Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The mRNA technology has not been widely tested, and was released in a rush. When I say danger I mean that.
Yes I know in theory it is safe, just like GMO. Personally I have no problem with GMO but many people have concerns.
The mRNA vaccine basic science has been under development for about ten years. The biggest issue that had to be solved was the composition of the lipid envelope, which was finally accomplished. That is why it was possible to generate the vaccine as soon as the RNA sequence of the coronavirus was published.
All of the normal vaccine testing was done. Some studies were done in parallel rather than sequentially, such as animal studies concurrent with the preliminary human trials rather than before them. The amount of money available made it possible to do very large Phase 3 trials. The concept that the trials were "rushed" and that makes the vaccines dangerous is just not true.
There is no "GMO" either. There is no modification of the genetics of the person receiving the vaccine.
"The fact that these vaccines could be rapidly developed within these last 10 months rests on more than four decades of study of mRNA. This success story begins with Institute Professor Phillip A. Sharp’s discovery of split genes and spliced RNA that took place at MIT in the 1970s — a discovery that would earn him the 1993 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine."
Obviously you confused healthcare for ordinary people with healthcare research.
China has a huge population so it cannot provide the service with the same quality as in western countries.
However, that does not mean they cannot develop top research and treat the patients better. Top journals often have articles from China too.
Quality of health services has nothing to do with population size.
Quote:
Do you know the scientist at Biogen went back to China from Boston to get treated, after hospitals in Boston refused to take her? (And she hid the fact that she was infected, and was criticized in China.) https://www.boston.com/news/local-ne...stigated-china
How is that relevant?
Quote:
Even if we focus on doctors in hospitals, most Chinese doctors see far more patients than doctors in the US on average. Often times they are more experienced.
That only means the services each patient receives is very poor.
Quote:
Yes he did. His hospital does not force workers to take it. In fact he already waited for a while.
I meant he didn't have a choice between vaccines developed by the west and vaccines developed by China. If PRC people were presented the choice between Western vaccine and Chinese vaccine, they would pick the former. It is a well-known fact that PRC people love bashing the West and Japan, but would always pick Western and Japanese products over local products if given the option.
If China's vaccine is really so trustworthy, how come only poor countries are buying it? Every developed country has refused Chinese and Russian vaccine even though the majority of them are completely ravaged by the pandemic and the infection rate and death rate are even worse than ever.
Add this to the poor quality and misbranded respirators and ventilators China sent out last year. Even when they reverse engineer (i.e. steal) medical technology, they still can't get it right:
These PRC defenders have no defense so the strategy always seems to be misdirection ("but, but, this other thing is happening..."). It's not meant to be relevant, it's meant to change the conversation.
China is a developing country so I don't understand the point of comparing Chinas health care or vaccines with the richest countries in the world. Of course rich countries will do better.
However, if Russia or China didn't produce any vaccine like most developing countries, then they would probably have to wait till 2022 before they could start large scale vaccination. That is not in Russia or Chinas interest.
The same applies to the countries who would not have access to vaccines if China didn't produce any.
The mRNA vaccine basic science has been under development for about ten years. The biggest issue that had to be solved was the composition of the lipid envelope, which was finally accomplished. That is why it was possible to generate the vaccine as soon as the RNA sequence of the coronavirus was published.
All of the normal vaccine testing was done. Some studies were done in parallel rather than sequentially, such as animal studies concurrent with the preliminary human trials rather than before them. The amount of money available made it possible to do very large Phase 3 trials. The concept that the trials were "rushed" and that makes the vaccines dangerous is just not true.
There is no "GMO" either. There is no modification of the genetics of the person receiving the vaccine.
"The fact that these vaccines could be rapidly developed within these last 10 months rests on more than four decades of study of mRNA. This success story begins with Institute Professor Phillip A. Sharp’s discovery of split genes and spliced RNA that took place at MIT in the 1970s — a discovery that would earn him the 1993 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine."
When I say GMO, I used an analogy. I didn't say the vaccine uses GMO.
Quality of health services has nothing to do with population size.
You still don't understand the difference between healthcare research and healthcare service.
