Sinopharm: Chinese Covid Vaccine Gets WHO Emergency Approval (bbc.co.uk) 128
AmiMoJo shares a report from the BBC: The World Health Organization (WHO) has granted emergency approval for the Covid vaccine made by Chinese state-owned company Sinopharm. It is the first vaccine developed by a non-Western country to get WHO backing. The vaccine has already been given to millions of people in China and elsewhere. The WHO had previously only approved the vaccines made by Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson and Moderna.
With little data released internationally early on, the effectiveness of the various Chinese vaccines has long been uncertain. But the WHO on Friday said it had validated the "safety, efficacy and quality" of the Sinopharm jab. The WHO said the addition of the vaccine had "the potential to rapidly accelerate Covid-19 vaccine access for countries seeking to protect health workers and populations at risk." It is recommending that the vaccine be administered in two doses to those aged 18 and over. A decision is expected in the coming days on another Chinese vaccine developed by Sinovac, while Russia's Sputnik vaccine is under assessment.
With little data released internationally early on, the effectiveness of the various Chinese vaccines has long been uncertain. But the WHO on Friday said it had validated the "safety, efficacy and quality" of the Sinopharm jab. The WHO said the addition of the vaccine had "the potential to rapidly accelerate Covid-19 vaccine access for countries seeking to protect health workers and populations at risk." It is recommending that the vaccine be administered in two doses to those aged 18 and over. A decision is expected in the coming days on another Chinese vaccine developed by Sinovac, while Russia's Sputnik vaccine is under assessment.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
flip-flopping
Responding to a constantly evolving, once-in-a-century lethal pandemic based on new evidence developed by professionals in the field.
FTFY
Re: (Score:1)
Everyone has their own truth (Score:2)
I like the logic where bad numbers are true and good numbers are a lie. But only when applied to others. It seems like an interesting way to experience reality.
So you are some sort of bully that denies other people's truths? :-)
Re: (Score:2)
So you are some sort of bully that denies other people's truths? :-)
Try to get along. Let's all hold hands and sing Kumbaya, Republicans feelings are just as good as objective reality. [wikipedia.org]
An idea for next-time, try to choose somewhere less conspicuous as your safe space.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
NAK
Re: (Score:2)
The efficacy rate of the Chinese vaccine, assuming the numbers can be trusted, is roughly on-par with a typical flu shot. The main problem I see with this is, how on earth can the WHO have any certainty what the efficacy rate is when China drastically under-reports the number of people infected in their country? It follows that their control group may be under-reported as well, which fucks with the numbers.
Re: The WHO? (Score:3)
The numbers likely aren't from groups inside China since they don't have enough cases to test it on. The tests are done elsewhere where there are enough cases and where they don't have control over how they're done or how the results are collected, etc.
Re: The WHO? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Basically concurrence (with the comments on this branch), but I do want to note my comment does not assess the safety of the Chinese vaccine, though I didn't mention the reasons. One is that you might not trust the extra safety data reported from the Chinese side. However if you're a full-blown conspiracy loon you would prefer Door #2 and doubt that the Chinese are using their own vaccine on their own people.
The REAL threat of national vaccines is rather different, but I wager that none of the active racist
Re:The WHO? (Score:5, Insightful)
What's wrong with you? This discussion is for racist and irrational bashing of China.
Bashing the Chinese Communist Party and it leadership is not racist. Matter of fact they are some of the most racist folks on the planet currently. I suppose you haven't noticed their various ethnic cleansing efforts.
Re: (Score:2)
NAK^2
Re: (Score:3)
See Tibet, O Blind One.
Re: (Score:1)
Public masturbation of 703852 (Score:1)
Z^-1
Terrible idea (Score:2)
Dear Slashdot,
Please disable editing of the subject headers once they are created. It would cut down on this bullshit significantly.
You can see for yourself how useful it is. You did it in the very post in which you complained about it.
We'll just end up with spam and troll subjects that we can't get rid of.
Re: The WHO? (Score:2, Insightful)
Public masturbation of 8072074 (Score:2)
Z^-2
Re: (Score:2)
What's wrong with you? This discussion is for racist and irrational bashing of China.
Hey, if it ain't defined as a hate crime, then it's cool. The NEW American way.
