Nine student nurses suffer side effects after Sinovac vaccination

[Sheryl]

1 minute ago, DJBenz said:

Thanks. So nothing conclusive yet.

 

There is an article in the New England Journal of Medicine which I think is quite persuasive  https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104882

 

Note however this discussion is solely with regard to the vaccines that use an Adenovirus platform (AZ and J&J). And that all studies confirm that the incidence is (1) very, very low and (2) disproportionately occurs in younger women.

 

It has taken a while to determine if the occurrence of this  rare clotting disorder was greater than average in people who got these vaccines precisely because the incidence was so low among both vaccinated and unvaccinated people.  However enough evidence has amassed at this point that it seems clear there is an increased incidence, though still a very low one; I don't know any public health professional who doubts that.  It also  seems clear that the increased incidence is disporoportionately in younger people and especially women, though we do not have the necessary age and sex disaggregated data on incidence in non-immunized people to quantify it.  There have only been a few studies on this condition prior to this and they did not capture enough cases to be able to compute rates by gender and age group.

 

It is clear that on an overall population level the very small risk is less than the risk of being unvaccinated. So if an across the board decision has to be made for everyone, it makes sense to use these vaccines. However, in countries where it is feasible to offer alternative vaccines not using the adenoviral platform to younger people, it makes sense to do that where possible.  The UK decision using age 40 makes sense to me, EU countries making it under 60 seem over the top and politically influenced.

 

All this has nothing at all to do with Sinovac, which is made from inactivated virus. There have been no blood clots identified linked to Sinovac or other similar vaccines. The Thai public on the whole is very unclear about this and does not seem to understand  the difference between one type of vaccine and another hence many receiving Sinovac think it is linked to blood clots and thsi may explain the groups of young women reporting symptoms for which no cause can be identified and which then spontraneously disappear.

 

It was clear to me right at the start that the reports from Rayong and now this one were almost surely not genuine and rather reflected social media-fueled mass hysteria. When rare vaccine side effects occur, they do not occur in a whole groups of people immunized together and then not at all in elsewhere. They will occur in isolated cases here and there, which is exactly what happened with AZ and J&J.  Even if the problem was batch specific, it should occur evenly among all peopel immunized with the same batch, which is not what happened here.

 

The pattern we are seeing in Thailand does not look like genuine rare adverse effects, especially since not being reported elsewhere with the same vaccine.  Rather it seems to be an "infectious" process due to auto-suggestion and spread on social media and through person to person rumor mongering.

 

There is are also  individual case reports in Facebook of things that happened to just one person and are almost certainly unrelated to the vaccine, i.g. one circulating of what appears to be either ringworm or psoriasis. People do nto seem to understand that every single thing that occurs to a person in the days and weeks after vaccination are nto due to the vaccine and that there are clear scientific  methods for determining this through comparing the incidence in both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. 

 

 

 

 

[placeholder]

9 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

There is an article in the New England Journal of Medicine which I think is quite persuasive  https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104882

 

Note however this discussion is solely with regard to the vaccines that use an Adenovirus platform (AZ and J&J). And that all studies confirm that the incidence is (1) very, very low and (2) disproportionately occurs in younger women.

 

It has taken a while to determine if the occurrence of this  rare clotting disorder was greater than average in people who got these vaccines precisely because the incidence was so low among both vaccinated and unvaccinated people.  However enough evidence has amassed at this point that it seems clear there is an increased incidence, though still a very low one; I don't know any public health professional who doubts that.  It also  seems clear that the increased incidence is disporoportionately in younger people and especially women, though we do not have the necessary age and sex disaggregated data on incidence in non-immunized people to quantify it.  There have only been a few studies on this condition prior to this and they did not capture enough cases to be able to compute rates by gender and age group.

 

It is clear that on an overall population level the very small risk is less than the risk of being unvaccinated. So if an across the board decision has to be made for everyone, it makes sense to use these vaccines. However, in countries where it is feasible to offer alternative vaccines not using the adenoviral platform to younger people, it makes sense to do that where possible.  The UK decision using age 40 makes sense to me, EU countries making it under 60 seem over the top and politically influenced.

 

All this has nothing at all to do with Sinovac, which is made from inactivated virus. There have been no blood clots identified linked to Sinovac or other similar vaccines. The Thai public on the whole is very unclear about this and does not seem to understand  the difference between one type of vaccine and another hence many receiving Sinovac think it is linked to blood clots and thsi may explain the groups of young women reporting symptoms for which no cause can be identified and which then spontraneously disappear.

