7 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Its called accumulation, a bit like a bitcoin price chart before it spikes over a threshold. 

 

That or its just an obvious lack of testing.

You have lost me totally now I am afraid, although I am sure you are right! I am not terribly clever with statistics, and don't have the beginnings of a clue about bitcoin!

5 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Seems the government has noted Chula virologist Dr. Poovorawan pitching the claimed effectiveness of the AstraZeneca and Chinese Sinovac vaccines being given here...

 

This is the Google Translate version, corrected for typos, of the government's info post:

 

"Yong Phu Worawan, head of the specialist center in clinical science, Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, points out vaccines that are injected in Thailand. Both Sinovac and AstraZeneca are effective. Well, prevents severe illness and 100 percent prevents death. Not different from other vaccines. Less to moderate prevention. Sinovac vaccine can protect 78 percent. AstraZeneca 76 Percentage and Anti-Mutant England. Please ensure that the vaccine performance is used in Thailand."

 

The post seems to be making the claim that while the two vaccines may be lower than others at preventing all coronavirus symptoms, he's arguing they're still effective at preventing serious illness and death...

 

https://www.facebook.com/informationcovid19/posts/304585771159754

 

 

 

After seeing these comments above from Dr. Poovorawan defending the Chinese Sinovac vaccine used in Thailand, and then quite a few subsequent post comments here deriding Sinovac, I wanted to see if there was anything supporting what the doctor is saying, and it turns out there is.

 

While much of the news media attention has focused on the supposed "efficacy" rates for the vaccine in the 50% range, efficacy in that context means only protecting against symptomatic infection, even the mildest kinds. But when it comes to preventing serious illness, hospitalization and death, the available info as Dr. Poovorawan mentions shows Sinovac doing much better and comparable to the western vaccines.

 

Here's a Wikipedia excerpt that, unlike a lot of the mainstream news reporting, does a good job of distinguishing between Sinovac's results for preventing symptomatic infections vs. all the more serious kinds of health impacts, as follows:

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoronaVac

 

So in all the reported date above, 100% effective at preventing severe, hospitalized and fatal cases.  Now, the caveat to all that is, as I understand it, those results haven't really been fully vetted and peer reviewed as yet... But at least, the data would seem to suggest it's not right to simply keep referring to Sinovac as a 50% vaccine and deriding it on that basis.

 

Comments?

 

 

1 hour ago, grandpa said:

I see that the Ministry of Public Health has decided to use some of the limited supply of Vaccine to innoculate Thai Airways staff!  What about the vulnerable sick and elderly people!  When will they stop propping up this ailing company and get their priorities right!  People before business!  At least it is only the ineffective Sinovac that they are using.

Sinovac is not ineffective. It has virtually 100% stopping power against death and life-threatening symptoms due to Covid.

7 hours ago, robblok said:

To educate people and show that antivaxers are similar to the former village idiots 

Those with out knowledge are dumber than a village idiot ????

Just by comparison, here's the latest stats for the Pfizer vaccine that the company reported on April 1 (no joke...). And not much different from Sinovac when it comes to preventing serious COVID illness... both at very high rates.

 

--BNT162b2 is highly effective with 91.3% vaccine efficacy observed against COVID-19, measured seven days through up to six months after the second dose

 

--Vaccine was 100% effective in preventing severe disease as defined by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and 95.3% effective in preventing severe disease as defined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration

 

--Vaccine was 100% effective in preventing COVID-19 cases in South Africa, where the B.1.351 lineage is prevalent"  (but no mention of its efficacy against the UK strain).

 

https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-confirm-high-efficacy-and-no-serious

 

Note- some preliminary findings out of Israel also indicate the Pfizer vaccine is very effective against the UK strain once people have been fully vaccinated.

 

"Is the Pfizer vaccine effective against the UK strain?

Early results from lab studies show that the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine offers a good level of protection against mutations found in the UK variant (B.1.1.7). While further research is ongoing, it’s likely that the vaccine will still help protect against this strain."

 

https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/news/coronavirus-and-your-health/covid-variant#UKpfizer

 

10 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Sinovac is not ineffective. It has virtually 100% stopping power against death and life-threatening symptoms due to Covid.

 

If the reported Sinovac numbers are legit and can be believed....

1 hour ago, J Town said:

And this on the China vaccine:
"China is in a tight spot after the country’s top health official admitted efficacy rates for Chinese Covid-19 vaccines are 'not high.' He suggested either increasing doses or mixing with other vaccines to improve performance."

 

Moe, Larry, do something. Push buttons! Turn dials! Flip switches!

Here's the comparable data from AstraZeneca, as reported on March 25 re their Phase 3 trial in the U.S.:

 

--76% vaccine efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 occurring 15 days or more after receiving two doses given four weeks apart.

