Relative Risk Reduction Can Be Relatively Misleading

preview_player
Показать описание
Relying on RRR alone in making clinical decision can be misleading. I will outline why in this video.
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

Excellent video, thank you. Very applicable to the current covid vaccines and the figures we are given

jackhandley
Автор

there were so many sources I looked at to understand and memorize this concept. You are a master educator. This was the best explanation I found and finally got the concept. Thank you

marcinw
Автор

I have struggled to understand this concept for ages, and in a couple of minutes you have cleared everyhing up. Thank you so so much

nellsypie
Автор

We need this study for covid right now...we already know absolute reduction risk of the jabs are less than 1%

Dr.Frankensteen
Автор

Perhaps it would be worth correcting the error in the video? In Study 2, NNT may be 7 or 8 according to your point of view (see previous comments) but it is certainly not 6.

richard_perry
Автор

Outstanding video. It has something in short supply today. Integrity.

arnoldfrackenmeyer
Автор

ARR and NNT can only be compared when the drugs are tested within the same study (similar populations). This is a very serious error. In terms of the covid pandemic, you will get different ARR and NNT depending on how common cases are in the study group at that particular time.

nealesmith
Автор

Yes just like the COVID mRNA Vaccines this is great!

southernaesthetics
Автор

Excellent. Needs to be common knowledge so patients can be part of taking informed decisions in whether to get on a drug or not. Like statins....

JustBrowsing
Автор

Thanks for the video. Might be worth representing RRR = (CER - EER)/CER with the brackets to avoid errors.

zk
Автор

Honest question - presuming the studies can be compared, shouldn't the expectation be that if Fixitan were used in study 2 that it would reduce the hospitalization rates from 40% to 16%?

bzzt
Автор

Thank you very much it is very nice explanation

brrrr
Автор

Nnt in study 2 is 1/0, 14 = 7.14, therefor nnt is 7 ?

loco
Автор

I think I understand NNT...how many people need to be treated to prevent 1 hospitalization. To calculate this you divide 1 by the Absolute Risk Reduction.
So, for Fixitan, 1/0.03 = 33.3...so 33.3 people would need to be treated with Fixitan to prevent 1 hospitalization
And, for Correctapril, 1/0.14 = 7.14...so 7.14 people would need to be treated with Correctapril to prevent 1 hospitalization

In that case, the Relative Risk Reduction is basically statistical fuckery...the 60% is truly meaningless if way more people have to be treated in order to prevent 1 hospitalization. This is how, not just patients, but also doctors are misled. Most doctors are very busy tending to patients and likely do not have time to fully understand what is being pushed...I'm certain that the 60% vs 35% is a no brainer to them.

Truly, Big Pharmaceutical companies are worse than cartels...at least, with illegal drugs, you know you are taking a huge risk and those pushers make no claims of altruism. Big Pharma is akin to the priests that did unspeakable acts to alter boys...pretending to be trustworthy leaders only to be the lowest and most despicable members of society. And, the politicians, the mainstream media, and the FDA, CDC and WHO are like the bishops that moved these priests around the country so that they could hide the atrocities instead of turning these "men" over to the authorities...causing more atrocities and destroying more lives and leading us towards a nihilistic amoral society. Without the lies, propaganda and cover-ups, Big Pharma would never get away with poisoning citizens and making them sicker with their "medicines". Shame on all of these charlatans and snake oil salesmen as well as their partners in crime.

dadmaxx
Автор

How relative this is in the recent vaccine madness and Ivermectine censureship

compier