It was never 95% effective. It had 95% efficacy, which means clinical conditions. Kind of like how perfectly used condoms are like 90% effective at preventing pregnancy but typical use is barely better than a perfect pull out game.
And only in relative terms. Absolute risk reduction is supposed to be under 1%, that is, in order to save one soul, you have to vaccinate 100 people. Those 95% are just in case you catch the flu, you have a 95% risk reduction for the disease
That is just the official explanation, mind you. Personally, I don't trust any of it, since they firstly haven't done a comprehensive study to show what percentage of the population has already caught the virus before and therefore has basic immunity, and secondly, the risk of severe disease is unevenly distributed across the population, so that for someone like me, who is healthy, the risk reduction would be minimal at best.
(post is archived)