Astra Zenenca Vs. Sinovac

[watthong]

1 hour ago, oldcpu said:

One medical worker in the 618 (677,348 double dose of Sinovac infected) died.   And one worker in the 68 (22,062 only one dose of Sinovac) died.

 

The info I provided also indicates for how many it was only mild symptoms (597 out of 618 only mild symptoms for 2 doses ... and 67 out of 68 only mild symptoms).

 

Thank you, as the devil is in the details, and I hope folks still retain their basic Math skills learned oh so long ago...

A different statistics coming from the White House: the "Disinformation Dozen" referring to 12 individuals who allegedly "stirred" up 65% of dis-information on social media regarding Covid vaccination. A direct result of that "wave" of disinformation is the rise of infection spreading throughout 50 states. Browsing through this thread one could see similar pattern of dis-information weaving in and out regarding Sinovac efficacy.

[jerrymahoney]

1 hour ago, oldcpu said:

This is sad to read - my understanding is that is a very large hospital.

 

I went to the ThaiPBS article  (  https://www.thaipbsworld.com/ramathibodi-hospital-suspends-some-services-as-300-medics-infected-with-covid-19/ ) where that originates from, and they don't, unfortunately, state how may mild infection, how many serious, nor if any in ICU. 

 

Sinovac's efficacy for stopping one from catching the virus is not great (compared to some other vaccines) and rather it tends to be more effective in ensuring the infection is mild with less severe cases and less instances of death.    Hence those statistics, which the article does not (yet) provide, are important.

Maybe they are not releasing vaccination data because they are concerned about this one:

 

The Samut Sakhon public health office clarified on Monday that the late Dr Phicheat Sahakij, who worked at Suang Luang Hospital in Krathum Baen district and died from Covid-19 on July 10, had not been vaccinated against the coronavirus.

 

(An earlier Facebook post said ) the doctor had received two doses of the Sinovac vaccine along with other frontline medical personnel. The post has gone viral with more than a thousand comments expressing condolences and questioning the efficacy of the vaccine.

 

https://www.nationthailand.com/in-focus/40003169

Edited July 18, 2021 by jerrymahoney

[oldcpu]

32 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Maybe they are not releasing vaccination data because they are concerned about this one:

 

The Samut Sakhon public health office clarified on Monday that the late Dr Phicheat Sahakij, who worked at Suang Luang Hospital in Krathum Baen district and died from Covid-19 on July 10, had not been vaccinated against the coronavirus.

 

(An earlier Facebook post said ) the doctor had received two doses of the Sinovac

 

https://www.nationthailand.com/in-focus/40003169

Hopefully the truth, what ever it may be, eventually comes out, sooner than later.

[steven100]

[Tony125]

On 7/8/2021 at 9:17 AM, millymoopoo said:

Sinovac efficacy is in question.!

Hundreds of vaccinated health workers in Indonesia and Chile are being infected with covid 19 and some are dying.

Both these countries (along with 31 others) use Sinovac primarily.

Some suggest Sinovac is better than nothing, these news articles would suggest it's about the same as nothing.

You be the judge.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwib8eaJs9LxAhVP4zgGHRVjBbUQFjAAegQIBBAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Fworld%2Fasia-pacific%2Fhundreds-indonesian-doctors-contract-covid-19-despite-vaccination-dozens-2021-06-17%2F&usg=AOvVaw0x_6qgZom9siCqbR8ktmFu

Study shows antibodies drop by 50% every 40 days after 2 doses of Sinovac

 

https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/study-shows-antibodies-drop-by-50-every-40-days-after-2-doses-of-sinovac

[gearbox]

3 hours ago, oldcpu said:

This is sad to read - my understanding is that is a very large hospital.

 

I went to the ThaiPBS article  (  https://www.thaipbsworld.com/ramathibodi-hospital-suspends-some-services-as-300-medics-infected-with-covid-19/ ) where that originates from, and they don't, unfortunately, state how may mild infection, how many serious, nor if any in ICU. 

