"Absolute risk reduction" is being tossed around to question vaccine efficacy.
This is one of those things which highlights how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
This is one of those things which highlights how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
There is a role for absolute risk reduction. Vaccine efficacy is not one of that.
Take measles vaccine. Let's say we give 10000 placebo and 10,000 vaccine
100 get measles with placebo and 0 get it with vaccine. Relative efficacy is 100%
Absolute risk reduction is 1%-0% =1%.
Take measles vaccine. Let's say we give 10000 placebo and 10,000 vaccine
100 get measles with placebo and 0 get it with vaccine. Relative efficacy is 100%
Absolute risk reduction is 1%-0% =1%.
So are we going to go around saying measles vaccine has only 1% efficacy?
I had written about the importance of absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat in 1996. A time when most trials and journals did not report them. So it's amusing when people opposed to vaccines ask to learn about absolute risk reduction and NNT. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8803742/
Absolute risk reduction is an anti vaccine talking point. It is used to downplay the remarkable efficacy of vaccines by using it inappropriately. It shows up with pics like this. Don't fall for it. 
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
