1 hour ago, wensiensheng said:

If true, I wonder why they aren’t vaccinating more people everyday? 10m AZ plus 10 mil sinovac, equals 20 mil in total per month, which is roughly 600k or so a day.

 

It would suggest that there is another bottleneck.

With the very recent AZ leaked document, I am now wondering if this is the reason that the number of people who have received a second dose has stalled for more than 2 weeks now.

Thailand would need some 10 M doses of AZ to catch up with the numbers being single Vaxxed, and they have made a statement to the Nation, that AZ would be te second shot administered.

2 minutes ago, Cake Monster said:

With the very recent AZ leaked document, I am now wondering if this is the reason that the number of people who have received a second dose has stalled for more than 2 weeks now.

Thailand would need some 10 M doses of AZ to catch up with the numbers being single Vaxxed, and they have made a statement to the Nation, that AZ would be te second shot administered.

Anything is possible. There just isn’t enough information to know anything for sure.

So the topic is one hour old and there have been already two threats of 'On you go to the ignore list.'

 

People who tend to do that go on the jerrymahoney "For entertainment purposes only" list.

11 minutes ago, worrab said:

I am sure I am right to say that if you look back over the last week, there were figures showing that Sinovac loses 50% of it's effectiveness every 40 days against the Delta variant. I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong. 

There was an article about the results of a lab study that ran 60 days. 21 days after inoculation began, levels of antibodies were observed to decline so that by day 60 half were gone. The headline of the article got it wrong. But even if it got it right, antibody levels by themselves are not enough to predict effectiveness. It's T cells and B cells that are determinative.

In the article itself, the only doctor who was interviewed complained that Coronavac was less effective, not ineffective.

And then there's the widely misunderstood meaning of "efficacy" and "effectiveness" when it comes to vaccines. They both have to do with prevention of transmission. Nothing to do with the level of protection a vaccine provides against serious symptoms and death. In the past, it's been consistently the cases the Coronovac has performed better at reducing the level of serous symptoms and death than it has done in preventing transmission. I'm not claiming that such is the case against the Delta variant. But people who claim that Coronavac is useless against it can't cite any clinical studies  to support their case. Because, as of now, there are none.

Edited July 19, 20214 yr by placeholder

A post using a trolling image has been removed. 

4 minutes ago, wensiensheng said:

Anything is possible. There just isn’t enough information to know anything for sure.

All the figures we are given can never be trusted for sure.

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

And then there's the widely misunderstood meaning of "efficacy" and "effectiveness" when it comes to vaccines. They both have to do with prevention of transmission. Nothing to do with the level of protection a vaccine provides against serious symptoms and death. In the past, it's been consistently the cases the Coronovac has performed better at reducing the level of serous symptoms and death than it has done in preventing transmission. I'm not claiming that such is the case against the Delta variant. But people who claim that Coronavac is useless against it can't cite any clinical studies  to support their case. Because, as of now, there are none.

No. Efficacy means whatever a study intends it to mean.  Even your WHO friends know that...

 

"A vaccine’s efficacy is measured in a controlled clinical trial and is based on how many people who got vaccinated developed the ‘outcome of interest’"

 

The WHO, on vaccines.

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection

7 minutes ago, placeholder said:

There was an article about the results of a lab study that ran 60 days. 21 days after inoculation began, levels of antibodies were observed to decline so that by day 60 half were gone. The headline of the article got it wrong. But even if it got it right, antibody levels by themselves are not enough to predict effectiveness. It's T cells and B cells that are determinative.

In the article itself, the only doctor who was interviewed complained that Coronavac was less effective, not ineffective.

And then there's the widely misunderstood meaning of "efficacy" and "effectiveness" when it comes to vaccines. They both have to do with prevention of transmission. Nothing to do with the level of protection a vaccine provides against serious symptoms and death. In the past, it's been consistently the cases the Coronovac has performed better at reducing the level of serous symptoms and death than it has done in preventing transmission. I'm not claiming that such is the case against the Delta variant. But people who claim that Coronavac is useless against it can't cite any clinical studies  to support their case. Because, as of now, there are none.

