# Pfizer “vaccine”: kill 200 to ‘save’ one? By Kit Knightly

The dangers of the Covid vaccines are lopsidedly outweighed by the risks and dangers. From Kit Knighly at off-guardian.com:

In the early days of the “vaccine” rollout, we ran several articles discussing the risk-reward of the new mRNA jabs. Dr Sadaf Gilani, in particular, did good detailed write-ups on “absolute risk reduction”.

To explain “absolute risk reduction” (ARR) in simple terms: if an unvaccinated person has a 10% chance of getting the disease, and a vaccinated person has a 1% chance, then the ARR for the vaccine is 9%.

Of course, that’s just an example, the actual ARR for the Covid “vaccines” is nowhere near 9%:

This is the absolute risk reduction for Pfizer/BioNtech (each group had over 18,000 people):

Injection Group: 8/18,198 = 0.04%
Placebo Group: 162/18,325 = 0.88%

Absolute risk reduction = 0.84%

From the “absolute risk reduction”, you can then calculate the “number needed to vaccinate” (NNTV). This is the rough number of people you need to inject in order to definitely prevent one case/death.

To continue the example above, if your vaccine reduces the odds of infection from 10% to 1% (an ARR of 9%), you need to vaccinate eleven people to prevent one infection, giving you an NNTV of 11.

Again, the NNTV of the Covid vaccines are much, much, MUCH higher than 11. Estimates range from between 88 and 700 to prevent a single case, and anything up to 100,000 to prevent one solitary death.

And remember, all this data was for adults. Children are at a far lower risk from Covid – both in terms of hospitalisation and death. In the US, children aged 5-11 have a 99.992% chance of surviving “Covid” – so it naturally follows the NNTV for this group will be far, far higher than for adults.

But, now that the FDA has approved Pfizer’s “vaccine” for emergency use on children aged 5-11, “far, far higher” is not good enough. We need to calculate an actual figure for the “number needed to vaccinate” in order to hypothetically protect one child from dying “with Covid”.

Fortunately for us, someone else has already done it.