 

It was clear to me right at the start that the reports from Rayong and now this one were almost surely not genuine and rather reflected social media-fueled mass hysteria. When rare vaccine side effects occur, they do not occur in a whole groups of people immunized together and then not at all in elsewhere. They will occur in isolated cases here and there, which is exactly what happened with AZ and J&J.  Even if the problem was batch specific, it should occur evenly among all peopel immunized with the same batch, which is not what happened here.

 

The pattern we are seeing in Thailand does not look like genuine rare adverse effects, especially since not being reported elsewhere with the same vaccine.  Rather it seems to be an "infectious" process due to auto-suggestion and spread on social media and through person to person rumor mongering.

 

There is are also  individual case reports in Facebook of things that happened to just one person and are almost certainly unrelated to the vaccine, i.g. one circulating of what appears to be either ringworm or psoriasis. People do nto seem to understand that every single thing that occurs to a person in the days and weeks after vaccination are nto due to the vaccine and that there are clear scientific  methods for determining this through comparing the incidence in both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. 

I guess I'm running the risk of being accused of sucking up to a moderator, but this is the best thing I've seen written about Covid in any of the forums. So well written. Thanks

[Sheryl]

2 minutes ago, josthomz said:

 

I guess this is often overlooked, but of special relevance. 

 

The medias in European countries, being the medias of course, do nothing but talk negatively about the AstraZeneca vaccine. And people which do not have enough medical / scientific knowledge to understand the maths behind it are falling prey to an irrational fear about the AZ vaccine. 

 

I've. been told by friends in Europe, that their family members even those of advanced age are completely refusing vaccinations when they are told it's going to be AstraZeneca. 

 

It is clear to me that after Brexit, the EU union wouldn't be too willing to purchase vaccines from the UK. But IMHO what the politicians and specially the medias are doing in Europe, might end up costing lives given that a lot of people are systematically refusing vaccination just because they are offered AstraZeneca. 

 

 

And unfortunately, not just lives in Europe.

 

Meanwhile UK is successfully opening up on the strength of an AZ vaccination campaign.

 

I'm going to the US on 5 July and can easily get Pfizer or Moderna on arrival, for free.  However, rather than undertake the flight unvaccinated, I will get the AZ vaccine prior if I can manage to do so.

 

[DJBenz]

16 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

There is an article in the New England Journal of Medicine which I think is quite persuasive  https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104882

 

Note however this discussion is solely with regard to the vaccines that use an Adenovirus platform (AZ and J&J). And that all studies confirm that the incidence is (1) very, very low and (2) disproportionately occurs in younger women.

 

It has taken a while to determine if the occurrence of this  rare clotting disorder was greater than average in people who got these vaccines precisely because the incidence was so low among both vaccinated and unvaccinated people.  However enough evidence has amassed at this point that it seems clear there is an increased incidence, though still a very low one; I don't know any public health professional who doubts that.  It also  seems clear that the increased incidence is disporoportionately in younger people and especially women, though we do not have the necessary age and sex disaggregated data on incidence in non-immunized people to quantify it.  There have only been a few studies on this condition prior to this and they did not capture enough cases to be able to compute rates by gender and age group.

 

It is clear that on an overall population level the very small risk is less than the risk of being unvaccinated. So if an across the board decision has to be made for everyone, it makes sense to use these vaccines. However, in countries where it is feasible to offer alternative vaccines not using the adenoviral platform to younger people, it makes sense to do that where possible.  The UK decision using age 40 makes sense to me, EU countries making it under 60 seem over the top and politically influenced.

 

All this has nothing at all to do with Sinovac, which is made from inactivated virus. There have been no blood clots identified linked to Sinovac or other similar vaccines. The Thai public on the whole is very unclear about this and does not seem to understand  the difference between one type of vaccine and another hence many receiving Sinovac think it is linked to blood clots and thsi may explain the groups of young women reporting symptoms for which no cause can be identified and which then spontraneously disappear.

 

It was clear to me right at the start that the reports from Rayong and now this one were almost surely not genuine and rather reflected social media-fueled mass hysteria. When rare vaccine side effects occur, they do not occur in a whole groups of people immunized together and then not at all in elsewhere. They will occur in isolated cases here and there, which is exactly what happened with AZ and J&J.  Even if the problem was batch specific, it should occur evenly among all peopel immunized with the same batch, which is not what happened here.

