What's new

Official: Chinese vaccines’ effectiveness low

Joined
Oct 6, 2020
Messages
2,516
Reaction score
-55
Country
India
Location
India
Official: Chinese vaccines’ effectiveness low
By JOE McDONALD and HUIZHONG WU18 minutes ago



1 of 5
Gao Fu, director of the China Centers for Disease Control, speaks at the National Vaccines and Health conference in Chengdu in southwest China's Sichuan province Saturday, April 10, 2021. In a rare admission of the weakness of Chinese coronavirus vaccines, Gao the country's top disease control official says their effectiveness is low and the government is considering mixing them to give them a boost. (Chinatopix Via AP)


BEIJING (AP) — In a rare admission of the weakness of Chinese coronavirus vaccines, the country’s top disease control official says their effectiveness is low and the government is considering mixing them to get a boost.
Chinese vaccines “don’t have very high protection rates,” said the director of the China Centers for Disease Control, Gao Fu, at a conference Saturday in the southwestern city of Chengdu.
Beijing has distributed hundreds of millions of doses abroad while trying to promote doubt about the effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine made using the previously experimental messenger RNA, or mRNA, process.
“It’s now under formal consideration whether we should use different vaccines from different technical lines for the immunization process,” Gao said.

Officials at a news conference Sunday didn’t respond directly to questions about Gao’s comment or possible changes in official plans. But another CDC official said developers are working on mRNA-based vaccines.

“The mRNA vaccines developed in our country have also entered the clinical trial stage,” said the official, Wang Huaqing. He gave no timeline for possible use.

Experts say mixing vaccines, or sequential immunization, might boost effectiveness. Researchers in Britain are studying a possible combination of Pfizer-BioNTech and the traditional AstraZeneca vaccine.

The coronavirus pandemic, which began in central China in late 2019, marks the first time the Chinese drug industry has played a role in responding to a global health emergency.

Vaccines made by two state-owned drug makers, Sinovac and Sinopharm, have been exported to 22 countries including Mexico, Turkey, Indonesia, Hungary, Brazil and Turkey, according to the foreign ministry.

The effectiveness of a Sinovac vaccine at preventing symptomatic infections was found to be as low as 50.4% by researchers in Brazil, near the 50% threshold at which health experts say a vaccine is useful. By comparison, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine has been found to be 97% effective.

Health experts say Chinese vaccines are unlikely to be sold to the United States, Western Europe and Japan due to the complexity of the approval process.

A Sinovac spokesman, Liu Peicheng, acknowledged varying levels of effectiveness have been found but said that can be due to the age of people in a study, the strain of virus and other factors.

Beijing has yet to approve any foreign vaccines for use in China.

Gao gave no details of possible changes in strategy but cited mRNA as a possibility.

“Everyone should consider the benefits mRNA vaccines can bring for humanity,” Gao said. “We must follow it carefully and not ignore it just because we have several types of vaccines already.”

Gao previously questioned the safety of mRNA vaccines. He was quoted by the official Xinhua News Agency as saying in December he couldn’t rule out negative side effects because they were being used for the first time on healthy people.

Chinese state media and popular health and science blogs also have questioned the safety and effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

As of April 2, some 34 million people in China have received both of the two doses required for Chinese vaccines and about 65 million received one, according to Gao.

The Sinovac spokesman, Liu, said studies find protection “may be better” if time between vaccinations is longer than the current 14 days but gave no indication that might be made standard practice.


——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Never knew vaccines could be mixed as well
 
. .
I think he is being taken out of context. He was trying to explain that mRNA vaccines are more effective than retroviral vaccines. mRNA vaccines produce a broad spectrum response making it a better option against new variants. This doesnt mean that vaccines like Sputnik, SinoPharm or Astera Zenca are any less effective. Mederna, Pifzer, Jhonson and Cansinobio should be prefered if available otherwise something is better than nothing.
but no blood clotting deaths

I am going back to Australia soon so i hope govt over there dont force me to take Astrazenca. I would rather wait for pifzer or something that doesnt kill you by clotting.
 
.
Official: Chinese vaccines’ effectiveness low
By JOE McDONALD and HUIZHONG WU18 minutes ago



1 of 5
Gao Fu, director of the China Centers for Disease Control, speaks at the National Vaccines and Health conference in Chengdu in southwest China's Sichuan province Saturday, April 10, 2021. In a rare admission of the weakness of Chinese coronavirus vaccines, Gao the country's top disease control official says their effectiveness is low and the government is considering mixing them to give them a boost. (Chinatopix Via AP)


BEIJING (AP) — In a rare admission of the weakness of Chinese coronavirus vaccines, the country’s top disease control official says their effectiveness is low and the government is considering mixing them to get a boost.
Chinese vaccines “don’t have very high protection rates,” said the director of the China Centers for Disease Control, Gao Fu, at a conference Saturday in the southwestern city of Chengdu.
Beijing has distributed hundreds of millions of doses abroad while trying to promote doubt about the effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine made using the previously experimental messenger RNA, or mRNA, process.
“It’s now under formal consideration whether we should use different vaccines from different technical lines for the immunization process,” Gao said.