 

Sinovac's efficacy for stopping one from catching the virus is not great (compared to some other vaccines) and rather it tends to be more effective in ensuring the infection is mild with less severe cases and less instances of death.    Hence those statistics, which the article does not (yet) provide, are important.

The medical workers should have been vaccinated with mRNA vaccines. Sinovac is known to have lower efficacy in regards to virus transmission.  The doctors are critical staff, they should be available as much as possible. They could be asymptomatic or with mild symptoms with Sinovac, but would be still out of work.

My kid who is a doctor in Australia, was vaccinated long time ago with Pfizer, at that time Pfizer was not available to the general public at all.

[watthong]

24 minutes ago, Tony125 said:

Study shows antibodies drop by 50% every 40 days after 2 doses of Sinovac

 

https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/study-shows-antibodies-drop-by-50-every-40-days-after-2-doses-of-sinovac

Bingo! Expect to see same above posting recurring every 20 minutes in each and every Covid thread for the next 2 weeks.

[placeholder]

25 minutes ago, Tony125 said:

Study shows antibodies drop by 50% every 40 days after 2 doses of Sinovac

 

https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/study-shows-antibodies-drop-by-50-every-40-days-after-2-doses-of-sinovac

If you read that article carefully, you'll see that it was badly botched. The study actually lasted 60 days.  And antibody level testing was started on the 21st day and went on for another 40 days. So there is no basis for construing that every 40 days the antibody level drops by half. This report came via thethaiger.com. There's a reason that large media organizations hire people with a background in science to report on issues like this. Clearly, not the case here.

[oldcpu]

1 hour ago, Tony125 said:

Study shows antibodies drop by 50% every 40 days after 2 doses of Sinovac

 

https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/study-shows-antibodies-drop-by-50-every-40-days-after-2-doses-of-sinovac

A 60 day studies that can predict a drop every 40 days ?  ie. after 80 days ? ie after 120 days?

 

No links to the actual study.   ... One must take on faith that the drop is linear. The drop could be worse.  There could be no further drop.  

 

This is simply attention grabbing headlines.  It borders  on worthless.

 

As much as I think there are far superior vaccines to both Sinovac and AstraZeneca, which are the topic/scope of this thread in the Original Poster's thread starting post, the fact of the matter is aside from Sinopharm, none of the other vaccines are available in Thailand in any quantity.  None.  In the mean time, as much as the doubters like to post, I believe Sinovac and AstraZeneca, despite not being as good as other vaccines, have saved lived.  Yes. saved lives.

 

Saving lives means a lot more important to me than axe grinding that some other vaccines are superior (where Thailand has not been able to get the superior vaccines because wealthier countries monopolized on the earlier supplies of these higher efficacy vaccines) .  

 

A superior vaccine that is not available (because wealthier countries snapped up the early supplies) saves no lives in Thailand.  This much is clear.

[placeholder]

45 minutes ago, placeholder said:

If you read that article carefully, you'll see that it was badly botched. The study actually lasted 60 days.  And antibody level testing was started on the 21st day and went on for another 40 days. So there is no basis for construing that every 40 days the antibody level drops by half. This report came via thethaiger.com. There's a reason that large media organizations hire people with a background in science to report on issues like this. Clearly, not the case here.

Small error in my post. I should have written that the study went on for another 39 days.

[gearbox]

3 hours ago, watthong said:

Thank you, as the devil is in the details, and I hope folks still retain their basic Math skills learned oh so long ago...

A different statistics coming from the White House: the "Disinformation Dozen" referring to 12 individuals who allegedly "stirred" up 65% of dis-information on social media regarding Covid vaccination. A direct result of that "wave" of disinformation is the rise of infection spreading throughout 50 states. Browsing through this thread one could see similar pattern of dis-information weaving in and out regarding Sinovac efficacy.

