Sinovac Vaccine & other Vaccine Discussion (compiled)

[Guest SINA]

We all know this Reuters piece is purposely biased against SinoVac. Hiding the fact that millions of Indonesia healthcare workers are asymptomatic. 

AZ how many people died? Oh ya, they forgot to mention it. Ignore this thread pls, just another Colonial Bootlicker thread. 

[leo yok loo]

I do buy chinese products. They are cheap. But if i need critical parts for important work, i will think twice. Many fake things. Jelly bean parts are ok.

[Guest Guest]

Just now, Guest SINA said:

We all know this Reuters piece is purposely biased against SinoVac. Hiding the fact that millions of Indonesia healthcare workers are asymptomatic. 

AZ how many people died? Oh ya, they forgot to mention it. Ignore this thread pls, just another Colonial Bootlicker thread. 

 

Wumao spotted lol

[IntoBJonly]

3 hours ago, superflawless said:

Bwahahahahahahhahaha

 

There are idiots who claimed that the China-made vaccine is safer.

OMG, how mortifying.

 

"More than 350 doctors and medical workers in Indonesia were infected with COVID-19 despite being vaccinated with CoronaVac, Associate Professor Mak noted, "It's not a problem associated with Pfizer. This is actually a problem associated with the Sinovac vaccine, and in other countries, they are now starting to think about booster vaccinations, even six months out from an original vaccination for some of these vaccines as well."

If you read the papers.... vaccinated Singaporeans are also infected....

 

In the case of Indonesia, if these doc and nurses have taken Pfizer vaccine instead, would they Not have been infected? We seriously don't know

[IntoBJonly]

I hear people making statement like:

 

the number of not vaccinated people who got infected is higher than the number of people who have been vaccinated, hence vaccination is better.

 

My question is:

 

It is not a controlled environment. Meaning we are not conducting a test where we put equal number of not vaccinated and vaccinated people in a lab and then expose them with the virus to assess the power of the vaccine.

 

So how can we make this claim? There are so many variables

[oralb]

 

Why you can't compare Covid-19 vaccines

[shenalone]

t

4 hours ago, superflawless said:

Bwahahahahahahhahaha

 

There are idiots who claimed that the China-made vaccine is safer.

OMG, how mortifying.

 

"More than 350 doctors and medical workers in Indonesia were infected with COVID-19 despite being vaccinated with CoronaVac, Associate Professor Mak noted, "It's not a problem associated with Pfizer. This is actually a problem associated with the Sinovac vaccine, and in other countries, they are now starting to think about booster vaccinations, even six months out from an original vaccination for some of these vaccines as well."

they should look at the condition of their workplace are they fully geared?  all it takes is a little fire to start a forest fire 

[LeanMature]

1 hour ago, IntoBJonly said:

If you read the papers.... vaccinated Singaporeans are also infected....

 

In the case of Indonesia, if these doc and nurses have taken Pfizer vaccine instead, would they Not have been infected? We seriously don't know

 

No matter which vaccine people were vaccinated, they can still get infected.  They properly get off lightly with slight symptoms  instead of more serious complication like hooking up on oxygen tank.

[Neh Neh]

Today saw a clinic outside was having long queue. Thought new infection cluster in the neighbourhood queueing for swab test. When i walked closer to see, it was writen Sinovac Registration.

No matter what, Sinovac is safer choice thought less effective. So all these public are Idiots too???

[superflawless]

 

 

• 輝瑞BNT疫苗（Pfizer-BioNTech）效力：95%
• 莫德納疫苗（Moderna）效力：94%
• 俄羅斯衛星-V疫苗（Sputnik V）效力：92%
• 諾瓦瓦克斯疫苗（Novavax）效力：89%
• 牛津/阿斯特捷利康疫苗（AZ）效力：70%
• 嬌生疫苗（Johnson&Johnson）效力：66%
• 科興疫苗（Sinovac）效力：50%
• 國藥疫苗（Sinopharm）效力：70%（增列／根據《美國醫學雜誌》研究，第3期臨床試驗數據）

Researchers in Brazil initially said it was 78% effective in their clinical trials, but in January 2021 revised that figure to 50.4% after including more data in their calculations. Earlier in November, their trials were briefly halted after the reported death of a volunteer, but resumed after the death w

 

 

So, even though you might be vaccinated, it's important to note some countries in the future would want to know which brand you took. They might not accept "vaccinations passports" which show you taking vaccinations of certain brands.

