Coronavirus 2019-2020 thread (no unsubstantiated rumours!)

SteelBird

SteelBird

Colonel
Cambodia stands #7 on world vaccination percentage of population but the 3rd dose only stands at 5.3% with less than a million doses administered. (Source: NYT)
efoX42l.png
 
B

B.I.B.

Captain
FairAndUnbiased said:
There's only silence on this in western media because they want you to forget COVID is still around, and whenever you do remember, to blame it on unvaccinated conservatives and Chinese.

They literally do not want people questioning whether the COVID response is adequate for the average person. If they did then there are gonna be questions like how come so more died after the vaccines came out and how come there's another wave with their ubermensch vaccines when they were laughing at Chile for having a much smaller wave with Sinovac.

Much easier to blame foreigners and Trump.
Click to expand...
I'm stumped and wondering whether it's a wasted effort because W.H.O. has said only vaccines with a minimum of 50% efficacy rate is acceptable. We in NZ are rushing around to achieve a 90% vaccination rate using only Pfizer which currently has an efficacy rate in the low 30% against the Delta variant of infections which appear to make up the current cases of covid as no one has suggested otherwise.
 
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
B.I.B. said:
I'm stumped and wondering whether it's a wasted effort because W.H.O. has said only vaccines with a minimum of 50% efficacy rate is acceptable. We in NZ are rushing around to achieve a 90% vaccination rate using only Pfizer which currently has an efficacy rate in the low 30% against the Delta variant of infections which appear to make up the current cases of covid as no one has suggested otherwise.
Click to expand...
So originally the 50% was suggested because that is the efficacy required to reduce r < 1 in the original virus strain. But now that there's a new variant they kept the same efficacy benchmark.

Clearly this is not a medical consideration because the virus isn't the same strain anymore and doesn't know about human vaccine benchmarks.

However if it still reduces probability severe illness x probability of infection at a rate lower than the probability of side effects then it's still a net gain.
 
B

B.I.B.

Captain
FairAndUnbiased said:
So originally the 50% was suggested because that is the efficacy required to reduce r < 1 in the original virus strain. But now that there's a new variant they kept the same efficacy benchmark.

Clearly this is not a medical consideration because the virus isn't the same strain anymore and doesn't know about human vaccine benchmarks.

However if it still reduces probability severe illness x probability of infection at a rate lower than the probability of side effects then it's still a net gain.
Click to expand...
I see, I still think we should be using a variety of vaccines such as Moderna which is regarded as slightly better than Pfizer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top