Dumaguete Info Search


Chinese Vaccine

Discussion in 'COVID-19' started by SkipJack, Nov 21, 2020.

  1. Toto

    Toto DI Senior Member

    Messages:
    749
    Trophy Points:
    251
    Ratings:
    +666 / 205
    Well, the article I linked to has this:

    The New York Times article sparked a transatlantic row, with the BMJ demanding a prominent retraction of a headline suggesting vaccine mix and match was officially approved. That was “seriously misleading”, said the BMJ editor, Dr Fiona Godlee.

    It’s not official policy, said Dr Mary Ramsay, Public Health England’s head of immunisations. “We do not recommend mixing the Covid-19 vaccines – if your first dose is the Pfizer vaccine you should not be given the AstraZeneca vaccine for your second dose and vice versa.”

    But on the “extremely rare occasions” where the same vaccine is unavailable or it is unknown which jab the patient received, it is “better to give a second dose of another vaccine than not at all”.
     
  2. djfinn6230

    djfinn6230 DI Senior Member

    Messages:
    978
    Trophy Points:
    201
    Ratings:
    +953 / 117
    Blood Type:
    B+
    I don’t know what to believe in media reports on this pandemic anymore. They no longer appear to be valid cites. I do believe in both my USA doctor and my Philippine doctor and ultimately I would follow their advice (thus the disclaimer in my original post),


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  3. Toto

    Toto DI Senior Member

    Messages:
    749
    Trophy Points:
    251
    Ratings:
    +666 / 205
    I'm used to it by now. It's not unusual to find you have to change an understanding, The Guardian is mixed on factual reporting.
    The NYT was asked to print a correction to match the 'rare cases' quote. Just check media bias, etc., and check up on the source.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. OP
    OP
    SkipJack

    SkipJack DI Senior Member

    Messages:
    877
    Trophy Points:
    246
    Ratings:
    +1,160 / 79
    Blood Type:
    I don't know.
  5. djfinn6230

    djfinn6230 DI Senior Member

    Messages:
    978
    Trophy Points:
    201
    Ratings:
    +953 / 117
    Blood Type:
    B+
    I believe Sinovac is one of the major vaccines being brought in here in addition to two others. Apparently this is being studied in Brazil but communications of test results are poor. Originally they claimed “78% efficacy against MILD to severe” cases. The latest release of information lowered it to “50.4%” but that is the figure for efficacy against VERY MILD to SEVERE”. They also note, according to an Al Jazeera article, that no person receiving the Sinovac vaccine required hospital treatment. So it looks like Sinovac is not as good as the others but it is still good at decreasing the death rate. The Brazil agency experts state that it will take longer to curb the epidemic with s vaccine that allows so many mild cases. Personally I would think that elders and other at high risk should be given the higher efficacy vaccines but Sinovac could be available for everybody in the event of a shortage of the higher efficacy vaccines. I suspect that Sinovac was designed for MILD TO SEVERE efficacy which could be their standard measurement while the West uses a stricter efficacy standard. 50.4% meets the western standard but it is borderline.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Notmyrealname

    Notmyrealname DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster Showcase Reviewer

    Messages:
    4,918
    Trophy Points:
    386
    Ratings:
    +5,588 / 2,888
    This is one of seven vaccines the government is reported to be negotiating about (as shown in the original post of the thread 'Vaccine in Philippines') and the first they expect to receive (about Feb/Mar) - BUT, I read today that allegedly the money required for all the necessary doses of vaccines overall has not yet been raised (as loans).

    It seems pointless using a vaccine at about 50% efficacy as half the people (see the math!!! :smile: ) would be walking around unprotected and 100% would be walking around not knowing (unless all are quarantined until tested for immunity - very unlikely). Then there is the cost factor of repeating vaccinations of the 50% failed ones (if using the same CoronaVac (the name of the vaccine made by Sinovac) would that mean that 25% of the original set was still not protected? They need to be vaccinated a third time ... now 12.5% are not protected.... etc!).

    As a vaccine usually is prophylatic - how do they know (as another person stated and I assume from a published article) that the 50% efficacy is against "mild to severe cases" (those being vaccinated generally don't yet have the disease!). That statement later changed to "mild to severe efficacy" but that does not make sense - efficacy is the level of how effective the vaccine is in successfully inducing acquired immunity against the disease (usually expressed as a percentage) and that cannot be stated as 'mild to severe' (only the symptoms of the disease can be). So do they mean that 50% of people after vaccination with Sinovac have a risk of mild to severe infection? If so then oops - they expect people to use it??? And different countries are getting different results! Could be due to different host genetics or different strains there OR the Chinese cannot make anything to a standard! Very confusing.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2021
  7. Toto

    Toto DI Senior Member

    Messages:
    749
    Trophy Points:
    251
    Ratings:
    +666 / 205
    I'm losing track of everything. I was thinking of creating a spreadsheet for comparison purposes, but there's missing and questionable data. There are now many vaccines. I wouldn't be happy with Sinovac, but that might allow a trip out to get good vaccine shots. It's getting confusing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. djfinn6230

    djfinn6230 DI Senior Member

    Messages:
    978
    Trophy Points:
    201
    Ratings:
    +953 / 117
    Blood Type:
    B+
    I will just take the jab or jabs and move on with life. The only thing is, if it is the Sinovac, I want to make sure there will be no conflict if a better vaccine becomes available. If I were 50 or younger, I would not care about that so much, assuming I got the vaccine at all, or Sinovac, or single Pfizer dose.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  9. Notmyrealname

    Notmyrealname DI Forum Luminary Highly Rated Poster Showcase Reviewer

    Messages:
    4,918
    Trophy Points:
    386
    Ratings:
    +5,588 / 2,888
    Brazil has been testing CoronaVac (the vaccine made by Sinovac) and it is reported that only about 50% of the vaccinated people are protected.

    Now it is reported that there is a new variant of the virus in Brazil.

    It has been written previously on this Forum about the possibility of natural selection allowing new variants to emerge through vaccination - so would 'incomplete' vaccination be a greater problem by killing off only weaker strains (as in incomplete use of antibiotics)?

    Without being alarmist, there is a very strong case for people protecting themselves and their close ones as this could be a very long haul and only efficient personal protection gives an almost 100% chance of survival - relying on vaccines may not work and may make things even worst and people too complacent.

    PROTECT YOURSELF and your close ones.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  10. djfinn6230

    djfinn6230 DI Senior Member

    Messages:
    978
    Trophy Points:
    201
    Ratings:
    +953 / 117
    Blood Type:
    B+
    It is so tiring to hear “wash your hands” and “respect social distancing” when we already know all of those righteous aphorisms that we have been hearing for the past year. Like we don’t already know that we should wear masks etc. to be safe). Now we have technical, man-made solutions to a problem that may even have been created by man (the jury is still out). Similar technical solutions wiped smallpox and polio off the map; have faith in the science and we will get through this with the help of current and future vaccine innovations from all corners of the world. The current situation is not sustainable year after year. These keep-safe procedures are necessary, temporarily, but even they are not nearly enough to end the Covid fatalities.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
Loading...