 

The pattern we are seeing in Thailand does not look like genuine rare adverse effects, especially since not being reported elsewhere with the same vaccine.  Rather it seems to be an "infectious" process due to auto-suggestion and spread on social media and through person to person rumor mongering.

 

There is are also  individual case reports in Facebook of things that happened to just one person and are almost certainly unrelated to the vaccine, i.g. one circulating of what appears to be either ringworm or psoriasis. People do nto seem to understand that every single thing that occurs to a person in the days and weeks after vaccination are nto due to the vaccine and that there are clear scientific  methods for determining this through comparing the incidence in both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. 

 

 

 

 

Now THAT is an answer. Thank you. I still have faith in AZ, my wife and son (50 & 18 respectively) had their second shots yesterday and I am due mine in about four weeks. Obviously the correlation to CVST was a concern, but given the evidence (and the fact one is far more likely to develop DVT on a flight when we as a family fly several times a year) our decision to carry on with the course was vindicated.

 

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I guess I'm running the risk of being accused of sucking up to a moderator, but this is the best thing I've seen written about Covid in any of the forums. So well written. Thanks

I'll run the risk with you.

[placeholder]

Just now, DJBenz said:

Now THAT is an answer. Thank you. I still have faith in AZ, my wife and son (50 & 18 respectively) had their second shots yesterday and I am due mine in about four weeks. Obviously the correlation to CVST was a concern, but given the evidence (and the fact one is far more likely to develop DVT on a flight when we as a family fly several times a year) our decision to carry on with the course was vindicated.

 

I'll run the risk with you.

I have no choice but to accuse you of being a suckup.

[DJBenz]

Just now, placeholder said:

I have no choice but to accuse you of being a suckup.

Taken on the chin. ????‍♂️

[DBath]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

There have been plenty of independent studies done outside of China that show the vaccine is highly effective in reducing symptoms serious enough to require hospitalization and death. The Chinese govt's general awfulness has nothing at all to do with this.

Well, that certainly changes everything doesn’t it, count me in! (At this point, I’d say almost anything if it meant I could be rid of you. You’re kind of like gum or dog poo stuck to the bottom of my shoe - on a hot day!). 

Edited May 12, 2021 by DBath

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, DBath said:

Well, that certainly changes everything doesn’t it, count me in! (At this point, I’d say almost anything if it meant I could be rid of you. You’re kind of like gum stuck to the bottom of my shoe - on a hot day!). 

Thank you for your consistently substantive and well-reasoned replies. 

[DBath]

12 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Thank you for your consistently substantive and well-reasoned replies. 

No, definitely, thank you for your polite, gracious and most humble consideration - your lordship! And for not talking down to me (it really hurts my feelings when you do that????). 
 

Is there a middle-finger emoji somewhere here?

Edited May 12, 2021 by DBath

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, DBath said:

No, definitely, thank you for your polite, gracious and most humble consideration - your lordship! And for not talking down to me (it really hurts my feelings when you do that????). 
 

Is there a middle-finger emoji somewhere here?

There's a phenomenon psychologists label projection. Those who experience it assign emotions they experience or behavor they exhibit t to others. I offer as evidence the following. You will note that I presented a rather dry piece of evidence with no trace of snark and then there is your reply:

Maybe there's another way to make this clear to you. Were the moderators to see your last few posts, what do you think their reaction would be? I have no intention of alerting them since letting stand what you wrote is an absolutely condign punishment.

[Logosone]

3 hours ago, DJBenz said:

Thanks. So nothing conclusive yet.

 

Your quotes were from the wrong article which referred to the previous state of knowledge, the actual article I linked to says: AstraZeneca: German team discovers thrombosis trigger.

 

Researchers at the Greifswald teaching hospital in northern Germany said on Friday that they had discovered the cause of the unusual blood clotting found in some recipients of the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine, public broadcaster Norddeutscher Rundfunk (NDR) reported.

 

The investigation showed how the vaccine caused rare thrombosis in the brain in a small number of patients.

