The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
the absolute risk reduction is calculated by simply subtracting this from this so when you click on this you'll see that it's the placebos risk minus the risk of the treatment group and that's actually a bigger number than you saw in the other vaccines actually suggesting that jnj is a more effective vaccine at least in this population
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
it turns out that J and J gets the most bang for its Buck now
when you look at the absolute risk reduction it turns out that the J and J vaccine has a 1.7 percent absolute risk reduction versus a 1.2 percent absolute risk reduction for moderna and I believe Pfizer is actually less than one percent risk reduction
it turns out that the j and j vaccine has a 1.7 absolute risk reduction versus a 1.2 percent absolute risk reduction for moderna and i believe pfizer is actually less than one percent risk reduction
it turns out that jnj gets the most bang for its buck
the absolute risk reduction was greater with j and j than both pfizer and moderna now again this was in the original strain not delta and that got easily missed