Actually, Chinese researchers claim to have done a few clinical studies but haven't released detailed data.. Given China's record in disparaging mRNA vaccines, I wouldn't trust the results even if accompanied by data.

1 minute ago, rabas said:

No. Efficacy means whatever a study intends it to mean.  Even your WHO friends know that...

 

"A vaccine’s efficacy is measured in a controlled clinical trial and is based on how many people who got vaccinated developed the ‘outcome of interest’"

 

The WHO, on vaccines.

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection

Thanks for the correction. However, the fact remains that those who question Coronavac's usefulness, consistently cite its efficacy and/or effectiveness based on transmission of the disease. They seem unaware that its usefulness in preventing serious illness and death is another thing entirely.

6 minutes ago, rabas said:

No. Efficacy means whatever a study intends it to mean.  Even your WHO friends know that...

 

"A vaccine’s efficacy is measured in a controlled clinical trial and is based on how many people who got vaccinated developed the ‘outcome of interest’"

 

The WHO, on vaccines.

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection

It turns out that the CDC and WHO are not in agreement:

Vaccine efficacy and vaccine effectiveness measure the proportionate reduction in cases among vaccinated persons. Vaccine efficacy is used when a study is carried out under ideal conditions, for example, during a clinical trial. Vaccine effectiveness is used when a study is carried out under typical field (that is, less than perfectly controlled) conditions.

https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson3/section6.html

 

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

NEW HIGH - #COVID19 Update on Monday: 11,784 cases & 81 deaths (100 cases from prisons). Full details at 12:30pm #Thailand

15 July: 9,186 - 98 dead

16 July: 9,692 - 67 dead

17 July: 10,082 - 141 dead

18 July: 11,397 - 101 dead

19 July: 11,784 - 81 <— TODAY

https://twitter.com/ThaiNewsReports/status/1416924245356015616

 

So what's the government plan/goal now, 12,000 per day?

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Thanks for the correction. However, the fact remains that those who question Coronavac's usefulness, consistently cite its efficacy and/or effectiveness based on transmission of the disease. They seem unaware that its usefulness in preventing serious illness and death is another thing entirely.

But??????? People are getting seriousy ill and dying after 2 jabs of the Chinese juice. Is not Delta breaking through? Seems you need to brush up on current affairs regarding Sinovac.

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Possibly from Pantip or possibly from The Infectious Disease Association of Thailand, who pointed to the efficacy concerns of the Sinovac vaccine, especially toward new variants like the Delta one.

Maybe. So then they should wait for something else. From your Thaiger link Iwill note the use of the words 'reported' and 'possibly':

 

The Infectious Disease Association of Thailand points to reported efficacy concerns of the Sinovac vaccine, especially toward new variants like the Delta one.

Today, the IDAT sent a letter to Thailand’s PM, Prayut Chan-o-cha. They stated that Sinovac is a “whole virus vaccine” and thus may possibly not be effective at combatting the Delta strain or other, newer variants. 

7 minutes ago, placeholder said:

It turns out that the CDC and WHO are not in agreement:

Vaccine efficacy and vaccine effectiveness measure the proportionate reduction in cases among vaccinated persons. Vaccine efficacy is used when a study is carried out under ideal conditions, for example, during a clinical trial. Vaccine effectiveness is used when a study is carried out under typical field (that is, less than perfectly controlled) conditions.

https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson3/section6.html

 

Although technically not in agreement, in practice I suspect that they are because the desired outcome of interest as stated by WHO, is usually the CDC definition.

 

I don’t know, but suspect that’s the case. At least with Covid. There maybe specific studies that look for some other outcome in other areas, but with Covid, I think there is probably agreement.

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Maybe. So then they should wait for something else. From your Thaiger link Iwill note the use of the words 'reported' and 'possibly':

 

The Infectious Disease Association of Thailand points to reported efficacy concerns of the Sinovac vaccine, especially toward new variants like the Delta one.

Today, the IDAT sent a letter to Thailand’s PM, Prayut Chan-o-cha. They stated that Sinovac is a “whole virus vaccine” and thus may possibly not be effective at combatting the Delta strain or other, newer variants. 

Wait for something else?

 

Was it not just yesterday that you repeatedly posted that you want Pfizer now, now now? Or was it the day before? Your posts tend to blur into one.

Just now, wensiensheng said:

Although technically not in agreement, in practice I suspect that they are because the desired outcome of interest as stated by WHO, is usually the CDC definition.

 

I don’t know, but suspect that’s the case. At least with Covid. There maybe specific studies that look for some other outcome in other areas, but with Covid, I think there is probably agreement.

It may also be

 

2 minutes ago, wensiensheng said:

Although technically not in agreement, in practice I suspect that they are because the desired outcome of interest as stated by WHO, is usually the CDC definition.

 

I don’t know, but suspect that’s the case. At least with Covid. There maybe specific studies that look for some other outcome in other areas, but with Covid, I think there is probably agreement.

Actually, Rabas rather misleadingly truncated WHO's definition of a very significant note.

Here is the definition in full

"A vaccine’s efficacy is measured in a controlled clinical trial and is based on how many people who got vaccinated developed the ‘outcome of interest’ (usually disease) compared with how many people who got the placebo (dummy vaccine) developed the same outcome."

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection

3 minutes ago, wensiensheng said:

Wait for something else?

 

Was it not just yesterday No what that you repeatedly posted that you want Pfizer now, now now? Or was it the day before? Your posts tend to blur into one.

No I said that no vaccine is effective if you haven't got it. 

Remember the good old days of roughly 2,000 cases a day for week after week? We never knew how lucky we were, lol.

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

It turns out that the CDC and WHO are not in agreement:

Vaccine efficacy and vaccine effectiveness measure the proportionate reduction in cases among vaccinated persons. Vaccine efficacy is used when a study is carried out under ideal conditions, for example, during a clinical trial. Vaccine effectiveness is used when a study is carried out under typical field (that is, less than perfectly controlled) conditions.

https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson3/section6.html

 

Another strawman argument, like throwing in quantum mechanics. The question is what does efficacy apply to, not the meaning of effectiveness. It is known throughout the medical world that efficacy is a quantitative measure of whatever outcome is of interest. Efficacy has been reported even here for infections, hospitalizations, and death.

 

Again this time from WIKI:vaccine efficacy

 

" Vaccine efficacy studies are used to measure several possible outcomes such as disease attack rates, hospitalizations, medical visits, and costs. "

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

No I said that no vaccine is effective if you haven't got it. 

Be careful what you say. It’s easy to check back and post quotes from your previous posts here you know.
 

And this time I won’t let you get away with editing posts to change their meaning. That is against forum rules and definitely not in the spirit of the game, is it now?

11 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Maybe. So then they should wait for something else. From your Thaiger link Iwill note the use of the words 'reported' and 'possibly':

 

The Infectious Disease Association of Thailand points to reported efficacy concerns of the Sinovac vaccine, especially toward new variants like the Delta one.

Today, the IDAT sent a letter to Thailand’s PM, Prayut Chan-o-cha. They stated that Sinovac is a “whole virus vaccine” and thus may possibly not be effective at combatting the Delta strain or other, newer variants. 

I'm not sure they would take your advice and tell people to wait, they are experts and not you so, I would leave them to make their own decisions and recommendations. 

 

They are just joining more than 200,000 Thai medical practitioners that have separately petitioned the government to purchase as quickly as possible mrna vaccines because of the concerns with Sinovac.