50% is truly unreliable. 

 

[superflawless]

Bwahahahahahahah, too funny!!!

 

They Relied on Chinese Vaccines. Now They're Battling Outbreaks.

Sui-Lee Wee

Wed, 23 June 2021, 2:22 am

China kicked off its vaccine diplomacy campaign last year by pledging to provide a shot that would be safe and effective at preventing severe cases of COVID-19. Less certain at the time was how successful it and other vaccines would be at curbing transmission.

Now, examples from several countries suggest that the Chinese vaccines may not be very effective at preventing the spread of the virus, particularly the new variants. The experiences of those countries lay bare a harsh reality facing a post-pandemic world: The degree of recovery may depend on which vaccines governments give to their people.

In the Seychelles, Chile, Bahrain and Mongolia, 50% to 68% of the populations have been fully inoculated, outpacing the United States, according to Our World In Data, a data tracking project. All four ranked among the top 10 countries with the worst COVID outbreaks as recently as last week, according to data from The New York Times. And all four are mostly using shots made by two Chinese vaccine makers, Sinopharm and Sinovac Biotech.

[superflawless]

“If the vaccines are sufficiently good, we should not see this pattern,” said Jin Dongyan, a virus expert at the University of Hong Kong. “The Chinese have a responsibility to remedy this.”

[superflawless]

Mongolia was a beneficiary, jumping at the chance to score millions of Sinopharm shots. The small country quickly rolled out an inoculation program and eased restrictions. It has now vaccinated 52% of its population. But on Sunday, it recorded 2,400 new infections, a quadrupling from a month before. https://singaporedailynews.com/2021/06/09/infections-rise-in-mongolia-where-sinopharm-is-the-main-vaccine/

[Guest]

someone forwarded me this and it is a good response to earlier posts by superflawless’ superflawed reasoning.
 

See the biased reporting by western media and ST repeats what they reported

[9:47 pm, 23/06/2021] Faisal Hamdi: See diff in reports by CNN (US Press) n by Jakarta Globe (Indonesia Press). Jakarta Globe report is more accurate.
[9:47 pm, 23/06/2021] Faisal Hamdi: [21/06, 11:40 pm] *Same news, same place but different media with fake news reporting.* America propaganda war with BIDEN’S latest $1.2b media war budget against China

[21/06, 11:40 pm] https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/18/asia/vaccinated-indonesian-doctors-covid-19-intl-hnk/index.html
[21/06, 11:40 pm] https://jakartaglobe.id/news/sinovac-vaccine-protects-health-workers-from-severe-covid19-in-deltahit-kudus

 

 

 

[Guest]

On 6/23/2021 at 2:24 PM, superflawless said:

Bwahahahahahahah, too funny!!!

 

They Relied on Chinese Vaccines. Now They're Battling Outbreaks.

Sui-Lee Wee

Wed, 23 June 2021, 2:22 am

China kicked off its vaccine diplomacy campaign last year by pledging to provide a shot that would be safe and effective at preventing severe cases of COVID-19. Less certain at the time was how successful it and other vaccines would be at curbing transmission.

Now, examples from several countries suggest that the Chinese vaccines may not be very effective at preventing the spread of the virus, particularly the new variants. The experiences of those countries lay bare a harsh reality facing a post-pandemic world: The degree of recovery may depend on which vaccines governments give to their people.

In the Seychelles, Chile, Bahrain and Mongolia, 50% to 68% of the populations have been fully inoculated, outpacing the United States, according to Our World In Data, a data tracking project. All four ranked among the top 10 countries with the worst COVID outbreaks as recently as last week, according to data from The New York Times. And all four are mostly using shots made by two Chinese vaccine makers, Sinopharm and Sinovac Biotech.

 

The above is a classic case of how one with a huge dose of ignorance can be easily  misled by faulty and unscientific reporting.

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202106/1227064.shtml

A New York Times article has maliciously distorted scientific facts in a bid to slander China's coronavirus vaccines.

In the report entitled, "They Relied on Chinese Vaccines. Now They're Battling Outbreaks," published on Tuesday, the article intended to suggest that "Chinese vaccines may not be very effective at preventing the spread of the virus" by exploiting a surge in COVID-19 cases in the Seychelles, Chile, Bahrain, and Mongolia after inoculating their citizens with China's vaccines.

