What's new

China's COVID vaccines: Do the jabs do the job?

HongKong's sample pool is too small

Sounds like a copium reason. It's been similarly observed in other countries. All studies have biases?

It's well known now people with ill heath, older people are pushed to Sinovac even in SG etc. And even then the difference in outcome is only in 0.*%.
Not to mention those who died from mrna b4 even having the chance to get infected.

Instead of keep trying, and failing, to understand rudimentary studies with limited info, just listen to experts who have done proper studies that inactivated vax are better at preventing serious cases.


Yeah I agree, listen to the real experts:

Singapore's Ministry of Health
1669668817962-png.901201

1669668853403-png.901202

1670078598132-png.902572


In SG you need to take an additional dose of Sinovac to be considered vaccinated. As seen in my previous post on the HK study for the 80+ age group, 3 dose Sinovac's effectiveness is closer to (but still higher than) 2 dose Pfizer, and 4 dose Sinovac's effectiveness is closer to (but still higher than) 3 dose Pfizer.

1672556518288.png


Hong Kong:
1669670268346-png.901211

1670078623444-png.902575

1672506811918-png.908684


Chile:
1670078604680-png.902573


Malaysia:
1670078615884-png.902574
 
Last edited:
.
Sounds like a copium reason. It's been similarly observed in other countries.
No, many studies from different countries showed that 3 shots of the Chinese vaccines have at least same level of protection as the western ones and Chinese vaccines are generally safer for the takers.
 
.
Sounds like a copium reason. It's been similarly observed in other countries. All studies have biases?



Yeah I agree, listen to the real experts:

Singapore's Ministry of Health
1669668817962-png.901201

1669668853403-png.901202

1670078598132-png.902572


In SG you need to take an additional dose of Sinovac to be considered vaccinated. As seen in my previous post on the HK study for the 80+ age group, 3 dose Sinovac's effectiveness is closer to (but still higher than) 2 dose Pfizer, and 4 dose Sinovac's effectiveness is closer to (but still higher than) 3 dose Pfizer.

View attachment 908748

Hong Kong:
1669670268346-png.901211

1670078623444-png.902575

1672506811918-png.908684


Chile:
1670078604680-png.902573


Malaysia:
1670078615884-png.902574
Still using old studies from 2 dose Sinovac and of course, no mention of ill health people being pushed to Sinovac, time of vax, let alone those who died from mrna but not considered as covid.

Why talk of Sinovac needing 3 doses to be considered vax'ed when even pfizer are now boosted to 5 or whatever doses. lol

The much newer NUS-Duke study already tell u which is better in plain english but u still prefer old reports/comments which even u cant interprete correctly. lol
 
.
much newer NUS-Duke study

Please. The video you cited didn't even offer much insights. We already know right from the start that inactivated vaccines target a broader T-cell response than mRNA because it's the whole virus while mRNA focused on the spike. But that's just theoretical. Inactivated vaccines turn out to induce much lesser antibodies.

1672559291284.png


In the end the figures speak for themselves as seen in different studies above.

1672559571618.png
 
Last edited:
.

China's COVID vaccines: Do the jabs do the job?​

Rumor #1: I've heard the Chinese vaccines don't work very well? Is that true?

"No, that's not true," says epidemiologist Ben Cowling at the University of Hong Kong. "Our research in Hong Kong has shown that's not true. I don't have a concern about the effectiveness of the Chinese vaccine."

The Chinese vaccines are not "mRNA vaccines," like the ones Pfizer and Moderna manufacture. Instead both CoronaVac and Sinopharm use an older, but well-proven, technology: they contain an inactivated – or killed – form of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

In the study, Cowling and his team analyzed data from about 20,000 COVID cases, ranging from mild to fatal. They found that two doses of either vaccine offered a high level of protection against severe disease for adults under age 60. Specifically, two doses of the Pfizer vaccine offered 95 to 97% protection, while two doses of CoronaVac offered between 89 and 94% efficacy, the team reported in the Lancet Infectious Disease this past October.

For older adults, the Pfizer vaccine proved significantly more effective after only two doses. Specifically, the Pfizer vaccine offered about 87-to-92% protection for this group while CoronaVac offered only 64-to-75% protection. But, Cowling points out, an extra booster – or third dose – of CoronaVac lifts the protection to about 98%, the same protection observed with three doses of Pfizer.

"There's a very good level of protection for three doses of either vaccine," Cowling says. And remember, health experts in the U.S. also recommend people over age 60 receive at least three doses of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine as well.
Check out what medical experts have to say, not your own BS.
 
.
Please. The video you cited didn't even offer much insights. We already know right from the start that inactivated vaccines target a broader T-cell response than mRNA because it's the whole virus while mRNA focused on the spike. But that's just theoretical. Inactivated vaccines turn out to induce much lesser antibodies.

View attachment 908763

In the end the figures speak for themselves as seen in different studies above.

View attachment 908764
lol, antibodies ? u know antibodies deal with infection right ?
Wake up, with over 90% of usa infected, pfizer ceo multiple infected, mrna infection protection now at 30% or lower etc. Whatever vax, it's now used mainly to fight severe cases, ie T cell response.

And good that u know in theory inactivated vax has better T cell response. The NUS study is also not just theory, it looks at real blood samples.

Again, understand the limitations of ur figures, with no info on time of vax, health status of patient etc, b4 talking about them.
And how ill patients are pushed to Sinovac, even then the difference in outcome is about 1% or less.
 
.
lol, antibodies ? u know antibodies deal with infection right ?
Wake up, with over 90% of usa infected, pfizer ceo multiple infected, mrna infection protection now at 30% or lower etc. Whatever vax, it's now used mainly to fight severe cases, ie T cell response.

And good that u know in theory inactivated vax has better T cell response. The NUS study is also not just theory, it looks at real blood samples.

Again, understand the limitations of ur figures, with no info on time of vax, health status of patient etc, b4 talking about them.
And how ill patients are pushed to Sinovac, even then the difference in outcome is about 1% or less.

All words without figures:

1672559571618-png.908764


even then the difference in outcome is about 1% or less.

1% vs 2% is twice the difference. It can be 500k deaths vs 1mil deaths.
 
Last edited:
. .
Figures without the brain to think. lol

I'm sure you have more brains than Singapore's health authorities and all the authors behind the studies I've cited lmao. If mRNA is developed by China, you know very well you would've been singing a different tune, instead of finding all kinds of copium reasons.
 
.
I'm sure you have more brains than Singapore's health authorities and all the authors behind the studies I've cited lmao. If mRNA is developed by China, you would've been singing a different tune, you know it yourself.
The author of the OP article knows more about medical info than you, doesn't he? what is your day job?
 
.
I'm sure you have more brains than Singapore's health authorities and all the authors behind the studies I've cited lmao. If mRNA is developed by China, you know very well you would've been singing a different tune, instead of finding all kinds of copium reasons.
SG authorities ?? lol.
Their job is to get people to jab with what's available. Any jab is better than none. Learn to think, not just post links u dont understand urself.

China's own mRNA is tested in indon, not even approved for use in China. Again, learn to think. lol
 
.
The author of the OP article knows more about medical info than you, doesn't he? what is your day job?

And the authors of the studies I've cited also know more medical info than you, don't they? What is your day job?

Moreover, I don't disagree with the OP article. As seen in the figures below:

1672506770965-png.908683

1672506811918-png.908684


1) Although Sinovac is less effective than Pfizer, but it is still effective in reducing the number of deaths significantly.

2) It is also true that Sinovac offered as much protection against severe disease as the mRNA vaccines for adults under age 60, but that's because the death rate for this group is close to zero. What's more important is to look at the age group above 80, because the median age of Covid fatality victim is 86; ie 50% of deaths occur above the age of 86.

1672565661100.png


SG authorities ?? lol.
Their job is to get people to jab with what's available. Any jab is better than none. Learn to think, not just post links u dont understand urself.

Erm, I live in SG so I know more than you. Sinovac was all along available but the health authorities still strongly recommend mRNA. And the majority of the population also trust the health authorities, that's why uptake for Sinovac is only 2%.

And of that 2%, the majority are immigrants from China living in SG who prefer taking their own brand.

1669668853403-png.901202
 
Last edited:
.
Erm, I live in SG so I know more than you. Sinovac was all along available but the health authorities still strongly recommend mRNA. And the majority of the population also trust the health authorities, that's why uptake for Sinovac is only 2%.

And of that 2%, the majority are immigrants from China who prefer taking their own brand.
If you don't agree with OP article written by medical professionals, mind explain why over 94% of US population had been infected by covid at least once and the country suffers the highest deaths in the world?

_124499766_f92cbab9-d478-4363-807e-9a6ffaeb68b7-2.png
 
.
If you don't agree with OP article written by medical professionals, mind explain why over 94% of US population had been infected by covid at least once and the country suffers the highest deaths in the world?

Again I repeat, I don't disagree with the OP that Sinovac is still effective in reducing deaths.

On your points:

1) Vaccinations don't really prevent infections anymore but they are still effective in preventing deaths.

2) If you use excess deaths rather than confirmed deaths as a metric, India and Russia actually had more deaths. Adjusted for population size, there are many countries with more deaths than the US.


3) They have crappy vaccination rate and higher obesity compared to SG. Also, a large percentage of deaths occur before the vaccines were out and during the Delta variant. Deaths are still occurring daily now, but at a lower rate. On the other hand, HK is recording higher deaths than even the US after they lost control of Omicron and forced to abandon zero-Covid.

1672567079400.png
 
Last edited:
.
1) Vaccinations don't really prevent infections anymore but they are still effective in preventing deaths.

2) If you use excess deaths rather than confirmed deaths as a metric, India and Russia actually had more deaths. Adjusted for population size, there are many countries with more deaths than the US.

2) They have crappy vaccination rate and higher obesity compared to SG. Also, a large percentage of deaths occur before the vaccines were out and during the Delta variant. Deaths are still occurring daily now, but at a much lower rate. On the other hand, HK is recording higher deaths than even the US after they lost control of Omicron.
If those US vaccines don't even work well for their own population, don't get your hopes up for what they can do for others, US still suffers hundreds of deaths daily now and another new wave is picking up.


 
.
Back
Top Bottom