Do the recent 80k pages of Pfizer documents released really show vaccine efficacy was only 12%?


So Sonia Elijah is making the same specious argument Peter Doshi did in his editorial in British Medical Journal in January 2021, which I refuted in detail in my blog post that same month. It seems she is making the mistake of not realizing that “suspected but unconfirmed cases” in the protocol refers to individuals receiving PCR tests because that had a symptom from a large pre-specifed list that triggered a PCR test, but for which the PCR test was negative. The authors of the FDA briefing document choosing the term “suspected but unconfirmed cases” for those with negative PCR tests was a poor choice that has contributed to this confusion and led many to misinterpret what it means.

So the argument made by Sonia Elijah suggesting the “real VE” of the Pfizer vaccines is 12% is an old one dating back to January 2021, and an erroneous one. The fact this claim is spreading virally around social media without confirmation or justification, and with very few questioning where it came from or whether it was a legitimate claim, shows how easy it is for unsubstantiated and false claims to quickly spread on social media, where they find a large set of receptive ears ready to believe and promote the claim without any documentation or justification, primarily because it feeds the narrative they believe and are promoting.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Do the recent 80k pages of Pfizer documents released really show vaccine efficacy was only 12%?

  1. Pingback: Fake claims about the Pfizer documents | weehingthong

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s