However, the report is biased on selective comparisons and seeking to create a straw man. 

According to experts specializing in the vaccine, a scientific approach to measure whether a vaccine is effective or not is to compare the people who get infected, become ill and show severe symptoms after being vaccinated with those who have similar situations but have not been vaccinated yet.

But in the NYT report, its subjective allegations were merely based on two ambiguous facts - 50 to 68 percent of people in the Seychelles, Chile, Bahrain and Mongolia have been fully inoculated; and "all four ranked among the top 10 countries with the worst COVID-19 outbreaks as recently as last week," but without any scientific evidence which can stand up to the test.

Many factors can affect the infection rate after populations are vaccinated, including the exact time of being infected, which strain infected them, what public health prevention and control measures have been carried out in the country, its national physical fitness, nutritional status as well as age composition. It is not rigorous or scientific to evaluate the quality of a vaccine simply by mentioning the number of people infected after vaccination.

The article was seeking to prove the reporter's pre-set assumptions with shady "evidence." It deliberately excluded all the important factors and only intended to underline the "problems" of China's vaccines.

The narrative of the article that the "surge in [COVID-19] infections" in Bahrain, Chile and Mongolia indicate that China's vaccines may not be valid is also questionable. Regardless of what kind of variants have infected people in these countries, how much prevention and control measures have been taken and the state of national physical fitness, the report was anxious to blame the surge of cases in these countries on the ineffectiveness of China's vaccines.

Israel,a country where a large proportion of its population is vaccinated with the Pfizer/BNT COVID-19 vaccine, also witnessed a surge of new virus cases. In the UK, more than 60 percent of adults have received two shots, and they have never been vaccinated with China's vaccines. But a surge in cases of the delta variant also hit the country. Is the surge in cases in Israel and Britain also because their vaccines are "not effective"?

The report even induced interviewed experts to absurdly say, "A major risk with Chinese inoculations is that vaccinated people may have few or no symptoms and still spread the virus to others." By doing so, the reporter clearly hopes to prevent all countries across the world from using China' vaccines which lead to such "dangerous results." It implies that they should just wait in line for Western vaccines like BNT, which are expensive and have a high shipping barrier.

A netizen post data released by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of the US - A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections have been reported from 46 US states and territories as of April 30. The netizen is to imply that NYT and the reporter are selectively blind.

 

[timberman]

Guest, this is up to individuals and their comfort levels. There have been infections of medical staff locally whom have taken mRNA vaccines as well and just as there are infected people taking traditional vaccines as reported on internet media. 
 

I am sure both types of vaccines does give protection, but personal habits and exposure risks does play apart. Given that most articles on the internet are of the English language, so be prepared for some biased views. Especially when greater contexts are often left out. 
 

Personally, I have gone for the mRNA ones given that they are not available even if you go to a private clinic. I guess if a booster is required, probably will sign up for the traditional ones next as they are now available via private clinics. If you are still on the fence, my suggestion is for you to put in your name into either one first. Getting appointments soon will be harder. Last I heard, queue for SinoVac is up until September. mRNA ones will be opened to all 1st July, so expect longer waits. 
 

As for agenda, haha, if you noticed, once a country reaches 1st world status, most will experienced birth rate decline. As there stresses and costs of modern life takes hold. So there is no need for that. 

Edited June 27, 2021 by timberman

[Guest guest]

On 6/20/2021 at 8:21 PM, Neh Neh said:

Today saw a clinic outside was having long queue. Thought new infection cluster in the neighbourhood queueing for swab test. When i walked closer to see, it was writen Sinovac Registration.

No matter what, Sinovac is safer choice thought less effective. So all these public are Idiots too???

It is really true Sinovac is a safer choice? No side effects after jab and have long term side effects?

[Neh Neh]

Hurry! go and take your sinovac jab. Stock running low very fast due to extreme high popular demands. Gov may not order more sinovac due to US political pressure.

[Guest Guest 1]

The choice is still yours. No matter which one you choose. Get one. No vaccine is 100% effective but will reducing severity. Yes some ppl having some side effect from vaccine but so far I am ok. 

For me, I pick the pfizer. It is 90%++ effective and so far the best in the market with some level of protection against the new variant. 

Some countries that use Sinovav now see rise in cases mainly due to the Delta variant. 