Officials at a news conference Sunday didn’t respond directly to questions about Gao’s comment or possible changes in official plans. But another CDC official said developers are working on mRNA-based vaccines.

“The mRNA vaccines developed in our country have also entered the clinical trial stage,” said the official, Wang Huaqing. He gave no timeline for possible use.

Experts say mixing vaccines, or sequential immunization, might boost effectiveness. Researchers in Britain are studying a possible combination of Pfizer-BioNTech and the traditional AstraZeneca vaccine.

The coronavirus pandemic, which began in central China in late 2019, marks the first time the Chinese drug industry has played a role in responding to a global health emergency.

Vaccines made by two state-owned drug makers, Sinovac and Sinopharm, have been exported to 22 countries including Mexico, Turkey, Indonesia, Hungary, Brazil and Turkey, according to the foreign ministry.

The effectiveness of a Sinovac vaccine at preventing symptomatic infections was found to be as low as 50.4% by researchers in Brazil, near the 50% threshold at which health experts say a vaccine is useful. By comparison, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine has been found to be 97% effective.

Health experts say Chinese vaccines are unlikely to be sold to the United States, Western Europe and Japan due to the complexity of the approval process.

A Sinovac spokesman, Liu Peicheng, acknowledged varying levels of effectiveness have been found but said that can be due to the age of people in a study, the strain of virus and other factors.

Beijing has yet to approve any foreign vaccines for use in China.

Gao gave no details of possible changes in strategy but cited mRNA as a possibility.

“Everyone should consider the benefits mRNA vaccines can bring for humanity,” Gao said. “We must follow it carefully and not ignore it just because we have several types of vaccines already.”

Gao previously questioned the safety of mRNA vaccines. He was quoted by the official Xinhua News Agency as saying in December he couldn’t rule out negative side effects because they were being used for the first time on healthy people.

Chinese state media and popular health and science blogs also have questioned the safety and effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

As of April 2, some 34 million people in China have received both of the two doses required for Chinese vaccines and about 65 million received one, according to Gao.

The Sinovac spokesman, Liu, said studies find protection “may be better” if time between vaccinations is longer than the current 14 days but gave no indication that might be made standard practice.


——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
Never knew vaccines could be mixed as well

Off to the re-education camps you go.....
 
.
I think he is being taken out of context. He was trying to explain that mRNA vaccines are more effective than retroviral vaccines. mRNA vaccines produce a broad spectrum response making it a better option against new variants. This doesnt mean that vaccines like Sputnik, SinoPharm or Astera Zenca are any less effective. Mederna, Pifzer, Jhonson and Cansinobio should be prefered if available otherwise something is better than nothing.


I am going back to Australia soon so i hope govt over there dont force me to take Astrazenca. I would rather wait for pifzer or something that doesnt kill you by clotting.
My parents took the Covishield dose (AstraZeneca vaccine made in India), they are absolutely fine.
 
. .
You don't understand him at all. All the six Chinese vaccines have been getting efficacy rate already shown. They have been two of the first ones to enter and finish phase iii trials the top two Chinese ones. The efficacy is around the same as other non mRNA vaccines except in only two countries trialled where they were a bit less effective for mild symptoms.

He's whole point is to say mRNA is better and China is working on similar mRNA based types to help supplement the adenovirus vaccine types because mRNA is more effective.

You accusing China of spreading doubt about mRNA type is just you saying it. Plenty of western media also spread doubt about mRNA. Plenty of Russian also. Even Indian media would have articles talking about doubts and dangers.

Totally missed the point of what he is saying and twisting nonsense by claiming China has some campaign to spread doubt about mRNA when China was early stakeholder in BioNTech which is mRNA vaccine. China hedged by placing bet on western mRNA method with financial stake while developing adenovirus vaccine type it is more familiar with.

Why would China spread doubt about anything it is invested in?

China invests in what it has not set up or able to do last year and now the situation proves mRNA is superior in efficacy than adenovirus vaccine so it also needs to be done now.
 
.
Off to the re-education camps you go.....

Better than drone deaths.

Just always remember one thing. We haven't forgotten Salala. We are not even yet.
Me and my parents took Chinese Vaccine and we are absolutely Fine too.

So what does this mean?

It means that RSS Hindu cheerleaders are simply doing their propaganda job as they are paid by their American masters.
 
.
My parents took the Covishield dose (AstraZeneca vaccine made in India), they are absolutely fine.

