Quote Originally Posted by MOZZER2 View Post
thanks for response citizen .

the only take on that how the hell can anyone lie about boarding a ship without a PCR test and fully jabbed ? The protocols wouldn't allow that

In terms of language used i would expect 100 per cent yield going in and 100 per cent yield coming out which in terms of six sigma is 3.4 defects per 1 million opportunities

A six sigma process is one in which 99.99966% of all opportunities to produce some feature of a part are statistically expected to be free of defects a defined measurement used in engineering

lets hope its a good vaccine !
Hey Moz, I do understand the confusion. I don't know the answer as to how people could lie in this scenario, but it has to factored in. Maybe the ship's cat brought it onboard? I'm joking. But you can't extrapolate the precision data from an unprecise trial. 100% yields can't really apply to efficacy i.e. the efficacy of the vaccine. For example, some of those vaccines will fall within an efficacy/potency level and some will fall outside. I'd have to look at Pharmacopeia guidelines to check levels for these but they will exist and won't be of the engineering levels of defects. Then, for example, someone may have had a vaccine, it's been recorded as them having a vaccine, but they didn't get the full dose because of whatever factors contributed to that. These are small but not impossible.

In a controlled clinical trial, everything would be checked, cross-checked, blind, double blind, whatever but most importantly, those clinical subjects wouldn't be allowed out of sight. Everything would be monitored. I get the free of defects analogy but that only applies to the syringe and needle, not the vaccine itself, and certainly not when it comes to the diversity of physiology. Does that make sense? I'm doing this really quickly and can continue tomorrow.