   

[Guest guest]

20 minutes ago, Guest Guest 1 said:

The choice is still yours. No matter which one you choose. Get one. No vaccine is 100% effective but will reducing severity. Yes some ppl having some side effect from vaccine but so far I am ok. 

For me, I pick the pfizer. It is 90%++ effective and so far the best in the market with some level of protection against the new variant. 

Some countries that use Sinovav now see rise in cases mainly due to the Delta variant. 

   

Indeed good to get vaccine, esp when this covid doesn't seems to go away soon. Unless like the SARS pandemic, no vaccination also and due to the virus simply just disappeared. Unless covid will disappear like next month or next year, then maybe no need to vaccinate also ok.

[Neh Neh]

2 hours ago, Guest Guest 1 said:

The choice is still yours. No matter which one you choose. Get one. No vaccine is 100% effective but will reducing severity. Yes some ppl having some side effect from vaccine but so far I am ok. 

For me, I pick the pfizer. It is 90%++ effective and so far the best in the market with some level of protection against the new variant. 

Some countries that use Sinovav now see rise in cases mainly due to the Delta variant. 

   

Your statement that countries taken sinovac and see rises in covid19 cases due new mutated covid19 virus is false leading. Australia, India, Japan, Korea and even SG all takn mainly Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are also seeing rises in covid cases due to the mutated virus. Does it mean Pfizer, Moderna not good too?

[Steve5380]

It would be interesting to know WHY the sinovac vaccine has such a low effectiveness. 

 

Other non-mRNA vaccines like the Johnson& Johnson and AstraZeneca  have better performances.  

Why cannot China imitate these, for those who are afraid of potential long-term bad effects of the mRNA ones?

There is a push for divulging the information on how to make the vaccines worldwide. 

So the Chinese could copy perfectly well the other vaccines,  and this is in line with their attitude of copying!

[Neh Neh]

To save more life, US should let all countries include china to copy vaccine recipy so all countries can make vaccine.

In the past, US copied UK, Japan copied US, Korea copied Japan. This is the line of their attitude of copying lol

[Guest guest]

1 hour ago, Steve5380 said:

It would be interesting to know WHY the sinovac vaccine has such a low effectiveness. 

 

Other non-mRNA vaccines like the Johnson& Johnson and AstraZeneca  have better performances.  

Why cannot China imitate these, for those who are afraid of potential long-term bad effects of the mRNA ones?

There is a push for divulging the information on how to make the vaccines worldwide. 

So the Chinese could copy perfectly well the other vaccines,  and this is in line with their attitude of copying!

Why everyone is saying there is potential long term bad  effects of the mRNA vaccine? But until now still no data and evidence that show and prove this?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

It would be interesting to know WHY the sinovac vaccine has such a low effectiveness. 

I cringe when I read statements like this.

Do you mean it has low effectiveness compared to other vaccines?

Or do you mean its effectiveness is so low that it shouldn’t be used at all?

 

Are you a qualified doctor, scientist or researcher to make such a statement?

 

As far as I know, Sinovac is effective enough to be approved by WHO for use. So in what capacity are you questioning WHO? 
 

Let’s put aside politics, I would not go for any vaccines to begin with. If I have to choose between A and B, I would go for the less potent (or so-called less effective) vaccine as long as both are safe and effective. 
 

I prefer to rely on my body’s natural immunity response to fight viruses. It would be very sad if my immune system is no longer capable of fighting viruses without vaccines.

 

I am not asking anyone to share my belief or not to take vaccine. By all means go for the most effective or strongest vaccines available if that makes you feel safer.

 

I don’t take medicines at all. I don’t believe in putting medicines into my body as I believe the best medicine is my own body’s immune system.
 

While antibiotics is not the same as vaccines, people’s attitude remains the same. They tell their doctors to prescribe the most powerful antibiotics to overcome their bacteria infection. What we have now is an overall weakened immune system for bacteria strains that are resistant to the most potent antibiotics we have. 
 

All I am saying here is that the best response anyone should have is to take care of their health, observe the protocols for pandemic situations, take responsibility and play their part in the community effort. 
 

To think that any vaccine can do the job of overcoming pandemic is going the wrong direction. To politicise the vaccine issues is even worse. 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2021 by Guest

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Neh Neh said:

Your statement that countries taken sinovac and see rises in covid19 cases due new mutated covid19 virus is false leading. Australia, India, Japan, Korea and even SG all takn mainly Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are also seeing rises in covid cases due to the mutated virus. Does it mean Pfizer, Moderna not good too?