The latter depends on lots of things, not just science and technology.
Also, when people talk about the service, they usually focus on how comfortable they feel in the process, not just the actual treatment he can receive.
e.g. I would not feel good in a relatively crowded hospital, sharing a room with some other patients. However, that does not mean the treatment I receive is necessarily bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greysholic
How is that relevant?
Isn't it obvious? She has a PhD degree and worked for a top US biotech company. However she decided to go back to China because she believed she can get adequate treatment there, not in Boston.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greysholic
That only means the services each patient receives is very poor.
That also means a doctor gains more experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greysholic
I meant he didn't have a choice between vaccines developed by the west and vaccines developed by China. If PRC people were presented the choice between Western vaccine and Chinese vaccine, they would pick the former. It is a well-known fact that PRC people love bashing the West and Japan, but would always pick Western and Japanese products over local products if given the option.
China has imported vaccines too. You didn't know that? China just signed a bill with BioNTech last month, to import 100 million vaccines in total. Nobody in China, including the government, says we must use domestic products.
And no, Chinese people do not "always" pick western and Japanese products for everything. They know China makes "some categories" of products the best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greysholic
If China's vaccine is really so trustworthy, how come only poor countries are buying it? Every developed country has refused Chinese and Russian vaccine even though the majority of them are completely ravaged by the pandemic and the infection rate and death rate are even worse than ever.
Because westerners are often too arrogant to adopt anything from China (or non-western country). If you lived in the west you should know that.
Add this to the poor quality and misbranded respirators and ventilators China sent out last year. Even when they reverse engineer (i.e. steal) medical technology, they still can't get it right:
These PRC defenders have no defense so the strategy always seems to be misdirection ("but, but, this other thing is happening..."). It's not meant to be relevant, it's meant to change the conversation.
You think respirators and ventilators are hi-tech? LMAO
You get what you pay for. There are high quality and low quality types for you to choose.
China is a developing country so I don't understand the point of comparing Chinas health care or vaccines with the richest countries in the world. Of course rich countries will do better.
However, if Russia or China didn't produce any vaccine like most developing countries, then they would probably have to wait till 2022 before they could start large scale vaccination. That is not in Russia or Chinas interest.
The same applies to the countries who would not have access to vaccines if China didn't produce any.
slightly off topic:
When I first read "China a developing country" I was like WHAT, NO WAY. But the WTO indeed does classify them as a developing country. Turns out WTO does not really define what is a developing country or not. Certainly China used to be, but now they are either the second or first largest economy in the world, depending on who you ask. Apparently China wants to keep that categorization to get the special benefits from WTO from that status. China playing games again. They really haven't been a "developing country" for at least a decade.
There's no way to know whether efficacy rates are accurate for all vaccines because you can get infected after the first mRNA shot. They're obviously not comparable. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines didn't test on high risk groups where the risk of severe side effects are higher. They also only counted subjects who reported symptoms and tested positive. You don't know how many people will test positive and be asymptomatic after the first shot..
The Sinovac vaccine was only tested on medical workers in Brazil who are under constant exposure to the virus. You would expect them to test positive. They also counted asymptomatic cases. Remember 70 percent of all people who test positive are asymptomatic.
Given that they all took shortcuts, of which I expressed doubts about the efficacy rates, the main benefit is whether the vaccine can protect you from being hospitalized. I would still take the vaccine since the odds are about 5% for middle-aged and 20% for the elderly.
China is a developing country so I don't understand the point of comparing Chinas health care or vaccines with the richest countries in the world. Of course rich countries will do better.
Why not? These are vaccines for the same virus. Of course people would compare them.
I seriously doubt you would get the Chinese vaccine for yourself and your family. You would say you would here to not lose face, but you would still get vaccines developed by the West in the end.
Quote:
However, if Russia or China didn't produce any vaccine like most developing countries, then they would probably have to wait till 2022 before they could start large scale vaccination. That is not in Russia or Chinas interest.
The same applies to the countries who would not have access to vaccines if China didn't produce any.
What’s the point of getting vaccinated when the vaccine is useless?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
