What does efficacy mean

When they say the vax has a 95% efficacy what does that mean?

Here's the current definition

the ability to produce a desired or intended result.

So what was the desired or intended result?

Vaccines before Covid have always been to stop transmission. Now it seems iike they have changed it to mean it keeps you from getting sicker.

They have actually said now it was never meant to stop transmission but then what did 95% efficacy mean?

I asked this in another thread and the Big Pharma drug pushers (you know who they are) wouldn't answer

I bet they ignore this too

They had to change the definition of the word. They were not vaccines, they were mRNA devices that not surprisingly turned out to be bioweapons.

a reply to: just4fun

rather than admit this didn't work as well as they thought, they change definitions to match the results. We see it, we know it happened, but we do nothing. This is what happens when you do nothing.

originally posted by: just4fun
When they say the vax has a 95% efficacy what does that mean?

Here's the current definition

the ability to produce a desired or intended result.

So what was the desired or intended result?

Vaccines before Covid have always been to stop transmission. Now it seems iike they have changed it to mean it keeps you from getting sicker.

They have actually said now it was never meant to stop transmission but then what did 95% efficacy mean?

I asked this in another thread and the Big Pharma drug pushers (you know who they are) wouldn't answer

I bet they ignore this too

You seem to have answered you own question, it depends on the result being measured although I think this is a better definition

A vaccine’s efficacy is measured in a controlled clinical trial and is based on how many people who got vaccinated developed the ‘outcome of interest’ (usually disease) compared with how many people who got the placebo (dummy vaccine)

So vaccine efficacy & efficency can be more than one figure depending on what outcome you are measuring.

Vaccines have never only been about stopping onward transmission (that's usually a side benefit), and that would rarely if ever be an efficacy measure as not suitable for that type of study.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Vaccines have never only been about stopping onward transmission

Such a Bull S### lie. Where are all the breakthrough cases of small pox and polio?

And why are they called breakthrough cases?

What are they breaking through?

originally posted by: just4fun
a reply to: ScepticScot

Vaccines have never only been about stopping onward transmission

Such a Bull S### lie. Where are all the breakthrough cases of small pox and polio?

And why are they called breakthrough cases?

What are they breaking through?

You will have to go tell all those anti vaxers who for years told us vaccines weren't about preventing transmission...

Now if you are going to call me a liar you can of course provide a link showing that vaccines were only ever about preventing transmission?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: just4fun
a reply to: ScepticScot

Vaccines have never only been about stopping onward transmission

Such a Bull S### lie. Where are all the breakthrough cases of small pox and polio?

And why are they called breakthrough

What are they breaking through?

You will have to go tell all those anti vaxers who for years told us vaccines weren't about preventing transmission...

Now if you are going to call me a liar you can of course provide a link showing that vaccines were only ever about preventing transmission?

Why are they called Breakthrough cases?

What are they breaking through?


Cmon you know


its easier to fool a man then to convince him he has been fooled.

a reply to: just4fun

it means it don't work.

originally posted by: just4fun

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: just4fun
a reply to: ScepticScot

Vaccines have never only been about stopping onward transmission

Such a Bull S### lie. Where are all the breakthrough cases of small pox and polio?

And why are they called breakthrough cases?

What are they breaking through?

You will have to go tell all those anti vaxers who for years told us vaccines weren't about preventing transmission...

Now if you are going to call me a liar you can of course provide a link showing that vaccines were only ever about preventing transmission?

Why are they called Breakthrough cases?

What are they breaking through?

The vaccine protection ( I would have thought that was fairly obvious).


Where is your link supporting your claim I am lying?

a reply to: ScepticScot

In other words, a vaccine is supposed to produce immunity and keep you from getting ill. If it has 95% efficacy, then we would expect that it produces a response that protects against illness 95% of the time.

Clearly, COVID vaccines never did that.

a reply to: ScepticScot

You will have to go tell all those anti vaxers who for years told us vaccines weren't about preventing transmission...

So then all those anti vaxers are right?

originally posted by: just4fun
a reply to: ScepticScot

You will have to go tell all those anti vaxers who for years told us vaccines weren't about preventing transmission...

So then all those anti vaxers are right?

Nope they just struggled to understand that there can be more than one benefit to vaccination, as apparently do you.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: just4fun

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: just4fun
a reply to: ScepticScot

Vaccines have never only been about stopping onward transmission

Such a Bull S### lie. Where are all the breakthrough cases of small pox and polio?

And why are they called breakthrough cases?

What are they breaking through?

You will have to go tell all those anti vaxers who for years told us vaccines weren't about preventing transmission...

Now if you are going to call me a liar you can of course provide a link showing that vaccines were only ever about preventing transmission?

Why are they called Breakthrough cases?

What are they breaking through?

The vaccine protection ( I would have thought that was fairly obvious).


Where is your link supporting your claim I am lying?

So then the desired result is to stop transmission?

And they were lying their ass off when they said 95% efficacy?

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: just4fun
a reply to: ScepticScot

You will have to go tell all those anti vaxers who for years told us vaccines weren't about preventing transmission...

So then all those anti vaxers are right?

Nope they just struggled to understand that there can be more than one benefit to vaccination, as apparently do you.

LMAO Its ok to be wrong and you are wrong

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: ScepticScot

In other words, a vaccine is supposed to produce immunity and keep you from getting ill. If it has 95% efficacy, then we would expect that it produces a response that protects against illness 95% of the time.

Clearly, COVID vaccines never did that.

If it has a 95% efficacy then during the trial it reducesd cases by 95%.

a reply to: ScepticScot

What protection though? Breakthrough cases means someone who was supposed to be prevented from getting it contracted it. Breakthrough has nothing to do with severity, so what was it supposed to be protecting against of it is not about prevention?

originally posted by: just4fun

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: just4fun
a reply to: ScepticScot

You will have to go tell all those anti vaxers who for years told us vaccines weren't about preventing transmission...

So then all those anti vaxers are right?

Nope they just struggled to understand that there can be more than one benefit to vaccination, as apparently do you.

LMAO Its ok to be wrong and you are wrong

Yet still no link to back up your claim.

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: ScepticScot

What protection though? Breakthrough cases means someone who was supposed to be prevented from getting it contracted it. Breakthrough has nothing to do with severity, so what was it supposed to be protecting against of it is not about prevention?

The claim isn't and never was that vaccination 100% prevented you from getting covid.

originally posted by: just4fun

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: just4fun

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: just4fun
a reply to: ScepticScot

Vaccines have never only been about stopping onward transmission

Such a Bull S### lie. Where are all the breakthrough cases of small pox and polio?

And why are they called breakthrough cases?

What are they breaking through?

You will have to go tell all those anti vaxers who for years told us vaccines weren't about preventing transmission...

Now if you are going to call me a liar you can of course provide a link showing that vaccines were only ever about preventing transmission?

Why are they called Breakthrough cases?

What are they breaking through?

The vaccine protection ( I would have thought that was fairly obvious).


Where is your link supporting your claim I am lying?

So then the desired result is to stop transmission?

And they were lying their ass off when they said 95% efficacy?

Breakthrough cases aren't about onward transmission so no.

a reply to: ScepticScot

No facts to support Pharma's claims. Indeed, 18 months in, the facts show the shots to be useless at stopping Covid, and dangerous to all and fatal to many.