My own "insane" response is divided. On the one hand I think WHO has an impossible mission, but WHO has actually handled it surprisingly well. It's almost as though most people, even many of the most insane dictators in the world, understand that diseases are bad. China has always been especially tough to deal with. No secrecy about their love of secrecy. It typically takes years to open any crack wide enough to get a glimpse of what is going on within China, and from that perspective the saddest part might be the sudden and irrational withdrawal of the American medical observers due to the sudden racist whims of "He whose name need not be mentioned." Not sure if anyone could have forced China to respond more quickly, but I'm sure the American observers couldn't do anything about China after they were pulled out (BEFORE Covid-19 appeared). And I even think WHO has always had much less leverage for dealing with China than America.
On the other hand, China's heavy handed but highly effective response makes me extremely suspicious. Why are they so ready for a biological disaster of this kind? Are they just that eager about defense, or do they know something about offense, too? Or just really good at figuring out the #1 priority and focusing on it? 'Nuff said. Or too much?
Oh yeah. I'm supposed to tip my hat to the original story. Mostly surprised that the Chinese vaccine is so inferior. That makes me think the numbers are probably accurate. It's the Sputnik V numbers that I least trust. Most of China's field testing of the efficacy of the Chinese vaccines has been outside of Xi's control. (As regards the safety testing, it's mixed. The international testing is still useful data, but if we can trust China's word for the numbers of Chinese people who have been injected, then we can be quite confident about the safety.)
I must be on fire if the troll's with censor mod points are burning! Requoted above.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"Say it often say it loud and people will believe it. " That playbook was borrowed from Goebbels.
In full, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by ext
His failure? (Score:2)
No they didn't, that was just a heap of Trump bullshit. They reported based on the information they had, and at the time Chinese info was all they had. They probably would have been better keeping quiet with arseholes like Trump around who were always going to use anything they did or said as political propaganda to hide his failures.
His failure to not believe the Chinese Communist Party, followed by his failure to close travel with China? His failure to fast track vaccines? His failure to buy doses speculatively before we knew their efficacy or safety? His failure to get industry to voluntarily manufacture respirators, PPE and other medical necessities?
Sure he asked dumb questions during press briefings, and he is partly responsible for politicizing mask wearing, but in terms of reducing transmission to the US, vaccines, PPE, medic
Re: (Score:2)
Don't make me laugh.
Taiwan, Singapore, Korea (South) successfully shut it down DESPITE advices from WHO, not because of them.
North Korea kills people who are infected, so they don't really count.
They shut their borders with China early and made masks mandatory while WHO was still doing this:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30... [cnn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, please read further. I see that you're conveniently ignoring stupid WHO advices. Let me spell it out for you.
WHO advises border should remain open:
https://www.reuters.com/articl... [reuters.com]
WHO advises that masks are not necessary:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30... [cnn.com]
Countries like Singapore and Taiwan in particular, wisely did NOT take WHO advice and acted against them early on. Hence their successful fight against the virus.
Remember this? (Score:2)
Senior WHO official dodges questions about Taiwan’s WHO membership; praises China.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, you mean what the Communists said early in the pandemic?
> I bet you're one of those morons who thinks
> "we have no evidence so far of person to person spread" means
> "it can't spread person to person"
Moron - oh you mean Tedros@WHO? This moron took Communist advices too literally. Thus making recommendations that are later proved to be obviously corrupted:
WHO recommends against closing borders:
https://www.reuters.com/articl... [reuters.com]
WHO recommends not to wear masks:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30... [cnn.com]
.
Re: (Score:2)
https://apnews.com/article/chi... [apnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Excellent. There's nothing worse than trusting someone who made up their mind once and then sticks to their belief even when new information becomes available. It's good to see you supporting the WHO who take a scientific approach to things and provide advice based on the best available information of the day.
Can you imagine if we instead tried to treat this virus with leather plague suits an herbs? Thank god for flip-flops, both the action of scientists as well as the things we put on our feet.
Re: The WHO? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Look, I'm actually very much an internationalist, and a firm believer in the UN and such, but the OP isn't wrong, and it really pained me to have to agree with Trump (I guess a broken clock is right twice a day and all that), but the WHO is one organisation that's an absolute farce.
During the Swine flu outbreak over a decade ago their head at the time said "It could spell the end of the human race" - absurd hyperbole if there ever was, no it wouldn't, people with natural immunity will always survive.
At the
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
which explains why it took so long to approve the Chinese vaccine, right?
Yep, they had to wait until the check cleared...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
With the director of said organization being bought, paid for,
Citation needed. And try link to someone credible (and no the former president of the united states of America doesn't count).
Re:Hope they saw the real data (Score:4, Funny)
Lets ignore the 4 years where they were run by a lysol-promoting, chloroquine-shilling somebody.
You forgot cat deworming medication, UV light up the keister, and bleach cocktails.
Mod me to Hell, butthurt Trumpies, see if I care. I have karma to burn.
Re: Hope they saw the real data (Score:2)
Yeah...nevermind the mrna vaccines that Saint Fauci doubted would even be starting phase 3 trials by now.
Let's heap praise on the people who weld their own citizens into their houses and black-bag anyone off the street for having the sniffles.
Re: Hope they saw the real data (Score:2)
I'm not sure what you're talking about, but it certainly worked.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's heap praise on the people who weld their own citizens into their houses and black-bag anyone off the street for having the sniffles.
s/heap praise/paean
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
but a lot of bad reactions could be swept under the rug in the Chinese system.
True, but millions of people have received the vaccine in other countries, including Indonesia, Turkey, Brazil, and the Philippines.
And absolutely no way of knowing if their efficacy numbers are accurate or wholesale fabrication.
Other countries have reported efficacy numbers varying between 60% and 90%.
Re: Hope they saw the real data (Score:5, Informative)
Depends on who got what and when. Chile uses one of the Chinese inactivated virus vaccines and they're seeing 50%.
Where the Chinese system can fall down hard is vaccine process control. A couple years ago they were caught giving fake vaccines to their own children on account of whoever ran a particular factory realized he could make a buck packaging saline and labelling it "vaccine."
Make a buck...get vials out the door to meet a diplomatic prestige requirement from the ccp...same thing. There's incentive to cheat and zero expectation of consequences.
Could be the 75% or whatever number is the real efficacy for the real vaccine as measured by a real phase 3 trial. Could also be that you only have a 2/3 chance of opening a vial and having real vaccine in it.
Re: (Score:2)
You can bet the Chinese people who managed to get public exposure got a bullet in the head. The CCP doesn't care just as long as they get paid off and no one knows about it.
Re: Hope they saw the real data (Score:2)
No, her net worth is zero, she's barred from corporate leadership anywhere for ten years, and she's about to go on trial for wire fraud.
In China it's even odds she catches a bullet or just doesn't get caught at all.
Re: Are you a moron? (Score:2)
Nearly all her wealth was in theranos shares. They're worth jack shit now.
Re: (Score:2)
This fake vaccine thing in China happened in 2016, after which they cracked down on it... so hard it happened AGAIN in 2018.
Re: (Score:2)
>Other countries have reported efficacy numbers varying between 60% and 90%.
Isn't there a problem that those countries don't have the medical infrastructure and experience to properly evaluate the data? That Chile, who does have the infrastructure and experience, is citing rather low number?
Re: (Score:2)
It's possible that efficacy might be linked to ethnicity or the prevalence of other diseases in those countries. We know that COVID-19 affects Asian people (that is people from South Asia, e.g. India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) worse than it affects white people, based on data from the UK.
Re: Does it even work? Ask Seychelles (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Seychelles is using Sinovac, the other Chinese vaccine.
Some quick info (Score:5, Insightful)
From the WHO website:
As of 18 February 2021, at least seven different vaccines across three platforms have been rolled out in countries. Vulnerable populations in all countries are the highest priority for vaccination. At the same time, more than 200 additional vaccine candidates are in development, of which more than 60 are in clinical development.
WHO has also listed the Pfizer/BioNTech, Astrazeneca-SK Bio, Serum Institute of India, Janssen and Moderna vaccines for emergency use.
Over 200 vaccine candidates in development.
Nice.
The awesome results of non-big-pharma (Score:2, Insightful)
So now that an alternative to the USA's big pharma is being rolled out, it gives people an ability to 'vote with their feet'. Only I've read that test results in Chile are that Sinovac is only SIXTEEN percent effective in the first dose, and that full vacination only brings it up to the SIXTIES percent range, not seventies.
Yeah, I think most people, who have a choice anyway, are going to want to stick to big-pharma's solutions rather than run out for Sinovac or Sputnik V. I mean look, even non-US-backed (Ox
Re: The awesome results of non-big-pharma (Score:5, Informative)
What you call the USA vaccine are developed in Germany (BioNTech), Netherlands(Johnson and Johnson).