 

https://www.dw.com/en/astrazeneca-german-team-discovers-thrombosis-trigger/a-56925550

 

As Sheryl writes above, there is literally nobody now who doubts that the AstraZeneca vaccine can lead to an increased incidence of cerebral thrombosis. 62 cases of this in Germany at last count, all vaccinated with AstraZeneca. The article shows that German researchers were able to pinpoint the trigger which causes the thrombosis in some, not all, cases. So fairly conclusive.

 

 

[Logosone]

2 hours ago, josthomz said:

 

I guess this is often overlooked, but of special relevance. 

 

The medias in European countries, being the medias of course, do nothing but talk negatively about the AstraZeneca vaccine. And people which do not have enough medical / scientific knowledge to understand the maths behind it are falling prey to an irrational fear about the AZ vaccine. 

 

I've. been told by friends in Europe, that their family members even those of advanced age are completely refusing vaccinations when they are told it's going to be AstraZeneca. 

 

It is clear to me that after Brexit, the EU union wouldn't be too willing to purchase vaccines from the UK. But IMHO what the politicians and specially the medias are doing in Europe, might end up costing lives given that a lot of people are systematically refusing vaccination just because they are offered AstraZeneca. 

 

 

The media in Europe does not talk negatively of AstraZeneca "being the medias" but because the AstraZeneca vaccine has killed 62 people in Germany alone due to cerebral thrombosis. The fear about AstraZeneca is not irrational, in fact it would be irrational not to fear Astrazeneca, after so many documented cases of people having died after taking the AstraZeneca vaccine. 

 

Several vaccines were produced, and it is become increasingly clear that the MRNA vaccines have decided the race in their favour and clearly are the best and AstraZeneca is very much fifth or sixth best and ideally avoided if you are fortunate enough to be able to get a different vaccine.

 

Never in a million years would I risk a cerebral thrombosis and take AstraZeneca, even if it's a small risk. Why run the risk? You can recover from Covid19, you can't from a cerebral thrombosis.

Edited May 12, 2021 by Logosone

[DBath]

49 minutes ago, placeholder said:

There's a phenomenon psychologists label projection. Those who experience it assign emotions they experience or behavor they exhibit t to others. I offer as evidence the following. You will note that I presented a rather dry piece of evidence with no trace of snark and then there is your reply:

Maybe there's another way to make this clear to you. Were the moderators to see your last few posts, what do you think their reaction would be? I have no intention of alerting them since letting stand what you wrote is an absolutely condign punishment.

Sorry if I offended his lordship, but if you’re going to name drop, you’d be better off using my wife’s name. I’m much more afraid of her than any Admin. I’ve been suspended before and while I don’t much care for it, something tells me it would affect someone like you much much more than it would me. I’m very comfortable in ‘my own skin’, and probably don’t value the same things you do. Anyway, thanks for all your help.
 

BTW, you were probably too busy ruling your kingdom to notice, but I did give his highness props for those covid graphs he posted. 

[Logosone]

37 minutes ago, josthomz said:

 

Re-read @Sheryl post again. 

 

Besides a study by the BMJ shows the risk of cerebral thrombosis from the disease (COVID-19) is 10 times higher than that from vaccination with AstraZeneca. 

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1005

 

You too have been brainwashed by the European medias (in this case) and an irrational fear to AstraZeneca has been "ingrained" in your mind, which could potentially cost you your life. If you were to get the disease while having refused vaccination with AstraZeneca. 

 

Others have been brainwashed not to take Sinovac, with the remark of its relatively low effectivity and thus making people believe it is of no use. When the truth is that although only about 50% effective in preventing COVID-19 related disease, it is close to 100% in preventing dead.... So still better than nothin'

 

Btw, does your wife take birth control pills? Because apparently the incidence of blood clots in birth control pills, according to studies, is way higher than that of the AstraZeneca vaccine...

 

Edit: According to the EMA (European Medicines Agency) there has been 62 cases of cerebral thrombosis 18 of which were fatal among 25 million vaccinated people with the AstraZeneca vaccine. 

 

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/astrazenecas-covid-19-vaccine-ema-finds-possible-link-very-rare-cases-unusual-blood-clots-low-blood#:~:text=EMA confirms overall benefit-risk,COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca).

 

How many people out of 25 million people infected with COVID-19 would have died? Roughly 500,000 if we calculate following European data on cases and deaths from COVID-19. 

 

You can now judge the risk by yourself again.

