HOHO，加拿大决定使用三哥疫苗

[茶马盐铁]

诸位自求多福吧。

干了这碗恒河水

 

[cable4sale]

骨灰，大便，超级细菌！恒河水都这样了，还敢喝？​

“干了这碗恒河水，来生还做印度人”，这句网络流传已久的调侃一直是人们对印度水质的印象。
为4亿印度人和居住在印度居民提供几乎一切水源的“母亲河”却是全世界污染最严重的水域。以前，总听说恒河里混杂着城市污水，动物粪便，农药化肥，工业废水甚至尸体骨灰。

 

[rentcfc]

怪不得前段时候义愤填膺的职责印度迫害农民，现在就闭嘴了。欧洲拒用，非洲退货，终于轮到给加拿大了。

 

[ottawa_tj]

疫苗的有效率是疫苗设计的结果。

有证据表明是生产原因造成的疫苗有效率低？

制药厂不是直接用河水生产，水是要处理的，只要处理好，宇航员还“喝尿”呢？

加拿大人日常吃的药里，或者制药原料里，不少来自印度。

 

[digitalife]

<<药神>>中的神药, 就是来自印度

 

[uglyducking]

不禁让人想起“我不是药神”

 

[happy 2016]

一经被批准和运到，渥太华会施打第3种疫苗 Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 疫苗。目前这种疫苗的有效率是62%。卫生官员Vera Etches博士也对阿斯利康疫苗与其他疫苗相比的效力表示担忧，他说:“62%的效力仍然比零好。 另外一种是强生疫苗 （Johnson & Johnson vaccin) ，是在加拿大审查的最后阶段，几周后可能会在加拿大施打。
介绍强生疫苗：强生公司的疫苗在全球对4万4千人进行了实验，发现在接种4个星期内对防范中等和重症新冠病毒感染的有效率是66%，对防范感染病毒而住院和死亡的有效率是100%，而且很少出现严重的副作用。
强生公司的新冠疫苗预计能够在世界范围内广泛使用，因为这款疫苗是单剂疫苗，而且能够在正常冰箱温度进行保存和运送，比辉瑞和摩德纳公司研制的新冠疫苗更容易分发。
美国范德堡大学医学中心传染病专家沙夫纳（William Schaffner）说，“如果我们有足够的计量，就可能发挥非常实际的作用，因为这是个单剂疫苗，会提高对难以接触人员的吸引力，”“我们能够把疫苗带给民众。”美国食品药品管理局代理局长伍德科克（Janet Woodcock）在一份声明中说，“授权使用这款疫苗扩大了疫苗的可用范围，后者是对付新冠病毒最佳的医学防范方法，可以帮助我们抗击已经夺去50多万美国人生命的疫情。”美国政府已经购买了一亿剂强生新冠疫苗，计划本星期分发大约300万到400万剂强生疫苗。

 

[贵圈]

渥太华个体能不能选择别的疫苗呢？

 

[woow]

渥太华个体能不能选择别的疫苗呢？

估计等两年吧。现在是人等疫苗。 听说，目前疫苗的运输存储有效期都受限的，来一批叫一波人，貌似定时定点，啥时间打不听你的，不跟你讨价还价

 

[贵圈]

I am getting a less effective vaccine now. Can I get a better one later?​

BY
GRADY MCGREGOR
AND
JEREMY KAHN
February 27, 2021 6:30 AM EST

Hong Kong kicks off COVID-19 vaccination program
Starting with China’s Sinovac vaccines.
Share
Pause
Unmute

Current Time 1:28
/
Duration 3:47
Loaded: 65.47%



Fullscreen





UP NEXT:

