89% of people dying from COVID are vaccinated - UK Government
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I stand corrected. He actually said 95.6%. I didn't include the .6%. My bad.
I encourage you to watch the entire segment. I'd love to hear your explanation that it's not biased or misinformation or MISLEADING in any way. I mean the takeaway is what ... vaccines are great, Pfizer is great, CEO is great, hey buy my book so I can make more millions.
The host is giddy: I'm a Pfizer girl!!!
CEO's book gets promoted
His book is about how great Pfizer is and how great the vaccine is
HUGE bar graph that shows how Pfizer is the "most popular" vaccine, as if anyone had a choice and consumers actively sought out that specific vaccine, host SUPER excited about that
Lies about efficacy rate in a deliberately misleading way. Takeaway is that it's 95.6% effective. Host giddy and excited and asking about that.
Just disgusting.
But, hey, media isn't in bed at ALL with big pharma. Nope nope nope.
I encourage you to watch the entire segment. I'd love to hear your explanation that it's not biased or misinformation or MISLEADING in any way. I mean the takeaway is what ... vaccines are great, Pfizer is great, CEO is great, hey buy my book so I can make more millions.
The host is giddy: I'm a Pfizer girl!!!
CEO's book gets promoted
His book is about how great Pfizer is and how great the vaccine is
HUGE bar graph that shows how Pfizer is the "most popular" vaccine, as if anyone had a choice and consumers actively sought out that specific vaccine, host SUPER excited about that
Lies about efficacy rate in a deliberately misleading way. Takeaway is that it's 95.6% effective. Host giddy and excited and asking about that.
Just disgusting.
He is discussing the original study, so he is not "STILL claiming his vaccine is 95% effective."
That was the effectiveness against the original virus. It was not a lie.
The effectiveness has dropped with the emergence of the new variants.
The interview was about how the vaccine was developed. I understand that you do not consider it to be a great achievement. I disagree. You are welcome to your own opinion.
Last edited by suzy_q2010; 03-07-2022 at 02:15 PM..
He as discussing the original study, so he is not "STILL claiming his vaccine is 95% effective."
That was the effectiveness against the original virus.
What's the takeaway?
Where's the follow up as to today's efficacy?
Where's the truth?
If he were hawking a supplement you'd be enraged, screeching at how he knew his supplement didn't have a 95% efficacy rate and claim it was misleading and false. You would be furious.
but but but vaccines ... you think it's OK to mislead and promote and advertise.
Or try this: Do you believe that the segment was a commercial? Or news? Or fake new? Or infomercial?
Where's the truth?
If he were hawking a supplement you'd be enraged, screeching at how he knew his supplement didn't have a 95% efficacy rate and claim it was misleading and false. You would be furious.
but but but vaccines ... you think it's OK to mislead and promote and advertise.
Or try this: Do you believe that the segment was a commercial? Or news? Or fake new? Or infomercial?
This is a great point. How many times have we heard doctors who shill supplements referred to on this forum as “quacks” and “snake oil salesmen”?
But Big Pharma? Nope. Those same posters are prepared to die on that hill.
And they might … you never know when those pesky long term vax side effects will start popping up.
This is a great point. How many times have we heard doctors who shill supplements referred to on this forum as “quacks” and “snake oil salesmen”?
But Big Pharma? Nope. Those same posters are prepared to die on that hill.
And they might … you never know when those pesky long term vax side effects will start popping up.
He presented the data as though it were applicable today. When he 100% knows it's not true. And of course, it's completely OK to present it that way, because pharma is untouchable. But yes, same posters would be screeching QUACK at the top of their lungs if it were a supplement, demanding he be doxxed and censored.
There was NO mention of the fact that it's 2 years old, out of date and just wrong.
The interview was disgusting. Pure advertisement.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
