Real World Data shows NO Need for Vaccines for Kids
- informedchoiceiowa
- Nov 6, 2021
- 2 min read
The CDC has guidance mentioning the importance of using the number needed to treat/vaccinate when it comes to evaluating the risk/benefit analysis of new drugs and vaccines.
Why doesn't Pfizer ever calculate a number needed to vaccinate (NNV) & why doesn't the FDA nor CDC require that assessment upon approving & authorizing these vaccines??
The question is how many children ages 5-11 would need to get the Pfizer vaccine in order to prevent ONE hospitalization, ICU admission, or death AKA severe Covid?
Because there were exactly ZERO cases of any severe Covid in the children's clinical trial (with 2300 kids), technically the data says you could vaccinate every single child 5-11 years old within the US and not prevent a single case of severe Covid in that age range.
However, if we use real world data that we already know to find the number needed to vaccinate in order to prevent ONE child death using the actual number of kids who have died ages 5-11, the fact that it's approximately 80% effectiveness at preventing severe Covid in a 6 month period (which is how long the vaccines seem to be effective) you come to a NNV in order to prevent ONE child death of 630,775.
I.e. you need to vaccinate 630,775 five to eleven year olds to save ONE of them from death.
However, to calculate the risk of the vaccine in children ages 5-11 we have to assume the same numbers of adverse events in the ages 12-24 are the same in 5-11 year olds (since there is no real world data in children 5-11). Using VAERS reports of deaths, analyses of underreported deaths, & the risk of heart inflammation issues, you get an analysis of killing 5,248 children ages 5-11 who receive the Pfizer vaccine in order to save 45 children from dying of Covid.
This comes to 1/117: for every 1 child saved by the Pfizer vaccines, 117 children will die from the vaccines.
Why aren't our government agencies doing this analysis like they emphasize? And if we are wrong, show us the correct analysis used to show the benefit outweighs the risk!
Comments