SERIOUS COVID

Is this a scam?

China is selling their vaccine for a high price to the Philippines while they themselves plan to use the better quality Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 for a lower price.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/new...id-19-vaccine-for-2021/ar-BB1bY6ra?li=BBnbfcL

https://www.voanews.com/east-asia-p...ts-deal-25-mln-doses-sinovac-covid-19-vaccine

 

It may or may not be a scam. China bought the Pfizer vaccine as they do not expect theirs will be ready until June.
Oddly the Chinese plan to deliver their vaccine to the Philippines in March.
Go figure!

 

Incorrect. Current UK Nhs Uk guidance points to a spectrum of problems persisting in 10% of post viral ‘recovered’ patients lasting up to 12 weeks or longer. ‘Long Covid’ has a remarkable overlap with the syndrome known as Medically Unexplained Symptoms (MUS). Plenty of evidence for ‘burnout’ through the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) axis with that one. For example, the experience of pain is potentiated. Doing an ‘apples n oranges’ meta-analysis on this atm. Recovery ain’t that simple either way. Hope no-one here is part of the 10%.

 

The question is: would it be better to give twice as many people just one dose and worry about a second shot as supply catches up. Given the current case numbers, sooner may be better.

Scott Gottlieb supports the idea:
https://twitter.com/SquawkCNBC/status/1337396511957716996?re...

 

Thanks. I hadn't read any stats, nor do I understand what HPA is, so I found this in BMJ and will study it. And it notes 10% is lower than some other observational studies.
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3026

 

Only if they are selfish and do not care about those around them.

The concept here is that we work together to create a greater good for all. Not simply act with a selfish zero sum attitude where ones personal success is at the loss of another.

Many people are selfish and overly swayed by their personal emotional preconceptions. So much so that they readily believe in either erroneous "facts" or information severely skewed to their preconceptions.

It may be true that for a percentage of the young population there is a very high recovery rate. But to use this as justification to not make simple efforts (wear a mask) to resist the spread of the disease that will hurt others, is just plain selfish.

On the other hand, there are casualties in war. If one can form an argument that letting a few die is justified by less stringent actions against the spread of the disease. Then they should make that argument specifically relative to the stringent action being considered or implemented.

For example one could make a case that automobile manufacturing plants should continue to operate because workers are mostly not in close proximity to each other and can work in a way that minimizes spread. Wear a mask. If the plant is closed people lose their income and that manufacturer loses market share against manufacturers in other countries that were able to continue making product. Causing severe long term negative impacts.

In your response to a comment about people who do not give a crap about wearing a mask, you stated that "Most shouldn't" because they are in a group that has a high recovery rate.

Some would see this as an extremely selfish position. That the trivial inconvenience of wearing a mask justifies subjecting others to a disease that may kill them.

The Covid-19 recovery rate is not 99.9%
https://fullfact.org/health/Covid-recovery-vaccine/