That’s exactly what an uncritical and biased mind does. It selects information to process, while ignoring other relevant data.

 

Thanks for pointing it out.

[Guest guest]

8 minutes ago, Blow away said:

I cringe when I read statements like this.

Do you mean it has low effectiveness compared to other vaccines?

Or do you mean its effectiveness is so low that it shouldn’t be used at all?

 

Are you a qualified doctor, scientist or researcher to make such a statement?

 

As far as I know, Sinovac is effective enough to be approved by WHO for use. So in what capacity are you questioning WHO? 
 

Let’s put aside politics, I would not go for any vaccines to begin with. If I have to choose between A and B, I would go for the less potent (or so-called less effective) vaccine as long as both are safe and effective. 
 

I prefer to rely on my body’s natural immunity response to tackle with viruses. It would be very sad if my immune system is no longer capable of fighting viruses without vaccines.

 

I am not asking anyone to share my belief or not to take vaccine. By all means go for the most effective or strongest vaccines available if that makes you feel safer.

 

I don’t take medicines at all. I don’t believe in putting medicines into my body as I believe the best medicine is my own body’s immune system.
 

While antibiotics is not the same as vaccines, people’s attitude remains the same. They tell their doctors to prescribe the most powerful antibiotics to overcome their bacteria infection. What we have now is an overall weakened immune system for bacteria strains that are resistant to the most potent antibiotics we have. 
 

All I am saying here is that the best response anyone should have is to take care of their health, observe the protocols for pandemic situations, take responsibility and play their part in the community effort. 
 

To think that any vaccine can do the job of overcoming pandemic is going the wrong direction. To politicise the vaccine issues is even worse. 

 

 

So far seems like no one can confirmed that how is the current virus strains spread to people, how people got infected based on recent cases. It is spread by airborne or through contact point? Or it is due to people did not observe the covid measures, that's why they got infected? So to make us feel safer and to reduce the fear, take vaccine is the only way. Unless you are very sure how the virus would spread, then can prevent it.

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, Blow away said:

 

Let’s put aside politics, I would not go for any vaccines to begin with. If I have to choose between A and B, I would go for the less potent (or so-called less effective) vaccine as long as both are safe and effective. 
 

I prefer to rely on my body’s natural immunity response to fight viruses. It would be very sad if my immune system is no longer capable of fighting viruses without vaccines.

 

I don’t take medicines at all. I don’t believe in putting medicines into my body as I believe the best medicine is my own body’s immune system.
 

While antibiotics is not the same as vaccines, people’s attitude remains the same. They tell their doctors to prescribe the most powerful antibiotics to overcome their bacteria infection. What we have now is an overall weakened immune system for bacteria strains that are resistant to the most potent antibiotics we have. 
 

All I am saying here is that the best response anyone should have is to take care of their health, observe the protocols for pandemic situations, take responsibility and play their part in the community effort. 
 

To think that any vaccine can do the job of overcoming pandemic is going the wrong direction. To politicise the vaccine issues is even worse. 

 

 

 

You have nearly Blown me Away with your opinions.

 

You wrote that as long as vaccines are safe and effective, you would go for the less effective?   Then go for the one that is ZERO effective, that is, the less effective. And when a vaccine is zero effective, it is not a vaccine anymore, so this should satisfy you! 

 

If you were right,  people would have been the healthiest before the invention of the vaccines and antibiotics.  And in the Middle Ages no one would have died from the bubonic plague.  In reality, vaccines and antibiotics are one of the strongest miracles of modern medicine.  And where you get that vaccines weaken our immune system?  They do not.

 

But you are right in that we would not need neither if humanity would take the necessary precautions.  For infectious diseases, this means perfect isolation or using masks, keeping safe distance from each other, and use perfect hygiene washing hands and any surface that could carry contaminants. 

 

But you should also have observed that we humans don't stick to the necessary precautions.   And we cannot change human nature.  In America, a majority of the 600,000 deaths would have been prevented if people had stuck with the precautions.  And now you can observe that even with Americans being so spoiled, the pandemic is nearly under control thanks to...   VACCINES.   Our government is relaxing the mandatory precautions and we are nearly back to normal, thanks to the elevated proportion of vaccinated people.  Even as we have had the highest mortality in the world,  we have improved radically thanks to the efforts of our new government to get everyone vaccinated.   And thanks to vaccination we have controlled other horrible infectious diseases and made them nearly extinct. 