What to know about Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine​

​

Our mission to make business better is fueled by readers like you. To enjoy unlimited access to our journalism, subscribe today.
Alan Yuen, a 60-year-old recent Hong Kong retiree, walked out of the Hong Kong Central Library on Friday morning with a sense of relief, happy that he was one of the first people in the city to receive a COVID-19 vaccine shot.
“The process was very smooth, just like getting any other injection,” he says. “But psychologically speaking, I feel safer.”
Like four other sites in the city on Friday, Hong Kong’s main library had turned into a makeshift COVID-19 vaccine center as government workers administered doses on the first day of Hong Kong’s campaign to inoculate its 7.5 million residents.
Hong Kong has approved two COVID-19 vaccines for use in the city—a 50% effective vaccine from Chinese maker Sinovac and a 95% effective one from German company BioNTech and U.S. drugmaker Pfizer. But on Friday, it was only administering Sinovac’s vaccine; BioNTech's has run into delays but is expected to arrive in Hong Kong on Saturday.
Yuen said he didn’t have a strong preference about which vaccine to get, but opted for Sinovac because he could access it earlier and he had heard that it only induced minimal side effects.
“The protection of the Sinovac vaccine, comparatively speaking, may be lower,” he says, but Sinovac's vaccine was available first.
Subscribe to Eastworld for weekly insight on what’s dominating business in Asia, delivered free to your inbox.
Yuen's choice is one that millions around the world may soon contend with; whether to get a less effective vaccine now or wait to get a stronger one later.
That question soon will be relevant in the U.S., which is poised to grant emergency authorization to Johnson & Johnson's single dose COVID-19 vaccine in coming days. It's less effective—66%—than the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines that are also available in the U.S. But limited supply of Pfizer and Moderna doses means that a J&J jab may be the only immediate option for some Americans.
Consumers' conundrum about taking a less effective vaccine is a challenge for public health officials too. Eager to get as many people vaccinated as quickly as possible, they must determine how to get their communities to take a vaccine that may be seen as second-best.
Especially in places with high rates of COVID-19, scientists advise taking whatever vaccine is most readily available to protect yourself and others from severe COVID-19 infections and help the world reach herd immunity. And they argue that taking one of the less effective vaccines now doesn't necessarily mean you can't take a more effective COVID-19 vaccine later. Researchers around the world are now embarking on mixed trials to test the safety and efficacy of taking two doses of two different vaccines in the same regimen.

If it turns out, as many scientists suspect will be the case, that getting an initial dose with one vaccine and a booster dose with a different vaccine confers similar, or in some cases, even better, immunity than getting two doses of the same vaccine, it will help ease the logistical challenge of vaccinating the world's population. Public health officials won't need to worry as much about supply shortages since they can use a different vaccine for first and second doses. And it may encourage the public to take the vaccine that's immediately available, even if it's not their top choice.

Vaccine consumerism​

Last June, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration set a 50% efficacy threshold for approving a COVID-19 vaccine, a figure that the World Health Organization also applied in its evaluation of COVID-19 vaccines.
But Pfizer and Moderna's blockbuster phase III results in November recalibrated the public's expectations for how good a COVID-19 vaccine should be. With efficacy rates above 90%, they immediately became the gold standard of COVID-19 vaccines that others are measured against. And most vaccines that have completed phase III trials since then have fallen short of the high bar they set.
In November, AstraZeneca said that its vaccine was 62% effective in preventing infections. Earlier this year, vaccine makers Sinovac and Johnson & Johnson have posted efficacy rates of 50.4% and 66%, respectively.
One exception is Russia's Sputnik V vaccine, which posted a 92% efficacy rate on Feb. 2.
Scientists argue that even with lower efficaciousness, vaccines are critical tools in helping the world end the devastating COVID-19 pandemic, especially because Pfizer and Moderna doses remain in short supply and have storage requirements that exempt some poorer countries from using them.
Ben Cowling, an epidemiologist at Hong Kong University, says that in a place like Hong Kong, it may make sense to wait for vaccines with higher efficacy rates since residents are at low risk of catching the disease on a day-to-day basis. But in places with higher rates of infection, less effective vaccines can prevent severe cases of COVID-19 and related deaths.
"A lot of the [less effective] vaccines are very good at protection against severe disease," he says. "Protection against mild infections" is where less effective vaccines may come up short.
Still, with more markets like Hong Kong, the U.S., the U.K., and parts of Europe offering multiple vaccines with dissimilar efficacy rates, researchers have found that there is more resistance to taking vaccines that offer less protection.
In Hong Kong, for example, a citywide poll in January found that 29.5% residents were willing to take Sinovac’s vaccine compared to the 56% willing to take the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. In Germany, officials are warning that citizens have turned down opportunities to take the AstraZeneca vaccine in favor of waiting for the more effective Moderna jabs.
Semra Ozdemir, an expert in medical decision making at the Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore, says that people may refrain from taking vaccines due to concerns about efficacy and where they are produced.
Based on surveys she conducted in Singapore, Ozdemir estimates that roughly 30% to 35% of the city’s population is likely to not get vaccinated right away partially because they want to wait for the best vaccines available.
For governments to reach these people, they must be as forthcoming as possible in providing information about the vaccines and why the public should take them. “These are the people who are highly educated, they read, they want to know [about the vaccines], they believe in science, and want to believe in the numbers,” she says. Discerning members of the public, she says, "want to have more information, more data. For them, transparency is important."

No need to choose​

But even if people accept a less effective vaccine now, they may have the option to get a different vaccine in the future.
Cowling says that no matter which vaccine people get first, they will likely have the option to get a booster of a different vaccine sometime after their first injections.
“I don’t think you’d have to use the same vaccine again. A booster dose after a year or two could be with another vaccine,” says Cowling. “I would not expect any concerns about safety or risk.”
In fact, he claims that booster shots may become prevalent even before countries reach herd immunity levels.
“If we can’t reach herd immunity level in Hong Kong after the first round of vaccinations…Then we will have to find a way to improve the immunity in the population, either by vaccinating people who didn’t want to get vaccinated or by boosting the immunity of people who have been vaccinated,” Cowling says.

Mixed trials​

Scientists are now engaged in early trials to determine the safety and efficacy of administering doses of separate vaccines in tandem.
In the U.K., which has approved vaccines from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Moderna, the National Institute for Health Research is carrying out a study to see if doses of the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines can be alternated, so that a person receiving an initial dose of one vaccine can receive a jab of the other as their second dose.

The study involves more than 800 volunteers, age 50 and older, and is being conducted at eight sites across England. The volunteers will receive either two doses of the same vaccine, or one dose of each vaccine in different combinations and intervals.
Other scientists have been supportive of the study, with many saying their hunch is that the study will show that mixing vaccine types for the two doses is safe and effective.
“The antigen used in all of the vaccines currently licensed in the U.K. is exactly the same spike protein, so the immune system will recognize it and can be expected to respond at least as well if a different product is used for boosting,” Peter English, a doctor who specializes in communicable disease control and a former editor of Vaccines in Practice Magazine.
It is also possible that the vaccines will work better when used in combination with alternating doses than when a person receives two doses of a single vaccine type, English said. He noted that this has already been shown to be the case for vaccines for hepatitis B, for instance.

Jonathan Van-Tam, the U.K.’s deputy chief medical officer and the senior official responsible for the study, said that given the challenges of vaccinating not only the entire U.K. population, but much of the world’s population against COVID-19, “there are definitely advantages to having data that could support a more flexible immunization program.”
In Hong Kong on Friday, Freddy Chua, a financier in his 60s, said that he had some doubts about getting a vaccine that might be less effective than others, but he ultimately decided that it would be better to get what's available now rather than wait for a different one later.
"I wanted to sign up for the early vaccine because I'm from Singapore," he said, and he hopes that getting a vaccine—any vaccine—will mean he won't have to quarantine for 14 or 21 days next time he goes home.