Coronavirus 2019-2020 thread (no unsubstantiated rumours!)

quantumlight

Junior Member
Registered Member
This is a significant table. It pretty much blows western media's negative narrative against Chinese vaccines out of water.

Here is a brief translation:
E7: number of vaccinated with 2 shots, F7: number of infected after 2 jabs, G7: percentage of infected after 2 jabs
A7: AZ jab,
A8: Pfizer jab
A9: AZ (Made in India)
A10: China's jab 621,699 2724 0.44%
A11: Russia's jab

So 621,699 finished 2 shots with Chinese vaccines. Only 2724, or 0.44% of these contracted COVID-19.

Here is virologist Kristian Anderson's take on the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2. Pay special attention to the discussion about furin cleavage sites:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Very sneaky dude... he basically saying there needs to emerge evidence of this being a naturally evolved virus in order to counter Biden's probe and that so far no "evidence" has been found... he goes on to say anything that leads one to believe Wuhan labs was in contact with covid would heavily weigh towards this being a Chinese lab leak...

No one points out the wierd leak at Fort Detrick and the subsequent shutdown of that biowar lab for safety concerns, or the fact that Bill Gates was simulating Event 201 right at the time US sickly personnel were in Wuhan for World Military Games...or that US Intel warned Israeli Intel of virus in Wuhan back in November 2019...

The supposition from the get go was this was China, without looking at the much more likely probability of this being engineered in any one of 200+ US biolabs across the world, then coverted planted in Wuhan (to collapse China during LNY and for false attribution of origin) against America's self declared greatest central threat of all times, and then used to frame China and smear China's reputation on world stage... to gathers allies to make China pay and to isolate China on world stage... what perfect timing and how convinent for the world's declining hegemon

Seriously after 9/11 and WMD false flag people are still falling over for CIA dirty tricks of lying, stealing, and cheating?

As is true for any scientific process, there are several things that would lend credence to the lab-leak hypothesis that would make me change my mind. For example, any credible evidence of SARS-CoV-2 having been at the Wuhan Institute of Virology prior to the pandemic — whether in a freezer, in tissue culture or in animals, or epidemiological evidence of very early confirmed Covid-19 cases associated with the institute.
Other evidence, were it to emerge, could lend further weight to the natural origin hypothesis. That includes the identification of an intermediate [animal] host (if one exists). Also, now that we know that live animals were sold at markets across Wuhan, further understanding of the flow of animals and connected supply lines could lend additional credence to natural emergence.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Didn't think AZ vaccine is mRNA but more of that viral vector thing?
Pfizer, Moderna, AZ vaccines all work on the same principle: deliver mRNA strands into human cells. Once the mRNA strands get into the cells, they will leverage the mechanisms in the cells to produce the COVID-19 virus’ spike protein. The differences between Pfizer/Moderna and AZ is the former use lipids to encapsulate the mRNA strands while the later uses the shells of Adeno virus.
 

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Stats on vaccine performance from Mongolian CDC, here's the table translated into Chinese:
View attachment 73786
Overall after 2 shots Sinopharm is performing the best, although the other vaccines are not far behind either except...

Note the Indian produced AZ and compare that against UK produced AZ. The Indian AZ vaccine seems to be dramatically worse.
One other strange thing about this table is infected ratio for people with only one shot is surprisingly good, to the degree that I find a bit difficult to believe. One would think only getting one out of two shot would result in infected ratio non-trivial higher than people who've had both shots but that's not what's happening (except Pfizer/BNT/Fosun). I'm guessing this is because this group of people only include those in that small time window before getting second shot and getting exposed in that time and becoming infected. While "second shot" time window is open ended so the possibility of them becoming exposed adds up each day as it passes.

So say Sputnik V for example where only 0.35% got infected after getting first shot and 0.64% got infected after second shot. If the time window between the two shots for this vaccine is very narrow than that could explain the numbers. Conversely Pfizer's more normal looking numbers may be due to a much wider time window between the shots. It would be good to know the time window between shots for each vaccine in Mongolia.
 