 

--85% efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 in participants aged 65 years and over

 

--100% efficacy against severe or critical disease and hospitalisation

 

https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2021/azd1222-us-phase-iii-primary-analysis-confirms-safety-and-efficacy.html

 

And the 85% number for participants age 65 and older is even higher than a prior announcement by the company that ended up being revised, according to CNBC:

 

"The findings suggest the vaccine is more effective in patients aged 65 and older than previously understood, with a newly reported efficacy rate of 85% for that population, up from a previously stated 80%."

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/24/covid-vaccine-astrazeneca-issues-updated-phase-3-trial-data.html

 

The AZ vaccines also seems to do well against the UK strain, but not quite as well as against the original strain:

 

"Is the Oxford vaccine effective against the UK strain?

A study on the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine shows that it offers good protection against the UK variant of coronavirus (B.1.1.7).

The study showed that this vaccine offers 75% effectiveness against the UK strain, compared to 84% against the initial strain."

 

https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/news/coronavirus-and-your-health/covid-variant#UKoxford

 

45 minutes ago, MrJ2U said:

They ran out of tests at most locations again.  Going for a test is rather risky lining up with people coughing and sneezing.

 

I wouldn't worry nearly as much about the coughing and sneezing as the prospect of being hauled off to quarantine at a hospital in the case of a positive test, even with an asymptomatic case.

 

16 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

If the reported Sinovac numbers are legit and can be believed....

It's not Sinovac that's doing the reporting on these numbers. For instance, in Brazil, it's the Butantan Institute:

https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-reported-results-of-the-sinovac-covid-19-vaccine-from-a-trial-by-the-butantan-institute-in-brazil/

19 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

If the reported Sinovac numbers are legit and can be believed....

And in Turkey not Sinovac monitoring cases:

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-turkey-sinovac-int-idUSKBN2AV18P

 

14 minutes ago, placeholder said:

It's not Sinovac that's doing the reporting on these numbers. For instance, in Brazil, it's the Butantan Institute:

https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-reported-results-of-the-sinovac-covid-19-vaccine-from-a-trial-by-the-butantan-institute-in-brazil/

 

The very first expert reaction quote in the site you linked to says...

 

“It is difficult to be too sure what the real efficacy is of the Sinovac vaccine given the limited data presented results. ... The case definitions in the report are not absolutely clear."

 

And another scientific commenter said: "“The reporting of the Sinovac trial of Coronavac (an inactivated whole virus vaccine) is very confusing."

 

As I said above, everything I've read suggests that the Sinovac results overall haven't gotten the same level of independent and 3rd party scrutiny thus far compared to the western vaccines.

 

10 minutes ago, placeholder said:

It's not Sinovac that's doing the reporting on these numbers. For instance, in Brazil, it's the Butantan Institute:

 

And in Turkey not Sinovac monitoring cases:

 

Sinovac

Turkey

Brazil

 

Which of those 3 instill confidence in any published study, as opposed to the prospect of taint by corruption?

 

Having gone through all those details and comparisons myself as posted above, I probably now have a better level of comfort regarding the Sinovac vaccine.

 

Previously, based on all the 50% type news reporting, I probably would have avoided it, and I really wasn't focusing on Sinovac as an option in the past. But now based on understanding that it does appear to be quite effectiveness against serious COVID, hospitalization and death, I'd probably take it... if I got the opportunity... and nothing else or better was available...

 

But the available information on this kind of stuff is always evolving and changing... So need to keep tabs on it and see what else ends up percolating up on the Thailand-available Sinovac and AZ vaccines in the coming months.

 

 

 

18 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Having gone through all those details and comparisons myself as posted above, I probably now have a better level of comfort regarding the Sinovac vaccine.

 

Previously, based on all the 50% type news reporting, I probably would have avoided it, and I really wasn't focusing on Sinovac as an option in the past. But now based on understanding that it does appear to be quite effectiveness against serious COVID, hospitalization and death, I'd probably take it... if I got the opportunity... and nothing else or better was available...

 

But the available information on this kind of stuff is always evolving and changing... So need to keep tabs on it and see what else ends up percolating up on the Thailand-available Sinovac and AZ vaccines in the coming months.

 

 

 

All the vaccines are 100% effective against hospitalisation and death. However, with Sinovac we just have to take their word for it as their results have yet to be published and peer-reviewed. They certainly seem to be hiding something. Also the latest news is that a single dose of Sinovac is not very effective so there's quite a long period between receiving the first dose and getting full protection. By contrast Astrazeneca is providing a high-level of protection (80%) 3 weeks after the first dose.

 

In the real world the AstraZeneca vaccine appears to have done an excellent job at controlling the UK outbreak but the Sinovac vaccine has not done a good job at controlling the pandemic in Chile.

1 minute ago, edwardandtubs said:

All the vaccines are 100% effective against hospitalisation and death. However, with Sinovac we just have to take their word for it as their results have yet to be published and peer-reviewed. They certainly seem to be hiding something. Also the latest news is that a single dose of Sinovac is not very effective so there's quite a long period between receiving the first dose and getting full protection. By contrast Astrazeneca is providing a high-level of protection (80%) 3 weeks after the first dose.

