Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

FederalSlutInspector t1_ixo1xkm wrote

78% effective how could they possibly have any kind of respectable sample size when it is such a rare disease. Are they having vaccinated people expose themselves to the virus to see because if they don't get exposed to it then there's no way to know if it is effective or not.

19

IxbyWuff t1_ixoh2c2 wrote

Hence the word 'suggests'. It's an interesting data point, not pretending to be a truth

14

LavaMcLampson t1_ixot6hm wrote

It wasn’t that rare in the sub population of gay men in London for a period of several months which is the group they vaccinated.

9

Baud_Olofsson t1_ixpkp83 wrote

> 78% effective how could they possibly have any kind of respectable sample size when it is such a rare disease.

The UK has had more than 3500 confirmed cases, and almost exclusively among MSM. That is more than enough.

> Are they having vaccinated people expose themselves to the virus to see because if they don't get exposed to it then there's no way to know if it is effective or not.

Like with any vaccine study, they are comparing infection rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated people.

9

[deleted] t1_ixqh3l2 wrote

If it's anything like the last vaccine, they just made that number up. "stops transmission dead in it's tracks"

4