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member
Pfizer, Moderna, AZ vaccines all work on the same principle: deliver mRNA strands into human cells. Once the mRNA strands get into the cells, they will leverage the mechanisms in the cells to produce the COVID-19 virus’ spike protein. The differences between Pfizer/Moderna and AZ is the former use lipids to encapsulate the mRNA strands while the later uses the shells of Adeno virus.
Don’t adenovirus vaccines deliver the DNA of Covid rather than the mRNA? I remember reading that once the delivery is complete, DNA will transform into mRNA.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
One other strange thing about this table is infected ratio for people with only one shot is surprisingly good, to the degree that I find a bit difficult to believe. One would think only getting one out of two shot would result in infected ratio non-trivial higher than people who've had both shots but that's not what's happening (except Pfizer/BNT/Fosun). I'm guessing this is because this group of people only include those in that small time window before getting second shot and getting exposed in that time and becoming infected. While "second shot" time window is open ended so the possibility of them becoming exposed adds up each day as it passes.

So say Sputnik V for example where only 0.35% got infected after getting first shot and 0.64% got infected after second shot. If the time window between the two shots for this vaccine is very narrow than that could explain the numbers. Conversely Pfizer's more normal looking numbers may be due to a much wider time window between the shots. It would be good to know the time window between shots for each vaccine in Mongolia.
Could it be because they administered the second shot within the manufacturer recommended 4 weeks window instead of the western now standard approach of pushing that to 8, 12 weeks and beyond as a means to inflate their vaccination numbers?

Not only would doing the second shot within 4 weeks reduce the period of vulnerability, it could also give those who are exposed to the virus between shots higher chances of fighting off the virus since the immune response from the first dose should still be at its peak.

I hold strong and ongoing reservations about the western approach of stretching the time between shots as that seems like the perfect way to create vaccine resistant new super strains.
 

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Don’t adenovirus vaccines deliver the DNA of Covid rather than the mRNA? I remember reading that once the delivery is complete, DNA will transform into mRNA.
Sorry, you are correct. AZ uses DNA

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

However, the working principle is very similar: deliver mRNA/DNA into your cell and leverage your cell’s mechanisms to produce the spike protein

Like any human-made products, there bound to be errors in the encoding. With millions of them get injected into your body, who knows what those erroneous mRNA/DNA will do to your body.
 

Quickie

Colonel
There was actually an update on 20/06/2021 from Mongolian CDC:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

VaccineVaccinatedInfectedInfected ratio
Sinopharm - VeroCell1,274,73211,5500.91%
AstraZeneca - Vaxzevria103,4952,3942.31%
Pfizer - BNT162b212,1511020.84%
Gamaleya - Sputnik V2,193552.51%
Total:1,392,57114,1011.01%

You can be sure the western MSM will not report on this result as much as they won't report on the Scottish study that shows Pfizer and AZ to have only protection rates against the Delta variant of only 30% and 18% respectively.

One thing is for sure, you won't see Chinese media harping on the 30% and 18% effective rate the way the western MSM will, had the study be on the effectiveness of Chinese vaccines.
 
Last edited:

KYli

Brigadier
Mostly beta variant but also Alpha and Delta in Seychelles. 2 casualties are both fully vaccinated with AstraZeneca and no casualties with Sinopharm vaccinated. Even though AstraZeneca is as widely used as Sinopharm but Sinopharm is the one got blamed for the surge. At least the President of Seychelles acknowledged Sinopharm has prevented any casualties but the health officer is more cautious for the comparison.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

KYli

Brigadier
You can be sure the western MSM will not report on this result as much as they won't report on the Scottish study that shows Pfizer and AZ to have only protection rates against the Delta variant of only 30% and 18% respectively.

One thing is for sure, you won't see Chinese media harping on the 30% and 18% effective rate the way the western MSM will, had the study be on the effectiveness of Chinese vaccines.
All MSM and even some experts in Hong Kong and Singapore still claimed Pfizer is 90% effectiveness against Delta.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top