a single test subject from control group does not get ill, it means that they should isolate vaccine effect from some other unknown factor, along with natural immunity and repeat their experiment again.

That is a literal descritption of how they calculate their "vaccine efficiency" :)

If from 100000 vaccinated 1 get ill and from 100000 unvaccinated 2 get ill, they declare that vaccine efficiency is not 0.001% which is real value, comparing to natural immunity efficiency of 99.999%, but insane and wrong 50%. Results where picture is opposite, like 2 vaccinated get ill vs 1 unvaccinated get ill is just dropped as "unreliable". Some could just exclude ill test objects from vaccinated group to keep figures nice.

Talking wider, that "vaccine trials" are completely unscientific. They pose that vaccine is only input factor in experiment, but it is a lie. There are two factors - natural immunity and vaccine. They, as usual do not isolate vaccine factor from natural immunity at all, eventually measuring just a variations in natural immunity and not a vaccine effect, ans it is in a case they do their meaningless measurements honestly and don't just fake results. To make a scientific experiment they have to take test subjects without natural immunity at all and show that 100% test subjects from control group get ill and only 50% test subjects from vaccinated group get ill. Only in that case they could declare 50% efficiency. If a single test subject from control group does not get ill, it means that they should isolate vaccine effect from some other unknown factor, along with natural immunity and repeat their experiment again.

That is a literal descritption of how they calculate their "vaccine efficiency" :)

If from 100000 vaccinated 1 get ill and from 100000 unvaccinated 2 get ill, they declare that vaccine efficiency is not 0.001% which is real value, comparing to natural immunity efficiency of 99.999%, but insane and wrong 50%. Results where picture is opposite, like 2 vaccinated get ill vs 1 unvaccinated get ill is just dropped as "unreliable". Some could just exclude ill test objects from vaccinated group to keep figures nice.

Talking wider, that "vaccine trials" are completely unscientific. They pose that vaccine is only input factor in experiment, but it is a lie. There are two factors - natural immunity and vaccine. They, as usual do not isolate vaccine factor from natural immunity at all, eventually measuring just a variations in natural immunity and not a vaccine effect, ans it is in a case they do their meaningless measurements honestly and don't just fake results. To make a scientific experiment they have to take test subjects without natural immunity at all and show that 100% test subjects from control group get ill and only 50% test subjects from vaccinated group get ill. Only in that case they could declare 50% efficiency.

That is a literal descritption of how they calculate their "vaccine efficiency" :)

If from 100000 vaccinated 1 get ill and from 100000 unvaccinated 2 get ill, they declare that vaccine efficiency is not 0.001% which is real value, comparing to natural immunity efficiency of 99.999%, but insane and wrong 50%. Results where picture is opposite, like 2 vaccinated get ill vs 1 unvaccinated get ill is just dropped as "unreliable". Some could just exclude ill test objects from vaccinated group to keep figures nice.

Talking wider, that "vaccine trials" are completely unscientific. They pose that vaccine is only input factor in experiment, but it is a lie. There are two factors - natural immunity and vaccine. They, as usual do not isolate vaccine factor from natural immunity at all, eventually measuring just a variations in natural immunity and not a vaccine effect. To make a scientific experiment they have to take test subjects without natural immunity at all and show that 100% test subjects from control group get ill and only 50% test subjects from vaccinated group get ill. Only in that case they could declare 50% efficiency.

That is a literal descritption of how they calculate their "vaccine efficiency" :)

If from 100000 vaccinated 1 get ill and from 100000 unvaccinated 2 get ill, they declare that vaccine efficiency is not 0.001% which is real value, comparing to natural immunity efficiency of 99.999%, but insane and wrong 50%. Results where picture is opposite, like 2 vaccinated get ill vs 1 unvaccinated get ill is just dropped as "unreliable". Some could just exclude ill test objects from vaccinated group to keep figures nice.