It is not all black and white. There are TVF members who present good analysis of the Sinovac weaknesses, with solid arguments and data. Based on the worldwide data so far, there is little doubt that the mRNA vaccines are more effective than Sinovac. In some areas significantly more effective, e.g. virus transmission.

Nevertheless, so far pretty much any reputable western expert holds the opinion that "any of the available vaccines are better than no vaccine".

 

However there also is a different crowd, which looks like may have skipped quite a few classes in high school. Their posts are one liners, or one paragraph, and contain arguments against Sinovac like "junk, gunk, saline solution, 0 percent efficacy, Sinocrap, CCP, Uighurs etc". Then they tell the same to their Thai wifes and girlfriends.

 

Ironically they may be cutting the branch they are sitting on. Today my Thai GF, which had 2 Sinovac shots, told me she wants to book and pay for a Moderna shot. She has zero knowledge about vaccines, and can't even pronounce Moderna, but based on the disseminated disinformation she now wants a booster shot. She is a healthy lean middle age woman, which is very very likely to survive covid even without any vaccination.

Many of that Sinovac smearing crowd looks like can't afford to go back home and get a jab they prefer, so have to wait for vaccines here. Well, there are already reports that the Moderna jabs are already heavily oversubscribed. There is a chance that younger healthy Thais may get a Moderna booster, a jab which probably they hardly need, and leaving less available vaccines to the elderly and vulnerable Thais and expats. And is not unknown the expats to be put at the end of the queue.

 

Fingers crossed, I'm off to Europe next week to get my Pfizer jabs.

[rabas]

19 minutes ago, placeholder said:

If you read that article carefully, you'll see that it was badly botched. The study actually lasted 60 days.  And antibody level testing was started on the 21st day and went on for another 40 days. So there is no basis for construing that every 40 days the antibody level drops by half. This report came via thethaiger.com. There's a reason that large media organizations hire people with a background in science to report on issues like this. Clearly, not the case here.

Except that a huge number of biologically active compounds, including antibodies are subject to half-life decay. Half-lives vary but half-life means they continue to decay 50% on fixed half-life time intervals. That's probably why the study quotes a 50% decay time, that is how half lives are reported.

 

wiki, Antibodies:

 

"Depending on the class of antibody, as dictated by the identity of the Fc region, the antibody half-life and distribution throughout the body varies. "

 

So the continued decline in this case might be considered obvious. Stating otherwise would require strong evidence that it does not in this particular case.

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, rabas said:

Except that a huge number of biologically active compounds, including antibodies are subject to half-life decay. Half-lives vary but half-life means they continue to decay 50% on fixed half-life time intervals. That's probably why the study quotes a 50% decay time, that is how half lives are reported.

 

wiki, Antibodies:

 

"Depending on the class of antibody, as dictated by the identity of the Fc region, the antibody half-life and distribution throughout the body varies. "

 

So the continued decline in this case might be considered obvious. Stating otherwise would require strong evidence that it does not in this particular case.

Even if it is true, stating the obvious as something worthy of a headline is clearly misleading. That said, it is far from a universal rule that antibody levels decline in accordance with some half-life algorithm.

 

SARS-CoV-2 infection induces sustained humoral immune responses in convalescent patients following symptomatic COVID-19

"Although specific IgM-S/N become undetectable 12 weeks after disease onset in most patients, IgG-S/N titers have an intermediate contraction phase, but stabilize at relatively high levels over the 6 month observation period. At late time points, the positivity rates for binding and neutralizing SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies are still >70%. These data indicate sustained humoral immunity in recovered patients who had symptomatic COVID-19, suggesting prolonged immunity."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22034-1

 

Biology isn't physics.

[rabas]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Even if it is true, stating the obvious as something worthy of a headline is clearly misleading. That said, it is far from a universal rule that antibody levels decline in accordance with some half-life algorithm.

