I would be really skeptical of this think tank’s reports. The only thing this think tank does is pump out alarming reports from a western perspective to try to pump up defense spending. Most of their reports just hand pick statistics to try to raise alarm in the West. Most of their funders are from the western defense industry too.
News on China's scientific and technological development.
- Thread starter Quickie
- Start date
The methodology is public, and it looks good to me. China leading in research is well known fact now. There isn't anything to point to this being a lie especially considering no western government has done anything with this report.
The same methodology showed clear US dominance during the early 2000s, which the article notes.
Wrong.
First vaccine developed were from China Cansino and quickly followed by Russia Sputnik V. Pfizer one came out months later. So even with "historical advantages" they were not first.
Can Sino and Sputnik weren’t approved until 2021; Pfizer was provisonally approved in December 2020. So indeed, the U.S. was first to market.
Cansino was provisionally approved in China for use in June 2020 and another 2 shot inactivated vaccine for high risk occupations and Sputnik was provisionally approved soon after in August 2020 in Russia, so they were faster to market.
Sinopharm had EUA in China in as early as July 2020 and general use approval by December 2020 and was granted EUA by middle East countries in November 2020 and full approval by December 2020. So at least same time as Pfizer.
Pfizer was the first to be provisionally approved in a Westen country. Unless you feel approved for provisional use in China or Russia and middle East countries doesn't count as countries because they aren't the west?
Please get your facts straight.
antiterror13
Brigadier
To be fair, I think Pfizer is more advanced with mRNA vaccine, while Chinese and Russian were traditional C-19 vaccines
No. China’s EUA approval wasn’t a marketing approval, it’s more analogous to a Phase I trial. China gave marketing approval for Sinopharm late into 2020/early 2021 so the analogue Pfizer marketing approval came earlier. First to market on a more complex, effective, and first-in-class product. Main point is that China having the advantage in paper publishing is not at all a guarantee it will “win” the tech race/war/whatever in any amount of time given lags to commercialization, incumbent U.S. advantages (of which the COVID vaccine was illustrative and more widely known), and the business environment in which corporates operate, as well as the other variables that impact the business environment.
CanSino and Sputnik V vaccines are viral vector vaccines. So they are not exactly "traditional" either.
Nanolipid capsule vaccine technology is derived from earlier lipid capsule technology. Lipid capsules were known to cause serious side effects like infertility in women and could cause death via thrombosis. Because of this vaccination with lipid capsules was only allowed in terminal patients like cancer patients. That is why a lot of the work on those vaccines was cancer vaccines. Nanolipids is supposed to solve that issue, because the capsules are smaller they supposedly don't cause blood clotting, and thrombosis. But they require deep cold storage and the vaccines don't last that long. Which makes them harder to use in the field.
Nanolipid capsule vaccines are more heavily patented which means the companies which sell these vaccines can profit a lot more selling them by monopolizing the supply. That they are "better" is not that certain. The main advantage was supposed to be earlier time to market, but this was disproven with COVID-19 when China and Russia came out with their vaccines earlier with other techniques.
Last edited:
