疫苗可能只防止重症，而不防止感染，德国一个养老院17人感染，其中14人1月份就打了疫苗。

[billwanhua]

人类还有可能回到过去没有新冠无忧无虑的时光？

我对人类有信心，我认为目前的所有疫苗都是过渡产品，终极产品应该是防止感染的疫苗和治疗感染的药。

 

[Winterfun]

打过疫苗算机体算第一次感染吗？如果再感染，第二次感染或感染不同变异病毒，症状会变重吗？

 

[向问天]

打过疫苗算机体算第一次感染吗？如果再感染，第二次感染或感染不同变异病毒，症状会变重吗？

极少数人变重，多数人变轻。

 

[billwanhua]

打过疫苗算机体算第一次感染吗？如果再感染，第二次感染或感染不同变异病毒，症状会变重吗？

这个需要时间来回答。现在全球人在做实验。

 

[enst]

前几天中国西安一个医生打了疫苗感染，这里很多人笑，你没有笑？这个可是同一个养老院14个人感染

我沒期待過100% 難道好多人覺得官方故意把100% 隱瞞成50.7%?
個案啥也說明不了 主要看數據是不是造假了

 

[billwanhua]

我沒期待過100% 難道好多人覺得官方故意把100% 隱瞞成50.7%?
個案啥也說明不了 主要看數據是不是造假了

How effective is the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine? A real-world study in Sweden

Investigating a population in southern Sweden, a new study has found that a single dose of the vaccine is only about 42% effective in preventing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). But seven days after the second dose, the vaccine can prevent COVID-19 in 86% of the population.

www.news-medical.net

Of the total of 805,741 study participants, about 3% had been vaccinated by the BNT16b2 mRNA vaccine by 28 February 2021. About 80% of the vaccinated individuals were women, and the median age of the vaccinated set of people was 47 years.

Two weeks after the first dose, the vaccine was only about 42% effective. But it was 86% effective in preventing COVID-19 in people who had no prior infection seven days after the second dose for the period 15-28 February 2021. There was no difference in vaccine effectiveness between males and females.

he study found lower vaccine effectiveness of about 60% within seven days of the second dose.

People who had been infected before showed a 91% vaccine effectiveness. The effectiveness was still high when people had been infected more than three months before vaccination.

打了一针疫苗的还是不能浪。第二针7天内只有60%

你意思是50.7%也是造假？

首先我声明，目前三期实验和实战效果无可辩驳的支持mRNA 疫苗效果更好。但是：

报道说中国有效率50.7%，而智利实战是67%，辉瑞自己说是95%，而瑞典实战是86%, 其他实战报道也是89%-92%， 好像中国更诚实。For Novavax, in the UK-based trial the vaccine showed 86.3% efficacy, and in the South African trial it demonstrated an overall efficacy of 48.6%. (Novavax COVID-19 Vaccine Shows Efficacy Against South African, United Kingdom Variants). 而novavax报告的有效率是86.3%。
中国SinoVac三期实验 Turkeyc Indonesia and brazil showed that the vaccine was 91.25%, 65.3%, 50.7%, 而中国自己和别人都宣传50.7%.

辉瑞还根据几百人的实验宣布疫苗对南非变异100%有效，而以色列的实战报道确是对南非变异没有多少效果。

你说说谁在玩猫腻？

中国自己的CDC高福也承认效果不好，而且提出解决方案，结果被西方媒体抓住把柄猛揍。而AZ一直不承认有血管堵塞，英国更是推出是因为脱欧，欧洲搞的政治原因。强生血管堵塞就算了，还找个不相干的文章污蔑辉瑞和MODERNA疫苗也血管堵塞，你觉得哪个更透明？起码大家都不透明。

 

[enst]

你意思是50.7%也是造假？

首先我声明，目前三期实验和实战效果无可辩驳的支持mRNA 疫苗效果更好。但是：

报道说中国有效率50.7%，而智利实战是67%，辉瑞自己说是95%，而瑞典实战是86%, 其他实战报道也是89%-92%， 好像中国更诚实。For Novavax, in the UK-based trial the vaccine showed 86.3% efficacy, and in the South African trial it demonstrated an overall efficacy of 48.6%. (Novavax COVID-19 Vaccine Shows Efficacy Against South African, United Kingdom Variants). 而novavax报告的有效率是86.3%。
中国SinoVac三期实验 Turkeyc Indonesia and brazil showed that the vaccine was 91.25%, 65.3%, 50.7%, 而中国自己和别人都宣传50.7%.

辉瑞还根据几百人的实验宣布疫苗对南非变异100%有效，而以色列的实战报道确是对南非变异没有多少效果。

你说说谁在玩猫腻？

中国自己的CDC高福也承认效果不好，而且提出解决方案，结果被西方媒体抓住把柄猛揍。而AZ一直不承认有血管堵塞，英国更是推出是因为脱欧，欧洲搞的政治原因。强生血管堵塞就算了，还找个不相干的文章污蔑辉瑞和MODERNA疫苗也血管堵塞，你觉得哪个更透明？起码大家都不透明。woww

我一点没说50.7%造假啊 不用心虚 我是觉得期待任何疫苗100%都很奇怪
高福那个承认就不要说了吧 不是自己已经认错收回了吗

 

[billwanhua]

我一点没说50.7%造假啊 不用心虚 我是觉得期待任何疫苗100%都很奇怪
高福那个承认就不要说了吧 不是自己已经认错收回了吗

那你提中国50.7%什么意思？谁期待100%.？ 这个案例可能远远低于50.7%有效，一个养老院几百人，17个人感染其中14个人full-vaccined, 你偏要说中国50.7%.