.

Edited June 27, 2021 by Steve5380

[Derren]

1 hour ago, Guest guest said:

Why everyone is saying there is potential long term bad  effects of the mRNA vaccine? But until now still no data and evidence that show and prove this?

Since the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines are just developed last year, scientists will have to wait several years to collect data for the long term effects.

 

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

You have nearly Blown me Away with your opinions.

 

You wrote that as long as vaccines are safe and effective, you would go for the less effective?   Then go for the one that is ZERO effective, that is, the less effective. And when a vaccine is zero effective, it is not a vaccine anymore, so this should satisfy you! 

 

 

Steve I trust that you are smarter than that.

 

Vaccines have to be proven to be 1) more effective than placebos and 2) able to perform what it’s intended for and 3) able to satisfy a baseline measure for effectiveness before it can be declared an effective vaccine for use.

 

In that statement u mixed up two ideas that are contradictory. If you line up all approved vaccines, some will be more effective than others. But they are all effective according to some criteria.

 

Anything that has zero effectiveness cannot be considered a vaccine. You don’t compare it with other vaccines.

 

So that statement of yours doesn’t make any sense nor hold any logic. In other words, I don’t get your point at all. 

To add, I didn’t outright say I would go for ‘less effective’ vaccines. I said I would go for ‘less potent’ vaccines if I have to choose one. One can also interpret it as less effective based on some measures of comparison. Less effective relatively speaking doesn’t mean not effective. 

Edited June 27, 2021 by Guest

[Derren]

1 hour ago, Blow away said:

Let’s put aside politics, I would not go for any vaccines to begin with. If I have to choose between A and B, I would go for the less potent (or so-called less effective) vaccine as long as both are safe and effective. 
 

I prefer to rely on my body’s natural immunity response to fight viruses. It would be very sad if my immune system is no longer capable of fighting viruses without vaccines.

 

The first time the virus enters your body, your immune system does not know how to deal effectively with the virus, hence the potential for severe illness. 

The second time your immune system encounters the virus, it will be able to recognise the virus and remember how to destroy the virus effectively and efficiently.

 

So when you take a vaccine, you still need to rely on your immune response. It is like teaching your immune system first so that your immune system does not have to learn it the hard way. Without a vaccine, yes if you are young and healthy, your immune system would eventually be able to fight off the virus but in the meantime, you may develop serious illness/complications and you could pass it on to several other people. 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Derren said:

 

The first time the virus enters your body, your immune system does not know how to deal effectively with the virus, hence the potential for severe illness. 

The second time your immune system encounters the virus, it will be able to recognise the virus and remember how to destroy the virus effectively and efficiently.

 

So when you take a vaccine, you still need to rely on your immune response. It is like teaching your immune system first so that your immune system does not have to learn it the hard way. Without a vaccine, yes if you are young and healthy, your immune system would eventually be able to fight off the virus but in the meantime, you may develop serious illness/complications and you could pass it on to several other people. 

 

 

 

 

Agree. 
Unfortunately there is risk in everything. Like people dying from even just taking vaccines although the number is small. So it boils down to what risk you want to minimise or avoid. 

Don’t forget that the virus also mutates to counter the vaccines. This is where we end up playing the never ending catch up with viruses and their mutants. How many vaccines does one need to put into their body in a lifetime?

Of course it’s individual choice and we respect that. 

[Derren]

10 hours ago, Blow away said:

Agree. 
Unfortunately there is risk in everything. Like people dying from even just taking vaccines although the number is small. So it boils down to what risk you want to minimise or avoid. 

Don’t forget that the virus also mutates to counter the vaccines. This is where we end up playing the never ending catch up with viruses and their mutants. How many vaccines does one need to put into their body in a lifetime?

Of course it’s individual choice and we respect that. 

 

It is definitely up to the individual's choice, no doubt about that. Just bear in mind that each individual's choice affects the collective good. If not enough people take up the vaccine, we won't be able to reach herd immunity and so won't be able to progress much from where we are currently at.

 

You rightly pointed out that the risk of dying or getting life-threatening complications from the vaccine is very very small. Do weigh this small risk against the benefits, namely much smaller chance to get infected, less serious illness if infected (hence freeing up hospital beds for those with chronic illnesses who get infected), and less transmission risk to loved ones.