 

SARS-CoV-2 infection induces sustained humoral immune responses in convalescent patients following symptomatic COVID-19

"Although specific IgM-S/N become undetectable 12 weeks after disease onset in most patients, IgG-S/N titers have an intermediate contraction phase, but stabilize at relatively high levels over the 6 month observation period. At late time points, the positivity rates for binding and neutralizing SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies are still >70%. These data indicate sustained humoral immunity in recovered patients who had symptomatic COVID-19, suggesting prolonged immunity."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22034-1

 

Biology isn't physics.

Nice find except you can't disprove a general rule with a specific case. You need to show that levels in the Sinovac study do not continue to decay after the observed half-life.  Your quoted study did not involve a vaccine.   Prolonged responses have been shown for mRNA type vaccines, but mRNA vaccines work differently from Sinovac types. Here is a 209 day study of responses from Moderna. You can still see the half-life trend.

 

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2103916

 

So again, the Sinovac antibodies were said to decline rapidity to 50%, this is not the case in your study or the Moderna study. I would not assume it suddenly stops without strong reasoning.

 

 

"Biology isn't physics."

Most science disciplines are multilayer. This is why a Hungarian biochemist will probably get a Nobel prize for mRNA vaccines. Chemical physics^[1] is paramount to the understanding of molecular biology and biochemistry.

 

[placeholder]

36 minutes ago, rabas said:

Nice find except you can't disprove a general rule with a specific case. You need to show that levels in the Sinovac study do not continue to decay after the observed half-life.  Your quoted study did not involve a vaccine.   Prolonged responses have been shown for mRNA type vaccines, but mRNA vaccines work differently from Sinovac types. Here is a 209 day study of responses from Moderna. You can still see the half-life trend.

 

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2103916

 

So again, the Sinovac antibodies were said to decline rapidity to 50%, this is not the case in your study or the Moderna study. I would not assume it suddenly stops without strong reasoning.

 

 

"Biology isn't physics."

Most science disciplines are multilayer. This is why a Hungarian biochemist will probably get a Nobel prize for mRNA vaccines. Chemical physics^[1] is paramount to the understanding of molecular biology and biochemistry.

 

Even in the study you cited there's this:

The estimated half-life of binding antibodies after day 43 for all the participants was 52 days (95% CI, 46 to 58) calculated with the use of an exponential decay model, which assumes a steady decay rate over time, and 109 days (95% CI, 92 to 136) calculated with the use of a power-law model (at day 119), which assumes that decay rates decrease over time. 

 

And here's another study

Antibody Persistence through 6 Months after the Second Dose of mRNA-1273 Vaccine for Covid-19

The estimated half-life of binding antibodies after day 43 for all the participants was 52 days (95% CI, 46 to 58) calculated with the use of an exponential decay model, which assumes a steady decay rate over time, and 109 days (95% CI, 92 to 136) calculated with the use of a power-law model (at day 119), which assumes that decay rates decrease over time. 

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2103916

 

As for physics informing biology, it's obvious in the case of half lives it's just a matter of words not science.. Just because both disciplines use "half-life" as a term doesn't mean that they have any scientific relation to each other. In physics half life refers to how long it takes one half of a quantity of one element to decay into another element. Thanks to quantum mechanics we know that this is an inflexible rule and a process that takes place on the subatomic level.  Biological processes are complicated and occur in context.. No relation at all to quantum mechanics.  If you can show me where it's specified that biological half life of antibodies are constant over larger stretches of time share it with us. 

Edited July 18, 2021 by placeholder

[Tony125]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Even in the study you cited there's this:

The estimated half-life of binding antibodies after day 43 for all the participants was 52 days (95% CI, 46 to 58) calculated with the use of an exponential decay model, which assumes a steady decay rate over time, and 109 days (95% CI, 92 to 136) calculated with the use of a power-law model (at day 119), which assumes that decay rates decrease over time. 

 

And here's another study

Antibody Persistence through 6 Months after the Second Dose of mRNA-1273 Vaccine for Covid-19

The estimated half-life of binding antibodies after day 43 for all the participants was 52 days (95% CI, 46 to 58) calculated with the use of an exponential decay model, which assumes a steady decay rate over time, and 109 days (95% CI, 92 to 136) calculated with the use of a power-law model (at day 119), which assumes that decay rates decrease over time. 

