Or choosing a particular way to crunch numbers and present the data. Here's an example.
How did Pfizer calculate their "vaccine" is 95% effective? In the trial used, there was a 22,000 person "vaccinated" group where 8 people caught covid, and a 22,000 person unvaccinated control group where 162 people caught covid. 8 divided by 162 is 4.94%, and the shot is declared 95% effective.
How about looking at it a different way? In the "vaccinated" group, 0.036% got covid, vs. 0.736% in the control group. The shot therefore lowered the risk of catching covid by 0.7%. Doesn't sound so good that way, does it?
Weighing "95% effective" against the risks of the shot sounds like a good bet. Weighing "0.736% reduction" against the risks of the shot doesn't feel like a good bet.
Vaccine Makers Claim COVID Shots Are ‘95% Effective’ — But What Does That Mean? • Children's Health Defense
Absolute vs. Relative Risk: What Does Percentage Risk Really Mean?