So if the choice is between the Sinovac vaccine and no vaccination?

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

So if the choice is between the Sinovac vaccine and no vaccination?

Si-NO-Vac, is that the way it should read then.  I think so.

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

So if the choice is between the Sinovac vaccine and no vaccination?

It uses the traditional method of an inactivated virus so I think we can trust its safety. But then, how much do you trust Chinese manufacturers after the baby milk scandal?

2 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Si-NO-Vac, is that the way it should read then.  I think so.

Thanks for sharing an opinion supported brilliantly by a pun and only by a pun. Don't ever lose your laserlike focus on the salient facts of the case.

1 minute ago, edwardandtubs said:

It uses the traditional method of an inactivated virus so I think we can trust its safety. But then, how much do you trust Chinese manufacturers after the baby milk scandal?

Was the whole world watching Chinese baby formula manufacturers from the time the first box of formula was packaged?

25 minutes ago, edwardandtubs said:

In the real world the AstraZeneca vaccine appears to have done an excellent job at controlling the UK outbreak but the Sinovac vaccine has not done a good job at controlling the pandemic in Chile.

 

And on the flip side, perhaps, haven't heard any post vaccination blood clotting issues raised with the Sinovac vaccine, unlike the AZ vaccine...

 

Though a recent British Medical Journal article I was reading on that topic put the clotting risk into much better perspective than the mainstream news reporting often has....

 

AstraZeneca vaccine: Blood clots are “extremely rare” and benefits outweigh risks, regulators conclude

April 8, 2021

 

"Investigations by EU and UK regulators into reports of unusual blood clots after receiving the Oxford-AstraZeneca covid-19 vaccine have concluded that these are a “possible” and “extremely rare” side effect. Neither agency established a causal relation.

...

Among more than 20 million people who have been vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine in the UK so far, 79 cases of rare blood clots with low platelets have been reported, as well as 19 deaths, said the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. This equates to around one case per 250 000 people vaccinated—0.0004%—and one death in a million.

...

Putting the risk in context

1 in 250 000 people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine will develop blood clots with low platelets

1 in 2000 women each year will develop a blood clot from taking the combined oral contraceptive pill1

1 in 1000 people a year will develop a blood clot from air travel2"

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n931

 

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Was the whole world watching Chinese baby formula manufacturers from the time the first box of formula was packaged?

It's a fair point and millions of doses have already been administered apparently with no major issues. But I'd like to see the study published and peer-reviewed before getting injected with it. If I was in a high risk group though I'd definitely accept it.

2 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

So we are spiking to the moon then with the number of cases

.????

My prediction is yes, there maybe a few days of flat lining and even a drop but then its a rocket to the moon I'm afraid

Thailand has been hit with the UK variant and some say the existing vaccines don't protect against it.  No matter since not enough people are getting vaccinated anyway.

 

The new variant is said to be more easily transmitted and more lethal.

 

Look like Thailand may end up reaching herd immunity "the hard way."

1 hour ago, herfiehandbag said:

You have lost me totally now I am afraid, although I am sure you are right! I am not terribly clever with statistics, and don't have the beginnings of a clue about bitcoin!

My bitcoin analogy was simply that with this asset its common for people to accumulate buying but not push the price up until enough have bought at a certain level before it then shoots over the next barrier. So the example here would be that lots of people are contracting the virus but not enough tests are being carried out until eventually the tests are sufficient to show the full extent of the infections, ie spike in cases again.

 

My other explanation was far more simple with no comparison, they are just not carrying out enough tests now to reflect true numbers.

2 hours ago, Jester69 said:

Those with out knowledge are dumber than a village idiot ????

Totally correct too bad a lot of antivax knowledge is not knowledge but bad science. If its even science based. 

 

So im sorry for comparing anti vaxers with village idiots. Your right the village idiots are smarter. I appologize to all the village idiots.

 

Thanks for showing me the errors of my ways.

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

My bitcoin analogy was simply that with this asset its common for people to accumulate buying but not push the price up until enough have bought at a certain level before it then shoots over the next barrier. So the example here would be that lots of people are contracting the virus but not enough tests are being carried out until eventually the tests are sufficient to show the full extent of the infections, ie spike in cases again.

 

My other explanation was far more simple with no comparison, they are just not carrying out enough tests now to reflect true numbers.

This makes no sense. Even if testing were inadequate why wouldn't it capture an increase in percentages? What has a statistical survey have to do with the vagaries of supply and demand in the stock market?

@Natai Beach are you still planning to take the Thai herbal vaccine? Will it stop the Farang Strain from UK? 

24 minutes ago, placeholder said:

This makes no sense. Even if testing were inadequate why wouldn't it capture an increase in percentages? What has a statistical survey have to do with the vagaries of supply and demand in the stock market?

It was just satire that you just failed to get, don't worry yourself the post was not for you anyway

When you do for the jab I dont expect you will get a choice it will be what they have and here is the cost.