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2103916

 

As for physics informing biology, it's obvious in the case of half lives it's just a matter of words not science.. Just because both disciplines use "half-life" as a term doesn't mean that they have any scientific relation to each other. In physics half life refers to how long it takes one half of a quantity of one element to decay into another element. Thanks to quantum mechanics we know that this is an inflexible rule and a process that takes place on the subatomic level.  Biological processes are complicated and occur in context.. No relation at all to quantum mechanics.  If you can show me where it's specified that biological half life of antibodies are constant over larger stretches of time share it with us. 

 

1.4 billion doses later, China is realizing it may need mRNA COVID vaccines

 

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/1-4-billion-doses-later-003055601.html

[oldcpu]

13 minutes ago, Tony125 said:

 

1.4 billion doses later, China is realizing it may need mRNA COVID vaccines

 

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/1-4-billion-doses-later-003055601.html

I think this discussion has been going on in China for a long time. There is absolutely nothing new here ... Just a continual rehash of old news, and totally off topic for a Sinovac vs AstraZeneca thread where neither is a mRNA vaccine.

 

But I am learning to expect such from this forum.

 

????

[placeholder]

23 minutes ago, Tony125 said:

 

1.4 billion doses later, China is realizing it may need mRNA COVID vaccines

 

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/1-4-billion-doses-later-003055601.html

Actually on Friday I replied to a member who consistently defends the Chinese for sticking with inactivated virus vaccines on account of safety and denigrates the mRNA vaccine. Here is what I replied to him:

 

"This is such utter BS. Right now there are Chinese companies working on creating mRNA vaccines.

Revolutionary mRNA vaccines made by Chinese firms will be ready to hit market by end of year, says industry chief

Made in China jabs using genetic technology could soon be available, while BioNTech’s Chinese partner is seeking approval to use the vaccine on the mainland

The drugs that use messenger RNA to stimulate the immune system reported high efficacy rates following clinical trials

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3128998/revolutionary-mrna-vaccines-made-chinese-firms-will-be-ready

And didn't Fosun just place an order for 100 million doses of mRNA vaccines from Biontech?. So, are they planning to let them age like fine wines  for 20 years until they see what the consequences of vaccination with them are in in the West?"

 

 

[FridgeMagnet1]

Imagine if someone on here actually said

 

“yeah fair enough, having looked at the evidence and listened to the arguments, Sinovac is probably an reasonably effective vaccine, but not as good as the others”

 

Instead of creating threads about paid agents of the people’s republic of China infiltrating ThaiVisa…

Edited July 18, 2021 by FridgeMagnet1

[Tony125]

Study: Chinese COVID shot may offer elderly poor protection

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/study-chinese-covid-shot-may-offer-elderly-poor-protection/ar-AAMtciU?li=BBnb7Kz

[Tony125]

AstraZeneca searching for vaccines for virus-hit Southeast Asia

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/astrazeneca-searching-for-vaccines-for-virus-hit-southeast-asia/ar-AAMvWl6?li=BBnb7Kz

[oldcpu]

On 7/23/2021 at 7:21 PM, Tony125 said:

Study: Chinese COVID shot may offer elderly poor protection

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/study-chinese-covid-shot-may-offer-elderly-poor-protection/ar-AAMtciU?li=BBnb7Kz

My understanding is almost ALL ( all ?) vaccines were initially emergency approved for those under about age 65 and above about age 18,  and only later were studies conducted to see if vaccine helped the elderly.

 

I note there is no mention of T-cells in that article which if my memory serves me right is also an important indicator of effectiveness against the virus, and not just antibodies alone, which the article conveniently overlooks.  The article is also not yet peer reviewed and given the no mention of T-cells I question the "experts" opinion that the article mentions. 

