1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

Well if so, then they screwed up. That was then, this is now.

 

The Thaiger article is an opinion piece. However:

Pfizer says it will supply Covid vaccine only to central govt, not states 24 MAY 21

 

He said the company, in a communication to the (Punjab) state, said: "Pfizer is working with federal governments across the world to supply its Covid-19 vaccine for use in national immunisation programmes."

"Our supply agreements at this time are with national governments and supra-national organisations with allocation of doses and implementation within the country being a decision for local governments based on relevant health authority guidance. This approach Pfizer has followed across the world," the pharma major said.

 

https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/pfizer-says-it-will-supply-coronavirus-vaccine-only-to-central-govts-121052400950_1.html

 

I'm not sure what the purpose or reason for the link to that article is? It just confirms that Moderna and Pfizer only sell to central governments and not states?

 

Whats that got to do with Pfizer offering to sell their jabs to the Ministry of Public Health, Thailand in November of last year?

 

So you're not sure.

22 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

So you're not sure.

Can you do better than that or tell me why its relevant? Or is it just pure deflection

I don't care whether you are sure or not.

Just now, jerrymahoney said:

I don't care whether you are sure or not.

Got it, no debates possible just deflection.

A troll post with a link to a site of an online gambling/betting site has been removed:

 

3) You will not post about activities or links to websites containing such material that are illegal in Thailand or any other country within ASEAN. This includes but is not limited to: gambling, betting, pornography, illegal drugs, fake goods/clothing, file sharing of pirated material, pyramid schemes, etc. Discussion of the above is permitted only as news items, but never as a "how to" topic. Discussions must not be in breach of local laws.

 

17 hours ago, placeholder said:

Well, there have been many phase 3 clinical trials conducted under the auspices of governments or non-governmental organizations not beholden to the Chinese. And they showed a range of effectiveness from 51% to 84%. So, given the circumstances, it wasn't out of line for WHO to approve its emergency use. WHO did note its continued dissatisfaction with the data supplied by the Chinese. 

Effectiveness trials before or after the WHO gave approval for emergency use?

Not disputing there are some.

 

2 hours ago, jojothai said:

Effectiveness trials before or after the WHO gave approval for emergency use?

Not disputing there are some.

 

before