Background
A search on Twitter for Pfizer currently shows many people talking about a supposed recent release of documentation (tens of thousands of pages) from Pfizer. A simple Internet search shows many personal blogs discussing the release, sites claiming to have the documents in question (I was unable to access them, and at any rate am not inclined to go through such a large document myself), and news articles debunking a claim about adverse effects.
In the Twitter discussion, I have noticed a few common themes: along with the usual anecdotes (that I see every time there is a swell in Twitter discussion of COVID vaccines) about individuals supposedly harmed by the vaccine and protest of Pfizer's profit margins, there are four distinct claims I have noticed:
A claim that the leak of the Roe v Wade decision was timed to distract from the contents of the Pfizer documents (this is, of course, an unprovable and irrelevant conspiracy theory, so I have not selected it as the topic here)
A claim that the documentation indicates over a thousand deaths caused by vaccines during the trials (the news coverage I can find all seems to focus on this claim, making the simple argument that these deaths cannot necessarily be attributed to the vaccine; that's good enough for me as it stands, so this is also not the claim I want to highlight. I suppose this is similar to the classic misuse of VAERS seen in many other covid-19 related questions.)
A claim that the vaccine was not recommended during pregnancy or lactation, as the studies did not determine whether the vaccine would be excreted in human milk. It was established later that the vaccine is passed on this way, but this has been deemed safe and beneficial, so this is also not the claim I find interesting for skeptics.SE purposes.
Claim
The preceding is largely meant to establish that the documents in question indeed exist and that they have been looked over, but that I don't know where to look for a thorough treatment of the topic. There is one claim outstanding in the discussion which I have not seen addressed. I will quote example Tweets here:
While the system kept you busy with abortion in USA & War in Ukraine,
Pfizer data came out after a court order.
The vaccine was 12% effective & dropped to less than 1%.
No trials were done on pregnant women before giving them!
Pfizer vax had a 0.83% chance to save you.
Scam!
Pfizer data just out! We no why they fought to seal data for 75 years! Vaccine was 12% effective. Never trialled in pregnant women, tested on 7 Rats before it was given to them! Actual Pfizer vaccine had a 0.83% chance to save ur life from Covid. SHOCKED
Now that the "#Science" is out that the #Pfizer vax is actually 12% effective the first 7 days, and then below 1% after that time lapse... How do we fight the mandates legally? Even the kangaroo courts we have in #Canada won't be able to come up with enough bs to cover for that.
The numbers cited are consistent: it is claimed that Pfizer has now admitted their vaccine to be only "12% effective".
My question is: Where does this number come from, and does it have any salience or validity? How are the anti-vax crowd interpreting the document to infer such a result, and how could this happen with the same data that was used to produce headlines of over 90% efficacy at the time the vaccines were released? It seems as though outright fraud is being alleged.