Only Moderna is a real US vaccine, and the CEO is French.
Re: (Score:1)
What I call the USA vaccines are the ones made in no small part with USA money and especially ones currently approved for use in the USA (basically the three everyone in the USA is familiar with). All of which are most definitely produced by what people would call Big Pharma.
I admit that AstraZenica also was part of Operation Warp Speed (I was trying to avoid mentioning to avoid where that discussion could lead) but considering the UK's apparent preference for that one, and that some developing countries ar
US gov't speculatively bought doses (Score:3)
What I call the USA vaccines are the ones made in no small part with USA money ...
You mean when the US gov't speculatively bought doses before safety and efficacy were known. To get the doses in the field as soon as possible.
Re: (Score:2)
As did most other well-off countries because it was the only sensible thing to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Which vaccines were those? The US government committed to buying vaccines that received approval: ie. those with proven safety and efficacy.
Re: (Score:2)
Moderna wasn't Big Pharma before 2020. They never got any other drug approved. They are an outlier.
Johnson&Jonhons is Big Pharma, but again, it's their first approved vaccine.
Re:ivermectin is better than Sino (Score:4, Informative)
Think 250-300 mcg/kg ivermectin at 7-14 day intervals, not to mention vitamin C and D3 options.
ivmmeta.com
Both Sino vaccines are relatively low efficacy.
Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19 https://www.fda.gov/consumers/... [fda.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
There are three vaccines authorized for emergency use by the FDA https://www.fda.gov/emergency-... [fda.gov] https://www.fda.gov/emergency-... [fda.gov] https://www.fda.gov/emergency-... [fda.gov]
peer reviewed results (Score:5, Insightful)
Where are the peer reviewed results?
Re: peer reviewed results (Score:2)
Last year there was a report from a telecom data analysis group that approximately 21 million cell phones went dead in China.
Thatâ(TM)s a significant number as one canâ(TM)t function in China with a CCP approved tracking device.
Speculation of course that their real death toll was in millions not thousands.
But hey, itâ(TM)s China.
Don't need a study when everyone in trial (Score:2)
Where are the peer reviewed results?
You don't really need peer reviewed studies when half the nation (and counting) participates in the vaccine trials. Statistics is really for when you examine a (hopefully) representative sample, not so much nearly the entire population.
And yes I am part of that trial. By the time my age bracket qualified we had a sufficient amount of "anecdotal" data (hundred+ million vaccinated, deaths literally 1 in a million). That's better odds than catching covid and surviving.
Re: (Score:2)
well good then, why can't day synthethise what they observed from their million vaccinated and put that into a peer-reviewed journal?
Half of which nation by the way? Definitely not China.
What is the efficacy rate? And no, I do not trust an efficacy rate from a marketing pamphlet. If their phase 3 study is valid, they should be able to publish it.
Re: (Score:2)
The Lancet. https://www.thelancet.com/jour... [thelancet.com]
There was also the paper "evelopment of an inactivated vaccine Candidate, BBIBp-CorV, with potent protection against SARS- COV-2" published in Cell, but it doesn't seem to be online.
Re: (Score:2)
Good start but this is phase 1/2. Other vaccine makers have published phase 3 results in peer-reviewed journals.
Re: (Score:2)
This. Not having Peer-reviewed/scrutinized Phase 3 results basically says "well it is probably safe, but not sure whether's it's effective at all, please be my guinea pig".
Re: (Score:2)
Multiple countries are using this vaccine, yes. But what's the efficiency? Maybe it's only 40 or 50%. How many blood clots? Is it 1 per 50 000? We don't know.
There is a lack of transparency problem from these Chinese companies.
Stay away. Stay WELL away. (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know much about Sinopharm, but another Chinese vaccine "Coronavac" from the company Sinovac, is widely believed to be dangerous AND low in efficacy:
Low efficacy in Brazil study (50% - almost like flipping a coin)
https://www.bbc.com/news/world... [bbc.com]
Large Coronavac rollout in Chile...and it did not help
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/1... [cnbc.com]
Deaths after receiving Coronavac shots
https://in.news.yahoo.com/covi... [yahoo.com]
Note: I still believe getting vaccinated is the right thing to do - just be selective and say NO to low quality vaccines with half-assed phase 3 data and questionable safety.
Re: Stay away. Stay WELL away. (Score:2)
I would not touch a Chinese vaccine. The government controls all major Chinese companies, and the communist bandits have a well established record for obfuscation.
China as a country is neither a friend nor partner. The less business we do with that murderous regime the better.
Re: (Score:3)
If you read the BBC article claiming 50% efficacy you will see that actually it was about 76% effective at preventing severe symptoms. As for safety, more people have died taking the AstraZenica vaccine due to blood clots. So if you think that is "questionable safety" you had better not take AZ or J&J either.
While less than ideal the fact that it is available in large quantities to developing nations makes it very valuable. China has exported more doses than anyone else (as well as vaccinating hundreds
Re: Stay away. Stay WELL away. (Score:2)
Unlike Coronavac, AZ submitted complete phase 3 trial result to WHO a while ago.
If you ask me, I'd stay away from all 3 you mentioned. J&J, AZ and anything from Sinovac - but gun to my head, AZ over Coronavac, easy choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Learn how to read. I hope you're not stupid enough to understand that the context is "given you have a choice".
Having a choice is a privilege. Sometimes it is an unearned privilege - just like how China quietly collected and hogged all the world's PPE February last year.
By the way - you may want to learn that people who have a choice between Sinovac/Coronavac vs others, e.g. in a place like Hong Kong, all-informed residents, including its top epidemiologist, overwhelmingly choose Pfizer over Sinovac/Coro
Re: (Score:2)
My point is that the other is not just "a little bit" better. They're worlds better. I pity countries who don't have a choice and would have to take whatever they can. It doesn't change the fact that if they could, they would probably leave Sinovac behind.
Sinovac is a good choice only if the next best alternative is "no vaccine".
Re: Stay away. Stay WELL away. (Score:1)
The problem obviously lies with Western medicine which is needlessly complex, dangerous and ineffective. Chinese traditional medicine cured COVID in China using highly effective compounds sourced from the local zoo.
Re: (Score:2)
A 50% efficacy is better than 0%. Given the choice of not having a vaccine at all, and getting this one in question I'm sure the latter is a good (though not the most cost effective if another vaccine needs to be administered later when available) to dealing with a pandemic.
As for your link to deaths, we can literally auto generate that article now. Here's a template: "Another ${Country} citizen has died after receiveing the ${COVIDVaccineName} vaccine". Literally every one of these vaccines has lead to dea
Re: (Score:2)
Hell I live in Canada and in about a week will have access to Pfizer but got the AZ 2 weeks ago.
Why? Why not. People over 50 were playing vaccine bingo and canceling AZ apts if they got access to Pfizer. I decided that because it is being made available to me now I would take it now. If it means someone else gets access to Pfizer instead that's ok.
Regarding the topic I am sure Trudeau will love this since he seems to have an infatuation with the CCP (the liberal party seems to have gone that way since Chret
Re: (Score:2)
> If you let perfect be the enemy of good enough then you won't defeat a pandemic.
I never let perfect be the enemy of the good, in this case I'm afraid we're actually looking at the good vs the mediocre.
Re: (Score:2)
Philippine President Asks China To Take Back Donated Sinopharm Vaccines - Reports
https://www.bbc.com/news/world... [bbc.com]
Re: Stay away. Stay WELL away. (Score:2)
you again? lol :)
you may want to read more before blindly accepting what CCP mouthpieces feed you.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course I did. I did read your link, too. However, I dug way deeper and try to understand what "trending down" mean, and learnt that this "trending down" is extremely loosely-defined.
Go to bing.com/covid and learn what a real "tread down" actually look like, for countries with access to better vaccines like UK.
Re: Stay away. Stay WELL away...Pfizer/Moderna/AZ (Score:2)
Nice try AC. Come back when you learn what Phase 3 means.
and don't forget to drink more CCP koolaid while your at it.
China disappears people who speak out aagainst (Score:2)
their shitty vaccines. [hrw.org]
Sometimes the veil slips too. [bbc.com]
Gao Fu, head of the Chinese Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, on Saturday said at a conference the current vaccines "don't have very high rates of protection".
...
Mr Gao's original and later comments have been largely unreported by Chinese media.
His original comments however, attracted some criticism on social media site Weibo, with commenters suggesting that he should "stop talking".
Re: (Score:2)
A worthless vacine (Score:1)
Dangerous (Score:2)