4 minutes ago, rabas said:

Another strawman argument, like throwing in quantum mechanics.

I had to smile at that one yesterday.....555

Just now, rabas said:

Another strawman argument, like throwing in quantum mechanics. The question is what does efficacy apply to, not the meaning of effectiveness. It is known throughout the medical world that efficacy is a quantitative measure of whatever outcome is of interest. Efficacy has been reported even here for infections, hospitalizations, and death.

 

Again this time from WIKI:vaccine efficacy

 

" Vaccine efficacy studies are used to measure several possible outcomes such as disease attack rates, hospitalizations, medical visits, and costs. "

As for quantum mechanics. I used that to point oujt that  the term "half-life' in biology has no scientific relation to "half-life" as used in physics.

As for the efficacy question, why did you truncate the definition of efficacy as provided by the WHO? You actually left of the second half of a sentence. Clearly because of the observation in that definition that efficacy is usually used in reference to disease. And given the comments here, that's the point.

And of course I was directing my criticisms at people who misunderstand what efficacy and effectiveness mean in relation to covid. Basically, they confuse the colloquial use of these words with their scientific use.

And anyway, the CDC has a different definition, doesn't it? I'm going to stick with theirs. God Bless America!

2 minutes ago, rabas said:

efficacy is a quantitative measure of whatever outcome is of interest

great post, but what about outcomes and goals - surely efficacy must represent certain study goals that must be met - Each vaccine candidate needs to be evaluated for safety, immunogenicity, and protective efficacy in humans before it is licensed for use

50 million more doses of #Pfizer vaccine, more #Moderna expected to be purchased.

https://www.thaipbsworld.com/50-million-more-doses-of-pfizer-vaccine-more-moderna-expected-to-be-purchased/

1 minute ago, anchadian said:

50 million more doses of #Pfizer vaccine, more #Moderna expected to be purchased.

https://www.thaipbsworld.com/50-million-more-doses-of-pfizer-vaccine-more-moderna-expected-to-be-purchased/

Yes still at the we need to arrange a meeting stage, oh dear...................

 

"Mr. Anutin has assigned Thailand’s Food and Drug Administration (TFDA) Secretary-General Paisal Dunkhum to arrange meetings with representatives of the manufacturers of the vaccines already approved by the TFDA for procurement, especially the mRNA Pfizer and Moderna vaccines."

News has emerged this weekend that the Ministry of Public Health and its minister Anutin Charnvirakul has plans to withhold locally produced AstraZeneca vaccines from export.

 

It is the completely wrong move.

 

https://www.thaienquirer.com/30063/opinion-thailand-wants-to-withhold-vaccines-from-its-neighbours-it-is-the-wrong-move/

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Yes still at the we need to arrange a meeting stage, oh dear...................

 

"Mr. Anutin has assigned Thailand’s Food and Drug Administration (TFDA) Secretary-General Paisal Dunkhum to arrange meetings with representatives of the manufacturers of the vaccines already approved by the TFDA for procurement, especially the mRNA Pfizer and Moderna vaccines."

After these companies have fulfilled the order books as they stand now, I would not expect to see delivery until late 2022!! It is a pity that Anutin did not think about this a year ago! His actions now are too damn late to save the lives of hundreds of people!! 

Edited July 19, 20214 yr by worrab
Add

29 minutes ago, wensiensheng said:

Although technically not in agreement, in practice I suspect that they are because the desired outcome of interest as stated by WHO, is usually the CDC definition.

 

I don’t know, but suspect that’s the case. At least with Covid. There maybe specific studies that look for some other outcome in other areas, but with Covid, I think there is probably agreement.

I think your explanation is a reasonable one.

1 minute ago, worrab said:

After these companies have fulfilled the order books as they stand now, I would not expect to see delivery until late 2022!!  

Agree there. They are now rushing to get the last minute orders out to Australia!!