Coronavirus 2019-2020 thread (no unsubstantiated rumours!)

H

Heliox

Junior Member
Registered Member
DarkStar said:
Singapore is experiencing a rise in COVID cases despite over 70% vaccinated
View attachment 77195

Key thing is hospitalisations, are singapore experiencing an overwhelmed hospital system?
Click to expand...

Hardly (for the moment)

The National Centre for Infectious Diseases (NCID) is the premier, purpose built, facilty for this purpose. It alone has 35 ICU beds. Current Covid stats are 12 in ICU and 825 hospitalised out of 5,538 active cases.

That's 12 out of 35 in NCID. The ministry has announced in a recent presser that it has the ability to surge up to 1,000 ICU rooms in support of Covid related hospitalisations but is confidant that it will not be required to.

Re: The vaccination rate and current outbreak. Yeah, the gov is testing the waters on transition from a pandemic footing (trying to achieve zero cases) to an endemic footing. Hence the current low(er) level of effort to contain this outbreak. See the small blip and recovery prior to this steep climb? That was the last major effort to curb the spread. Probably taking a wait-and-see approach to the current steep rise to see how the infrastructure copes and how the public responds to this changed stance.

We've just implemented reciprocal vaccinated, quarantine-free travel with Germany and are likely to follow them in reporting hospitalisation as opposed to case counts. Welcome to the new normal.
 
Phead128

Phead128

Captain
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
taxiya said:
You presented two alternatives:
  1. vaccinated with 0.026% chance of myocarditis . WITHOUT infected.
  2. un-vaccinated and infected with 0.17% chance of myocarditis.
But I see many more possibilities. Here is my further breakdown of the two, and the ultimate chance of getting myocarditis at the end of them.
  1. vaccinated
    1. NOT infected by COVID. 0.026%
    2. Infected by COVID due to breakthrough infection. This chance is pretty high right now. What is the chance of still getting myocarditis? Let's say it is A% The breakthrough chance is B%. So the final chance is 0.026% + B%*A%
  2. un-vaccinated
    1. Without precautionary measures. X% chance to get infected by COVID that leads to 0.17% chance of myocarditis. X%*0.17%
    2. With precautionary measures (no party, no travel, face mask etc.). Y% chance to get infected by COVID to begin with. Y%*0.17%
    3. Zero case policy by the state. Z% chance for me to get infected. Z%*0.17%
In my opinion, Z% could be the lowest, almost down to zero. For me it is the best choice.

Of course I live in Europe, so 2.3 is not an option. 2.2 may be better than 1.1 in the final chance of sickness.

You sound very much like what the health authority in Europe was saying at the time when AZ was shunned that "the benefit of AZ outweighs its risk". This line of argument does NOT take into consideration of perceived efficacy of individual's social behavior and personal measures. But people make their choice with this consideration in mind. That is why the government wasn't convincing people and failed. You can see the failure that so many AZ vaccines being expired and wasted together with money.

Let me share my own experience and possible choice. I am a person against the "anti-vaccination" group and conspiracy theory. But I don't blindly buy the BS from incompetent politicians or the money thirsty enterprises.

I have taken two does of BioNtech. At the time of vaccination, I have determined that if I was offered AZ, I would turn that down and rely on my own precautionary measures because I am confident that these measures are adequate to reduce my chance of anything than the risk of AZ. That decision was also based on the efficacy of BioNtech at the time against pre-Delta variants.

Now with the much lower efficacy of BioNtech against Delta, the risk of side effect (in my personal calculation) is exceeding the risk of getting infected by COVID by my own precautionary measures.

Now there is an ongoing round of booster shot of BioNtech where I live. I am not offered because I am not in the risk group. But even if the general public is offered some months later, I will take decision based on new data of the efficacy on the new variant prevalent at the time. I may or may not take the vaccine.
Click to expand...

I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate your concern.

The answer to your ideal option 2.3 scenario (e.g. "no vaccination + no COVID alternative") was already addressed was in a previous post a few pages back. It is repeated below with clarifications, see #1 bullet point with citation:

  1. 0.009% risk of myocarditis among UN-vaccinated without COVID. (
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
    ) (Note: this is baseline risk in general population)
  2. 3.24X higher risk or 0.026% risk of myocarditis among vaccinated without COVID
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
  3. ??? risk of myocarditis among vaccinated with COVID.
  4. 18.28X higher risk or 0.17% risk of myocarditis among UN-vaccinated infected with COVID.
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The #1 bullet is baseline risk in general population without COVID and no vaccination, which answer you question about option 2.3 scenario. It's not zero, but it close to zero. If you think 0.009% is basically zero, then I can argue 3.24X higher risk of vaccine-related myocarditis is also close to zero, since 324% of a tiny number is still a tiny number.

In epidemiology, we say there is a statistically significant difference in the risk of myocarditis, but it might not be clinically meaningful difference because these numbers are so tiny that they don't make a real difference in the real world. Even myocarditis among UN-vaccinated with COVID is pretty damn small at 0.17%.
solarz said:
I said you're selling those vaccines ON HERE.

There are legitimate concerns about the safety of pfizer, moderna, and AZ, yet you keep making the false argument that covid is more dangerous.
Click to expand...

To be fair, I already addressed the "No vaccination with No COVID" scenario a few posts back. See first #1 bullet point.
  1. 0.009% risk of myocarditis among UN-vaccinated without COVID. (
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
    ) (Note: this is baseline risk in general population)
  2. 3.24X higher risk or 0.026% risk of myocarditis among vaccinated without COVID
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
  3. 18.28X higher risk or 0.17% risk of myocarditis among UN-vaccinated infected with COVID.
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
You are free to critique the numbers. They show a non-zero risk of myocarditis even for UN-vaccinated and no COVID scenario. Yes, vaccines offer statistically significantly higher risk, and COVID offers even more risk, but overall, these numbers are pretty damn small, so they aren't really clinically meaningful difference in grand scheme of things. Look how tiny these numbers are.
 
Last edited:
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
Phead128 said:
To be fair, I already addressed the "No vaccination with No COVID" scenario a few posts back. See first #1 bullet point.
  1. 0.009% risk of myocarditis among UN-vaccinated without COVID. (
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
    ) (Note: this is baseline risk in general population)
  2. 3.24X higher risk or 0.026% risk of myocarditis among vaccinated without COVID
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
  3. 18.28X higher risk or 0.17% risk of myocarditis among UN-vaccinated infected with COVID.
    Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
You are free to critique the numbers. They show a non-zero risk of myocarditis even for UN-vaccinated and no COVID scenario. Yes, vaccines offer statistically significantly higher risk, and COVID offers even more risk, but overall, these numbers are pretty damn small, so they aren't really clinically meaningful difference in grand scheme of things. Look how tiny these numbers are.
Click to expand...

You missed a critical aspect here:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
CDC researchers examined March 2020 through January 2021 data from Premier Healthcare Database Special COVID-19 Release, a U.S. hospital-based administrative database of healthcare encounters from more than 900 hospitals.

Eight things to know:
1. Myocarditis inpatient encounters were 42.3 percent higher in 2020 (4,560) than in 2019 (3,205).

2. The risk for myocarditis was 0.146 percent among COVID-19 patients and 0.009 percent among patients who were not diagnosed with COVID-19.
Click to expand...

The article isn't talking about the general population, it's talking about people who went to a hospital between March 2020 and January 2021. AKA during the height of the pandemic.

Your 0.009% figure is NOT a baseline risk for general population.

This article here estimates cases of myocarditis to be 10-20 cases per 100,000 persons, or about 0.0001% to 0.0002%:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This is 45-90 times less likely than your 0.009% figure. Which means that a risk of 0.026% of myocarditits from the pfizer vaccine is 130-260 times higher than no vaccination and no covid!

In any case, if you get covid, you probably have other things to worry about than just myocarditis! The actual risk calculation should be:

Risk of severe adverse reaction from vaccine

VS

(Risk of of getting covid) * (Risk of severe to critical symptoms from covid)

Covid has approximately 20% chance of severe to critical symptoms. If we assume 0.026% to be the risk of severe adverse reaction from pfizer, then 0.13% is your threshold. If you estimate your chance of getting covid to be higher than 0.13%, then you should get the pfizer shot. If you estimate your chance of getting covid to be lower than 0.13%, then you logically shouldn't get the pfizer shot.
 
Last edited:
Quickie

Quickie

Colonel
gadgetcool5 said:
What percentage of the new cases are vaccinated? That's what I'm curious about.
Click to expand...

Tyler said:
How many are local Singaporeans and how many are Indians on work permit?
Click to expand...

The early outbreak was mostly among the immigrant workers. The current rise in cases in Singapore is in the general population. There was a news report posted here previously saying that around 40% of the infected cases were fully vaccinated.
 
Strangelove

Strangelove

Colonel
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China's first production base for an mRNA vaccine against COVID-19, which uses domestically produced core raw materials and equipment, is expected to be put into use in October. Experts said that this proves China has grasped core mRNA vaccine technology, and it will boost the country's mass vaccination drive.

Jointly developed by the Academy of Military Medical Sciences, Suzhou Abogen and Yunnan Walvax Biotechnology Co, the mRNA vaccine called ARCoVax is expected to go into mass production in the base in Yuxi, Southwest China's Yunnan Province next month.

With an investment of 520 million yuan ($80 million), the plant, China's first production base for mRNA vaccine, has the capacity to produce 200 million doses annually.

Compared with mRNA vaccines developed by the US and Germany, the domestic mRNA vaccine is much safer as the selection of the vaccine antigen target is more precise and the neutralizing antibodies induced are higher, media reports said.

The storage cost of this vaccine is lower than those from overseas as it adopts a single injection in one package and could be stored at room temperature for a week or at 4 C for a long time, making it easier to use.

These factors make this domestic ARCoVax product stand out from Western-dominated mRNA vaccines made by pharmaceutical giants Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, which require much lower temperatures and more rigorous temperature controls, said experts.

The vaccine will be able to meet demand once it is put into production, as core raw materials and equipment for the Chinese mRNA vaccines have been made domestically.

A Beijing-based immunologist told the Global Times on Thursday that the domestically produced mRNA vaccine demonstrates China's huge improvements in mRNA technology and the country's leading position in biotechnology.

Such technology could be used in other biomedical fields such as oncotherapy and gene defect treatment, the immunologist said.

On Thursday, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed that domestic vaccine makers of both the mRNA and adenovirus types have launched research and development into how their vaccines could better deal with variants such as Delta and Beta.

ARCoVax has been approved to initiate its late-stage clinical trials in Mexico and Indonesia by local health authorities, Yunnan Walvax Biotechnology Co announced on August 31.

China's vaccine options will be enriched with the mixed use of different types - inactivated, mRNA or adenovirus, experts noted.

The immunologist believed the first mRNA vaccine against COVID-19 will boost the country's mass vaccination drive as the possibility of China using an mRNA vaccine as a booster shot cannot be ruled out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top