 

I share your concern regarding variants. it seems that we may likely need to take a booster shot once a year. Just like flu shots, each year's vaccine will be tweaked to target the most common and virulent variants. I don't like the idea of a yearly shot myself, but that may well be the price to pay to get back to some semblance of normalcy.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 28, 2021 by Derren

[Steve5380]

7 hours ago, Blow away said:

To add, I didn’t outright say I would go for ‘less effective’ vaccines. I said I would go for ‘less potent’ vaccines if I have to choose one. One can also interpret it as less effective based on some measures of comparison. Less effective relatively speaking doesn’t mean not effective. 

 

 

I responded to this phrase of yours:

 

"Let’s put aside politics, I would not go for any vaccines to begin with.. If I have to choose between A and B, I would go for the less potent (or so-called less effective) vaccine as long as both are safe and effective. "

 

Here you mix the concepts of potent and effective.  "Potent" has little to do with a vaccine.   And why would you go for the less effective?   Why isn't a 100% effective the best choice?   Maybe fewer mRNA particles are less "potent" than many altered or dead Covid viruses, but they are ideal stimulators of antibody production, therefore are very effective.  I don't know exactly how this works, but neither do you.  Why not trust the expert scientists, instead of the promoters of conspiracy theories?

.

Edited June 27, 2021 by Steve5380

[Guest Sdollar]

5 hours ago, Blow away said:

Agree. 
Unfortunately there is risk in everything. Like people dying from even just taking vaccines although the number is small. So it boils down to what risk you want to minimise or avoid. 

Don’t forget that the virus also mutates to counter the vaccines. This is where we end up playing the never ending catch up with viruses and their mutants. How many vaccines does one need to put into their body in a lifetime?

Of course it’s individual choice and we respect that. 

Wumao won't respect that at all. They want to use propaganda to obtuse people's minds for their political gains. That's why you're so vehemently defending them so tirelessly beyond normal.

 

The fact that previous infection offer unexpectedly little protection against 2nd infection was surprising. It also means that conventional vaccines using pseudo infection like sino-vac are not effective. We need to improve.

 

Why did WHO take so long to approve sino-vac? And even then they worded it very cautiously as though they're being forced to by their biggest sponsor. Even the CCP dare not brag about it unlike their usual style to crow about these things.

Why so muted? Like you, they actively sow doubts about other vaccines instead.

 

Yet they used it for vaccine diplomacy. They are taking advantage of poor nations clutching at any straws. This false sense of security is what caused the poor nations to be complacent and get worse.

It's politics that affect people's lives whether you like it all not.

[Steve5380]

10 minutes ago, Nightingale said:

 

Sorry to say many of these "expert scientists" have already been roped in by politicians and pharmaceutical companies.

 

No politician in the world could have been more powerful to "rope in expert scientists" than Donald Trump.  And we have seen how miserably he failed at that.

And pharmaceutical companies that develop and manufacture the vaccines are so brightly in the public eye that their management may be losing sleep over the possibility that they may be found out to have committed any impropriety.  There are precedents of managers of such companies being criminally prosecuted for deceptive practices.

[Steve5380]

9 hours ago, Blow away said:

Unfortunately there is risk in everything. Like people dying from even just taking vaccines although the number is small. So it boils down to what risk you want to minimise or avoid. 

 

 

Life is full of risks.  How we deal with this in health and medicine?  By comparing the risk of doing vs. the risk of not doing.  Once there are statistically significant cases, it can be clearly recognized the benefit of one or the other.  In the case of the covid vaccines in the US,  the risk of not doing is much, much higher than the risk of doing.  This is why the medical community recommends these vaccines.  

  

[Guest Happy?]

36 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

No politician in the world could have been more powerful to "rope in expert scientists" than Donald Trump. 

 

Our government is beginning to see that DT has a point.  We are going to open up soon, more partying and travelling on the way.  Just like Trump, we were now told to live with it in the "New Norm".  DT must have done something right that you did not quite foresee and now Singapore is going in his direction. 

[Guest Guest Vaccine Diplomacy]

4 hours ago, Guest Sdollar said:

Wumao won't respect that at all. They want to use propaganda to obtuse people's minds for their political gains. That's why you're so vehemently defending them so tirelessly beyond normal.