There is a hazard associated with it. EU and Britain are trying to shrug it off by saying benefits outweigh its risks. Right now its only being administered to above 40 year old and not the younger population. meaning it is being given to those most at risk of COVID severe infection.
BEFORE ANY ONE COMMENTS ANY FURTHER I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT APNNEWS IS AN INDIAN OUTLET WHICH HAS BEEN BARKING PROPOGANDA ABOUT CHINESE VACCINE FOR A WHILE NOW. I LOOKED UP ON GOOGLE THERE IS NO SUCH ADMISSION BY CHINESE HEALTH OFFICIAL. NOTHING BUT PROPOGANDA.
 
.
The most important specification quality is the prevention of severe disease which some reports call as prevent hospitalization and death. This is over 90% for all vaccines past all trials I believe including the Chinese ones. The mild case type is described in very different ways and each vaccine trial staging by the producer is called and measured slightly differently.

The mild case or symptomatic prevention statistic is both quite useless because of the difference in how the different types are measured and also because it's not easy to measure it since everyone reacts differently. This is why even pfizor and AZ had some variance more than 10% in different countries.

However it is important that the prevent severe symptom to hospitalization and death statistic is compared because this is easier to accurately measure and also more meaningful measure.

Some people already won't show any symptoms even without vaccine. The mild case they call or prevention of any symptoms is difficult statistic to compare because each producer has different measure and trials in different countries return different results sometimes with difference up to 20%.

Pfizor one is best along with AZ I think for severe to death measurement but all the others are above 90% I believe. Long time since checking.

They are saying China also needs to quickly develop mRNA technology because not only good for developing vaccines but highly useful for many health science research. mRNA method to develop vaccine is extremely new and during the first rush, all China's state efforts were spent on adenovirus vaccine. mRNA would take much more time to develop because China has no basis in this technology then so risking the time is not wise. Now it is okay to take time and catch up in this area especially when the proof from time now shows it is a better vaccine and it is very useful technology for things like cancer research. Something all humans will benefit from whoever can develop it first just like nuclear fusion. Don't care if it's India, China, USA, or Ethiopia, it will benefit all humans if it is done. mRNA technology can help not just cancer fighting research but many other things too.
 
Last edited:
. . .
You don't understand him at all. All the six Chinese vaccines have been getting efficacy rate already shown. They have been two of the first ones to enter and finish phase iii trials the top two Chinese ones. The efficacy is around the same as other non mRNA vaccines except in only two countries trialled where they were a bit less effective for mild symptoms.

He's whole point is to say mRNA is better and China is working on similar mRNA based types to help supplement the adenovirus vaccine types because mRNA is more effective.

You accusing China of spreading doubt about mRNA type is just you saying it. Plenty of western media also spread doubt about mRNA. Plenty of Russian also. Even Indian media would have articles talking about doubts and dangers.

Totally missed the point of what he is saying and twisting nonsense by claiming China has some campaign to spread doubt about mRNA when China was early stakeholder in BioNTech which is mRNA vaccine. China hedged by placing bet on western mRNA method with financial stake while developing adenovirus vaccine type it is more familiar with.

Why would China spread doubt about anything it is invested in?

China invests in what it has not set up or able to do last year and now the situation proves mRNA is superior in efficacy than adenovirus vaccine so it also needs to be done now.
Actually on this forum, you will find this campaign to discredit mRNA all over the place - just please just search you will find.
Unfortunately it is a typical pattern to negate others but then adopt the other's work when convinent.
We are talking of human lives here not a propaganda war. So, if the CCP trolls were decent they would have refrained from such false accusations. In the scientific community we know mRNA is the newest area of work and Chinese scientists are and will eventually catch up with meaningful contribution.

In the end, the point I am making - the world is in it together; there is NO us and them - east/west or in between.
 
.
Anyone who understands how efficacy is being defined or tested won't waste their time arguing.

The percentage will depends on the two group consisting of placebo and the vaccines. IMO Pfizer-Bio-NTech, Moderna are questionable as they consists of only the spike protein unlike inactivated virus which contained all the proteins. Hence their effectiveness against new variants are questionable and ground for debate.

The efficacy of China vaccines appeared low because they are being tested and administered to the first liners in high risk COVID nation like Brazil, Indonesia.
In Low risk Turkey or ME it is almost 100%.

IMO far more important is the side effects today. Chinese vaccines are still a safer bet.

The data for Indian own vaccine is quite unknown.
 
Last edited:
.
I think that unfortunately this is true as the example of Chile shows where they innoculated at some of the highest rates per capita in the world. Chinese vaccine was used at 90:10 ratio with Pfizer.

Chile data shows only 3% effectiveness after 1 dose, rising to 56.5% after 2 doses.

AstraZeneca gives figures of 94% after one dose and almost certainly nigh-on 100% after 2 doses. This is from UK real-world data after nearly 20 million jabs have been given.

Both AstraZeneca and Sinopharm vaccine in Chile are based on the same technology.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom