Coronavirus 2019-2020 thread (no unsubstantiated rumours!)

[vesicles]

Guys, the concept that a Chinese vaccine is superior to a Western one is as biased as the concept that a western vaccine is superior to a Chinese one. Don't make the same mistakes that politicians have been making lately. Whatever the results are, let the experts deal with it. Just sit back and let the process do its own work. We will find out soon.

I am not familiar with how the Chinese vaccines will be evaluated, but I am very familiar with how Western medicines/vaccines are typically evaluated. All their data will be peer-reviewed. I have been participating in the peer-review process for the past 20 years. In the first 15 years, I had been on the receiving end, with my manuscripts being reviewed by my peer. For the past 5-6 years, in addition to getting my own manuscripts peer-reviewed, I have been reviewing almost 10 manuscripts per year for many reputable journals, including Science, Nature and PNAS. In fact, I have reviewed a handful of Coronavirus studies in the past few months. I know the process and I respect the process. It's as transparent as my limited brain power can manage to think of. Is it perfect? No, it's not. Absolutely not! But I can't think of another more fair and transparent way to do this kind of thing.

Since all the Chinese vaccines are under clinical trials abroad, I would imagine they are going through the exact same process. So when you question the transparency and/or all the various supposedly under-the-table stuff, just remember that all the Chinese and western vaccines are probably evaluated by the same people in the same system.

Don't equate media with scientists. Ignore what the media is saying. They can say whatever they want to say, but they can't influence data. People who are actually doing the work are the scientists. And the people who will be reviewing these data will be scientists too. Just because you don't trust the media, it doesn't mean the scientists are also bad. It's time to leave the politics aside. You should respect science and respect the experts. This is a matter of science and facts, not a matter of opinion.

 

[KYli]

Pfizer is asking the FDA to approve the vaccine after only 2 months of second dose injection. It is pretty clear all vaccines and the process to approve vaccines have been cutting corner. Even though scientists and experts claim that it is safe. But it is still reasonable to question if those vaccines are actually safe. It is undeniable that China, WHO, and CDC(most reputed agency for pandemic) all made many wrong calls such as face masks, airborne or not airborne, and the summer season could stop the virus etc. Just think how long it took for CDC to acknowledge its mistake regarding face masks which call into question the independent of CDC from political and business influence. Just think how the CDC test kit failed at beginning that caused weeks of delay to detect the virus and provide prevention.

I am not saying Russia and China approving their vaccines for emergency uses are not risky but their actions have been strongly criticized by the media. On the other hand, people and the media have been singing praise and only praise for Pfizer and many Western vaccines. But it is obvious Pfizer released the early result of the clinical trial to secure more contracts. And then Moderna also did the same. I think both Chinese and Western vaccines should be scrutinized as much as possible. Because we all know the consequences if those vaccines failed or caused major side effect.

 

[vesicles]

Pfizer is asking the FDA to approve the vaccine after only 2 months of second dose injection. It is pretty clear all vaccines and the process to approve vaccines have been cutting corner. Even though scientists and experts claim that it is safe. But it is still reasonable to question if those vaccines are actually safe. It is undeniable that China, WHO, and CDC(most reputed agency for pandemic) all made many wrong calls such as face masks, airborne or not airborne, and the summer season could stop the virus etc. Just think how long it took for CDC to acknowledge its mistake regarding face masks which call into question the independent of CDC from political and business influence. Just think how the CDC test kit failed at beginning that caused weeks of delay to detect the virus and provide prevention.

I am not saying Russia and China approving their vaccines for emergency uses are not risky but their actions have been strongly criticized by the media. On the other hand, people and the media have been singing praise and only praise for Pfizer and many Western vaccines. But it is obvious Pfizer released the early result of the clinical trial to secure more contracts. And then Moderna also did the same. I think both Chinese and Western vaccines should be scrutinized as much as possible. Because we all know the consequences if those vaccines failed or caused major side effect.

The beauty of this whole process is to evaluate the data in the most unbiased manner. If it works, it shall pass. If it doesn’t work, it won’t pass. I’m not saying which one is better. All I’m saying is that you need to let the system work it out. The scientific peer review process is the most unbiased process on this planet. It is not perfect as it involves human beings. Any process that involves human beings is prone to all kinds of issues. But this is as unbiased as it can be.

When facing a new crisis, everyone has made mistakes. After all, we are all humans. How did they correct them? How did the Chinese eventually figure out the virus can actually transmit from human to human? Because we have the right system, which allows us to catch mistakes and correct them. This system has allowed us to stand up and challenge the president of the United States when he says stupid things. The system has also allowed us to sound our doubts when some of our colleagues say weird stuff, like hydroxychloroquine stuff. You think we are going to cave in because certain newspapers have said some good words about some company?

 

[KYli]

The beauty of this whole process is to evaluate the data in the most unbiased manner. If it works, it shall pass. If it doesn’t work, it won’t pass. I’m not saying which one is better. All I’m saying is that you need to let the system work it out.

When facing a new crisis, everyone has made mistakes. After all, we are all humans. How did they correct them? How did the Chinese eventually figure out the virus can actually transmit from human to human? Because we have the right system, which allows us to catch mistakes and correct them. This system has allowed us to stand up and challenge the president of the United States when he says stupid things. The system has also allowed us to sound our doubts when some of our colleagues say weird stuff, like hydroxychloroquine stuff. You think we are going to cave in because certain newspapers have said some good words about some company?

I don't think you would be but at the same time I have witnessed many people that have great integrity and very professional such as Fauci were forced to cave under pressure and said a lot of things that he shouldn't have said that are not good for the pandemic.

 

[j17wang]

Guys, the concept that a Chinese vaccine is superior to a Western one is as biased as the concept that a western vaccine is superior to a Chinese one. Don't make the same mistakes that politicians have been making lately. Whatever the results are, let the experts deal with it. Just sit back and let the process do its own work. We will find out soon.

I am not familiar with how the Chinese vaccines will be evaluated, but I am very familiar with how Western medicines/vaccines are typically evaluated. All their data will be peer-reviewed. I have been participating in the peer-review process for the past 20 years. In the first 15 years, I had been on the receiving end, with my manuscripts being reviewed by my peer. For the past 5-6 years, in addition to getting my own manuscripts peer-reviewed, I have been reviewing almost 10 manuscripts per year for many reputable journals, including Science, Nature and PNAS. In fact, I have reviewed a handful of Coronavirus studies in the past few months. I know the process and I respect the process. It's as transparent as my limited brain power can manage to think of. Is it perfect? No, it's not. Absolutely not! But I can't think of another more fair and transparent way to do this kind of thing.

Since all the Chinese vaccines are under clinical trials abroad, I would imagine they are going through the exact same process. So when you question the transparency and/or all the various supposedly under-the-table stuff, just remember that all the Chinese and western vaccines are probably evaluated by the same people in the same system.

Don't equate media with scientists. Ignore what the media is saying. They can say whatever they want to say, but they can't influence data. People who are actually doing the work are the scientists. And the people who will be reviewing these data will be scientists too. Just because you don't trust the media, it doesn't mean the scientists are also bad. It's time to leave the politics aside. You should respect science and respect the experts. This is a matter of science and facts, not a matter of opinion.

But I can claim chinese COVID-19 vaccines are superior to western vaccines, and not because of any particular national reason but because of SCIENCE.

China was the only country in the world to pursue an inactive whole virus vaccine (sinovac and sinopharm). Astrazeneca, J&J, Sputnik V and even Cansino bio are going for protein subunit viral vector, while the US has gone whole into the deep-end with mRNA. I don't care even if the US wins the vaccine race, because as someone also coming from a scientific background it was shocking that the western nations were the ones that put all their bags into one basket with unproven mRNA and no fall back. The US could have used a plan B development model where they also had an inactivated vaccine in the background in case mRNA turned out to be a bust. And before we say china isn't advanced enough for mRNA, that is also false because china has also been testing mRNA under walvax biotech as of June. They could have probably have gone to trials in May (going neck-to-neck with Pfizer and Moderna) had there been real impetus but lets be honest, they are currently in 6th! place among chinese vaccines so it doesn't make sense to fast track them.

My concern is that western hubris has actually left them selves at risk, in case either protein subunit or mRNA didn't pan out. Whether or not they succeed does not change the fact that western countries made an incredibly stupid choice going with unproven technology. As much as we shit on India in this forum, at least they are also pursuing 2 in Phase III testing that are of different technologies, being inactive, and protein subunit.

And of course the US was going to win the vaccine race under trump. Remember the way you "win" is that you have 30,000 trial volunteers, of whom 50% get liquid salt and 50% get a vaccine, and you basically wait until at least 170 people get infected and then you unbox the results and see the ratio of COVID in the liquid salt category against the vaccine. China and US vaccines all started within a week of each other in late July, but brazils cases (sinovac) had already peaked since it was winter in the south while US cases are peaking now because of winter in the north. For sinopharm, they chose a gamble on Dubai and UAE, which did a reasonable job of pandemic control so for their trials to hit 170 covid cases (and get the big reveal) is going to be long and slow.

 

[quantumlight]

My concern is that western hubris has actually left them selves at risk, in case either protein subunit or mRNA didn't pan out.

Let them be... they are rolling the dice. Good for them if luck wins but if they end up shooting themselves in the foot again, oh wells

 

[Dolcevita]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[plawolf]

The beauty of this whole process is to evaluate the data in the most unbiased manner. If it works, it shall pass. If it doesn’t work, it won’t pass. I’m not saying which one is better. All I’m saying is that you need to let the system work it out. The scientific peer review process is the most unbiased process on this planet. It is not perfect as it involves human beings. Any process that involves human beings is prone to all kinds of issues. But this is as unbiased as it can be.

When facing a new crisis, everyone has made mistakes. After all, we are all humans. How did they correct them? How did the Chinese eventually figure out the virus can actually transmit from human to human? Because we have the right system, which allows us to catch mistakes and correct them. This system has allowed us to stand up and challenge the president of the United States when he says stupid things. The system has also allowed us to sound our doubts when some of our colleagues say weird stuff, like hydroxychloroquine stuff. You think we are going to cave in because certain newspapers have said some good words about some company?

The problem is that the Western vaccines looks to be blatantly bypassing key parts of this well established process, or at a minimum cutting it to a fraction of the expected sample size and test duration.

Yes, it’s a global health emergency, so obviously it would be silly to go by the book on everything, but the worry is that by cutting core elements of the process short, the results are not accurate.

 

[localizer]

We just gotta wait. The downsides to all these vaccines will be apparent in 2021.

Even a slip in the manufacturing process can jeopardize lives.

 

[Intrepid]

In Europe, all vaccines that are available will be used. I think Chinese vaccines will be given in Europe, European vaccines in China.

Will the USA take part? I don't know, I don't care either. The US is moving further and further away from the rest of the world. Americans should stop doing this. But it is their free choice.