 

If there were no link to cerebral thrombosis and AstraZeneca, then yes, fear of AZ would be irrational, as it is, with 62 cases of cerebral thrombosis documented, people having died, frankly I would not risk my life by taking AstraZeneca. Even if the risk of cerebral thrombosis is small, it is a very serious and potentially lethal event. People have died after taking AstraZeneca. So again, why risk it if you can take another vaccine?

 

And I certainly would not choose Sinovac, as there are reports of people having died in Hong Kong after the Sinovac vaccinations:

 

Quote

On March 3, the day after a man was reported to have died after taking the Sinovac shot—and the day that BioNTech’s vaccine became publicly available—government data showed a decrease of 10,300 appointments for Sinovac’s vaccine. The Department of Health has recorded 13 deaths of people following immunization: 11 after receiving the Sinovac vaccine 

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2021/04/hong-kong-trust-vaccine/618469/

[VBF]

3 hours ago, DJBenz said:

Now THAT is an answer. Thank you. I still have faith in AZ, my wife and son (50 & 18 respectively) had their second shots yesterday and I am due mine in about four weeks. Obviously the correlation to CVST was a concern, but given the evidence (and the fact one is far more likely to develop DVT on a flight when we as a family fly several times a year) our decision to carry on with the course was vindicated.

 

I'll run the risk with you.

Me too - thank you @Sherylfor a very informative and clearly worded post.

 

FYI, I'm in UK and have had both my doses of AZ (Yay!!!????) as have at least a dozen other friends and acquaintances. 

Some of us, me included, had minor after effects from the second jab: feeling listless the next day, I got the chills for about 4 hours but after that AOK.

Both shots gave me a slightly tender arm the following morning but IME nearly all injections do that, hardly a big deal!

[Kiujunn]

13 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

There is an article in the New England Journal of Medicine which I think is quite persuasive  https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104882

 

Note however this discussion is solely with regard to the vaccines that use an Adenovirus platform (AZ and J&J). And that all studies confirm that the incidence is (1) very, very low and (2) disproportionately occurs in younger women.

 

It has taken a while to determine if the occurrence of this  rare clotting disorder was greater than average in people who got these vaccines precisely because the incidence was so low among both vaccinated and unvaccinated people.  However enough evidence has amassed at this point that it seems clear there is an increased incidence, though still a very low one; I don't know any public health professional who doubts that.  It also  seems clear that the increased incidence is disporoportionately in younger people and especially women, though we do not have the necessary age and sex disaggregated data on incidence in non-immunized people to quantify it.  There have only been a few studies on this condition prior to this and they did not capture enough cases to be able to compute rates by gender and age group.

 

It is clear that on an overall population level the very small risk is less than the risk of being unvaccinated. So if an across the board decision has to be made for everyone, it makes sense to use these vaccines. However, in countries where it is feasible to offer alternative vaccines not using the adenoviral platform to younger people, it makes sense to do that where possible.  The UK decision using age 40 makes sense to me, EU countries making it under 60 seem over the top and politically influenced.

 

All this has nothing at all to do with Sinovac, which is made from inactivated virus. There have been no blood clots identified linked to Sinovac or other similar vaccines. The Thai public on the whole is very unclear about this and does not seem to understand  the difference between one type of vaccine and another hence many receiving Sinovac think it is linked to blood clots and thsi may explain the groups of young women reporting symptoms for which no cause can be identified and which then spontraneously disappear.

 

It was clear to me right at the start that the reports from Rayong and now this one were almost surely not genuine and rather reflected social media-fueled mass hysteria. When rare vaccine side effects occur, they do not occur in a whole groups of people immunized together and then not at all in elsewhere. They will occur in isolated cases here and there, which is exactly what happened with AZ and J&J.  Even if the problem was batch specific, it should occur evenly among all peopel immunized with the same batch, which is not what happened here.

 

The pattern we are seeing in Thailand does not look like genuine rare adverse effects, especially since not being reported elsewhere with the same vaccine.  Rather it seems to be an "infectious" process due to auto-suggestion and spread on social media and through person to person rumor mongering.

 

There is are also  individual case reports in Facebook of things that happened to just one person and are almost certainly unrelated to the vaccine, i.g. one circulating of what appears to be either ringworm or psoriasis. People do nto seem to understand that every single thing that occurs to a person in the days and weeks after vaccination are nto due to the vaccine and that there are clear scientific  methods for determining this through comparing the incidence in both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nevertheless,  WHO (don't forget,  ruled by China's man) refused emergency approval of Sinovac a couple of days ago.

The reason: the Chinese couldn't convince the WHO expert panel that the number of serious side effects is low (not only with the elderly, whith whom Thailand doesn't want to use it anyway).

 

BTW Indonesia yesterday published very good numbers of efficiency, over 90%, much better than the oft-quoted Brazilian 50%. Numbers are from real life, vaccinations of medical workers. 

 

You are in the convenient position not to have to decide whether to take a Sinovac vaccine or not.  Thai's generally cannot choose,  this alone causes distrust.

 

AZ, developed by scientists of a public university (not private, profit-seeking enterprise) of an open country,  is the most transparent of all vaccines. That's a big reason why it's side effects are well known. 

 

Sinovac, developed by a scandal-plagued company in a secretive (even on TVF one cannot discuss side effects of Sinovac) dictatorship known for shoddy products, is the opposite. No wonder many people don't trust them.

 

I don't know trustworthy reports of side effects of Sinovac.

But I don't know trustworthy reports of their safety either. 

 

[Sheryl]

5 hours ago, Kiujunn said:

 

 

Nevertheless,  WHO (don't forget,  ruled by China's man) refused emergency approval of Sinovac a couple of days ago.

The reason: the Chinese couldn't convince the WHO expert panel that the number of serious side effects is low (not only with the elderly, whith whom Thailand doesn't want to use it anyway).

 

 

I don't think that  is  correct. WHO released advisory panel findings which noted insufficient data on adverse effects in people over 60 and people with certain chronic diseases .  As far as I know they have not yet issued a decision on whether or not to approve it for emergency use. It is possible they still will (though likely only for those under 60). Or they may hold off on a decision until more data is available.

 

I attach the actual WHO Advisory Group briefing for those interested.

 

Sinovac WHO.pdf

 

[Kiujunn]

7 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

I don't think that  is  correct. WHO released advisory panel findings which noted insufficient data on adverse effects in people over 60 and people with certain chronic diseases .  As far as I know they have not yet issued a decision on whether or not to approve it for emergency use. It is possible they still will (though likely only for those under 60). Or they may hold off on a decision until more data is available.

 

I attach the actual WHO Advisory Group briefing for those interested.

 

Sinovac WHO.pdf 4.51 MB · 1 download

 

Playing with words. 

China and Sinovac were hoping for WHO approval this week. Sinopharm got it, China gained face. Sinovac didn't - no loss of face?  Of course,  if they can provide better data they may still get it, and they may deserve it.

 

My point is mainly about trust and distrust.

Many Thais are scared of Sinovac, and the history and behavior of Sinovac makes this understandable.

But for a vaccine to work you need the trust of the people.

[Aomelia]

On 5/11/2021 at 2:17 PM, placeholder said:

Even if it's true that your mother is an epidemiologist, (and given that you are posting anonymously in this forum how could we know that) are you contending that her knowledge has been passed to you genetically? And even if your Mother is an epidemiologist, if she follows your line of reasoning, (if we want to dignify what you assert as evidence of reasoning,) she ain't much of one.

Believe what you want , up to you 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Aomelia said:

Believe what you want , up to you 

I don't believe what I want. I believe what epidemiological studies have determined to be the case whether I like the results or not. It's you who seems to think that it's intellectually respectable to reject results that don't please you.

[Logosone]

16 hours ago, josthomz said:

 

 

Others have been brainwashed not to take Sinovac, with the remark of its relatively low effectivity and thus making people believe it is of no use. When the truth is that although only about 50% effective in preventing COVID-19 related disease, it is close to 100% in preventing dead.... So still better than nothin'

 

 

Just because Brazilian scientists put out a false report on effectiveness does not mean Sinovac is safe. One should look at the data that records incidents after Sinovac was administered.

 

Hong Kong tracks data on the vaccines it administered.

 

"Most of the adverse events, which have not yet been definitively linked to the jabs, involved the Chinese-made Sinovac vaccine – 69 cases out of 91,818 doses administered – while two concerned the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, of which 1,207 doses had been injected as of Sunday."

 

https://news.abs-cbn.com/overseas/03/13/21/hong-kong-records-1st-case-of-facial-paralysis-following-covid-19-vaccination

 

It certainly looks like Sinovac is less safe than other vaccines.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Logosone