 

Maybe it's a good study. Maybe it isn't. But the classical slip shod reporting in the article with attention grabbing headlines is typical of the pathetically poor reporting that abounds today.

 

Finally I note this thread as started by the OP is to compare Astra Zeneca vs Sinovac and Sinopharm is not the same as Sinovac. Maybe it's better, maybe it's not better.

 

But it is off topic.

 

However I have learned this forum is more about axe grinding and cheap worthless shots than trying to stay on top and rather than trying to stick to facts.

[Tony125]

On 7/25/2021 at 8:39 AM, oldcpu said:

My understanding is almost ALL ( all ?) vaccines were initially emergency approved for those under about age 65 and above about age 18,  and only later were studies conducted to see if vaccine helped the elderly.

 

I note there is no mention of T-cells in that article which if my memory serves me right is also an important indicator of effectiveness against the virus, and not just antibodies alone, which the article conveniently overlooks.  The article is also not yet peer reviewed and given the no mention of T-cells I question the "experts" opinion that the article mentions. 

 

Maybe it's a good study. Maybe it isn't. But the classical slip shod reporting in the article with attention grabbing headlines is typical of the pathetically poor reporting that abounds today.

 

Finally I note this thread as started by the OP is to compare Astra Zeneca vs Sinovac and Sinopharm is not the same as Sinovac. Maybe it's better, maybe it's not better.

 

But it is off topic.

 

However I have learned this forum is more about axe grinding and cheap worthless shots than trying to stay on top and rather than trying to stick to facts.

Antibodies from Sinovac's COVID-19 shot fade after about 6 months, booster helps - study

https://www.yahoo.com/news/antibodies-sinovacs-covid-19-shot-142748493.html

 

 

Mixed AstraZeneca-Pfizer shot boosts COVID antibody level - study

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mixed-astrazeneca-pfizer-shot-boosts-080120509.html

[oldcpu]

16 hours ago, Tony125 said:

Antibodies from Sinovac's COVID-19 shot fade after about 6 months, booster helps - study

https://www.yahoo.com/news/antibodies-sinovacs-covid-19-shot-142748493.html

From that article I note:

 

Quote

Chinese researchers reported the findings from a study of blood samples from healthy adults aged between 18-59 in a paper published on Sunday, which has not been peer reviewed.
...
Researchers said it was unclear how the decrease in antibodies would affect the shot's effectiveness, since scientists have yet to figure out precisely the threshold of antibody levels for a vaccine to be able to prevent the disease.
...
The study also said that participants in some cohorts who received a third dose of the Sinovac shot about six months after the second showed around a 3-5 fold increase in antibody levels after a further 28 days, compared with the levels seen four weeks after the second shot.

So its a study, that is NOT peer reviewed, that states its unclear if the noted antibody decrease affects the effectiveness, but they then go on to say they can increase the antibodies by a 3rd jab of Sinovac.   Not what I would call definitive that the 3rd jab really needed, nor if 3rd jab should be Sinovac or AstraZeneca, or an mRNA ??  ????   ... hopefully as time goes by, with millions already vaccinated around the world with Sinovac, that better information/studies will be forth coming.

 

Quote

 

Mixed AstraZeneca-Pfizer shot boosts COVID antibody level - study

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mixed-astrazeneca-pfizer-shot-boosts-080120509.html

So its NOT about AstraZeneca vs Sinovac (title of thread started by OP), but rather its just the South Koreans proving in a study what the British (and I might add the Germans and the Spanish) already proved in their studies in regards to taking a Pfizer jab after an AstraZeneca jab.  ☹️

 

What would be more of interest to myself (given the many people I know who had 2 Sinovac jabs), would be to see studies that assessed the effectiveness of mixing one mRNA vaccine (a study of Sinovac/Moderna and also another of Sinovac/Pfizer).   Hopefully given USA donated Pfizer will be administered soon, and Moderna arriving possibly in late Q4 this year (?) that not too long afterward, such studies will materialize.

 

Edited July 27, 2021 by oldcpu