 

The fact that previous infection offer unexpectedly little protection against 2nd infection was surprising. It also means that conventional vaccines using pseudo infection like sino-vac are not effective. We need to improve.

 

Why did WHO take so long to approve sino-vac? And even then they worded it very cautiously as though they're being forced to by their biggest sponsor. Even the CCP dare not brag about it unlike their usual style to crow about these things.

Why so muted? Like you, they actively sow doubts about other vaccines instead.

 

Yet they used it for vaccine diplomacy. They are taking advantage of poor nations clutching at any straws. This false sense of security is what caused the poor nations to be complacent and get worse.

It's politics that affect people's lives whether you like it all not.

Given the rates of effectiveness of Chinese vaccines, I would still not discriminate against them and would go for them if i was in a region where they were the more easily and readily available ones. But as many countries are not very enthusiastic about it, its not the case. The Chinese vaccines are mired in as much of efficacy controversy as they are in political ones. But to say that this is all due to western conspiracy is also wrong

 

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/national-security/article249986534.html

 

Shouldn't china also keep the things out of diplomatic controversy and not base its response as you-called-me-a-motherfucker-so-i-call-you-a-motherfucker

 

[Steve5380]

29 minutes ago, Guest Happy? said:

Our government is beginning to see that DT has a point.  We are going to open up soon, more partying and travelling on the way.  Just like Trump, we were now told to live with it in the "New Norm".  DT must have done something right that you did not quite foresee and now Singapore is going in his direction. 

 

Yes,  Donald Trump (if he is your "DT") did forecast that Covid-19 would fade away in summer of 2020,  he entertained the idea that ingesting bleach may kill the virus, and he did everything possible to discourage the wearing of masks.  If this is your "something right" and Singapore is going in his direction...  good luck!

[LeanMature]

Why is Sinovac so popular with some people when the efficacy rate is just over 50 percent..🤔

[Zealouslogue]

1 minute ago, LeanMature said:

Why is Sinovac so popular with some people when the efficacy rate is just over 50 percent..🤔

It will die down soon. Novavax will be trending, lol. 

[leo yok loo]

20 minutes ago, LeanMature said:

Why is Sinovac so popular with some people when the efficacy rate is just over 50 percent..🤔

Think "some people" is PRC right?? I dont know...if that is the case, can only use "爱国主义" to explain. Maybe i am wrong. Hope that i am wrong.

[LeanMature]

2 minutes ago, leo yok loo said:

Think "some people" is PRC right?? I dont know...if that is the case, can only use "爱国主义" to explain. Maybe i am wrong. Hope that i am wrong.

 

or perhaps they are those not given the priority for Pfizer or Moderna jab ?

[leo yok loo]

1 hour ago, LeanMature said:

 

or perhaps they are those not given the priority for Pfizer or Moderna jab ?

According to them, some cant take pfizer or moderna due to individual health reasons.

[lonelyglobe]

4 hours ago, LeanMature said:

Why is Sinovac so popular with some people when the efficacy rate is just over 50 percent..🤔

For those who cant take MRNA vaccine and also for those who need to frequently enter china, it will be easy for them to clear immigration there as they only accept china vaccine.

Edited June 28, 2021 by lonelyglobe

[Derren]

1 hour ago, lonelyglobe said:

For those who cant take MRNA vaccine and also for those who need to frequently enter china, it will be easy for them to clear immigration there as they only accept china vaccine.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/china-travel-covid-19/index.html

 

"Despite rumors that the country would only grant travel visas to people who had gotten the China-created Sinovac vaccine, the Chinese embassy in the United States confirmed on April 20 that travelers with confirmed history of vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines would also be eligible."

[Guest Guest]

Lsst month injected pfizer. This month second jab they change to community vaccine.Is there a risk to mix this 2 vaccine?or is it belongs to the same family?

[Guest guest]

2 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

Lsst month injected pfizer. This month second jab they change to community vaccine.Is there a risk to mix this 2 vaccine?or is it belongs to the same family?

If you get your jab from govt vaccination programme, no need to scare.

[Guest Comirnalty]

2 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

Lsst month injected pfizer. This month second jab they change to community vaccine.Is there a risk to mix this 2 vaccine?or is it belongs to the same family?

You mean comirnalty vaccine? I think is same Pfizer drug but manufacture at different factory/location.  The name is just an indication of different manufacturer.