EPTI wish they could all be judged as products, not caring the slightest about who developed and make them...
At least Pfizer and Moderna are treated well all over afaik!
Coronavirus and You - Page 376
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control. It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you. Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly. This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here. Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. | ||
|
Slydie
1927 Posts
I wish they could all be judged as products, not caring the slightest about who developed and make them... At least Pfizer and Moderna are treated well all over afaik! | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On April 29 2021 06:56 Slydie wrote: At least Pfizer and Moderna are treated well all over afaik! The state of vaccine approval is pretty scattered overall. Far as I can tell the most approved vaccines in order: 1. AztraZeneca 2. Pfizer 3. Sputnik V 4. Moderna 5. J&J 6+. Sinopharm, Sinovac, Covishield The rest have negligible approvals. Approval is very politically stratified, as you might expect. Third world countries tend to approve a wide swathe of vaccines though. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14048 Posts
On April 29 2021 06:56 Slydie wrote: Is it only me, or do the agencies approving, rejecting, waiting or warning about vaccines seem to have a very hard not being politically biased? I mean, it seems too easy for local vaccines to be approved and far too difficult for vaccines from the "wrong" countries. I wish they could all be judged as products, not caring the slightest about who developed and make them... At least Pfizer and Moderna are treated well all over afaik! I have a suspicious feeling about the opposite of nations accepting data as fact if there isn't an international mechanism for verifying the vaccines. Unfortunately no one trusts the who after the plague so I doubt that we'll see that in our lives. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4361 Posts
On April 29 2021 06:56 Slydie wrote: Is it only me, or do the agencies approving, rejecting, waiting or warning about vaccines seem to have a very hard not being politically biased? I mean, it seems too easy for local vaccines to be approved and far too difficult for vaccines from the "wrong" countries. I wish they could all be judged as products, not caring the slightest about who developed and make them... At least Pfizer and Moderna are treated well all over afaik! Yeah, pretty clear there will be big problems in the future, since countries seem to be pushing ahead with the idea of vaccine passports for travel.Likely the EU, USA, Australia may not recognise sinovac as an effective vaccine and not allow Chinese who have had it to enter their countries.And the Sinovac is just one example (Since this vaccine has been shown to be as low as ~50% effective) , this could happen with other vaccines or China could disallow Pfizer recipients from entering China in retaliation etc. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4733 Posts
On April 29 2021 06:56 Slydie wrote: Is it only me, or do the agencies approving, rejecting, waiting or warning about vaccines seem to have a very hard not being politically biased? I mean, it seems too easy for local vaccines to be approved and far too difficult for vaccines from the "wrong" countries. I wish they could all be judged as products, not caring the slightest about who developed and make them... At least Pfizer and Moderna are treated well all over afaik! This is part of information warfare. The Sputnik vaccine is inferior (as proven by trials in third countries see here for example: https://www.dw.com/en/covid-brazil-regulator-rejects-russias-sputnik-vaccine/a-57345002 ) so Russians spread missinformation that is being rejcted due political reason when it fact it was rejected on merits. Same with Sinovac. PS.I thought thhread was supposed to be free of politics? | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8649 Posts
I dunno if it is inferior... however people who look into that say that strange things are going on and crucial information is missing. hence the Sputnik V approval rejection. that it was approved in lower income countries makes perfect sense since it is one of the cheaper ones and Pfizer/Moderna for instance are simply out of reach if there are no donations. I mean it started already kinda badly with this vaccine, they had to be the first for a propaganda win apparently without completing all the usual trials... then later on it was said to be actually quite good... now the missing approval(s) - it's quite a bit of a mess. in a world with way too much misinformation and anti vaxxers that - is just no way to bring your product to the market. and build trust which is as important as a good product, especially when it is a matter of life and death. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6216 Posts
It's pretty impossible for the average joe to determine anything from the results/news, so you'd have to wait for state agencies who actually have access to the vaccine and can do batch testing on deliveries as well. There's other countries with access who can do the appropriate tests, so if it's confirmed by other agencies, yeah it might not be as good as they say, but for now, grain of salt needed for both claims by Slovakia and Brazil. As far as vaccine passports go, I'd expect it to to be a network of vaccine passport-free countries and some countries with passports required. After around July or so this year, there will be little point to passports for travel between the USA and Canada for instance, because both should've achieved herd immunity. On the other hand, countries like Japan, NZ, Australia etc may not have large portions of the population vaccinated, and will require proof of vaccination to enter. | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
On April 29 2021 04:21 Acrofales wrote: However much I'd like to believe Anvisa to be an independent and trustworthy source, with Bolsonaro as president, I don't. Bolsonaro doesn't want vaccines (yes, he's that much of crazy), so a government agency denying approval is "convenient". The Slovak agency seems like a way better source. From what I've seen, the refusal hasn't generated outcries and has been generally accepted by the big name virologists here (100% of which are obviously anti-bolsonaro). Overall, I see no hint of political manipulation. Also, Coronavac (Sinovac), championed by São Paulo's governor, was Bolsonaro's big enemy, not Sputnik. It's interesting that in local media, there is a component of "this vaccine might be dangerous" (linked to the virus not being completely deactivated), but overall the biggest problem is "not enough information was presented". I imagine we could see a reversal in the coming months if the russians sort this out. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On April 29 2021 20:06 Sbrubbles wrote: From what I've seen, the refusal hasn't generated outcries and has been generally accepted by the big name virologists here (100% of which are obviously anti-bolsonaro). Overall, I see no hint of political manipulation. Also, Coronavac (Sinovac), championed by São Paulo's governor, was Bolsonaro's big enemy, not Sputnik. It's interesting that in local media, there is a component of "this vaccine might be dangerous" (linked to the virus not being completely deactivated), but overall the biggest problem is "not enough information was presented". I imagine we could see a reversal in the coming months if the russians sort this out. I thought Pfizer was Bolsonaro's enemy because they offered to sell him their vaccines in August (?) of last year and he refused and he got a lot of flak for his refusal later on. Wasn't he touting the Russian vaccine because that was the one he was able to buy? On April 29 2021 21:28 JimmiC wrote: From my reading on the issue in Slovakia was the president went against the EU and ordered sputnik and was hailed a hero by many, but when the delivery came and they tested the vials they were not the same as what was documented in the testing. Some were suggesting this was putin trying to destabilize the EU, but if the same or similar is happening in Brazil perhaps it is a production issue? Yah, production can't be easy. China approved their vaccine way too early (in the middle of phase 3 trials) and they've vaccinated fewer of their citizens than the US last I checked. J&J and AZ have had their issues with production too. It seems Pfizer is the only one that has been the most consistent in actually hitting or close to hitting their production targets. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Lmui
Canada6216 Posts
| ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
On April 30 2021 00:34 andrewlt wrote: I thought Pfizer was Bolsonaro's enemy because they offered to sell him their vaccines in August (?) of last year and he refused and he got a lot of flak for his refusal later on. Wasn't he touting the Russian vaccine because that was the one he was able to buy? To be clear, he was dismissive of vaccines as a whole, and many times worked against buying vaccines and vaccination, like the refusal to work with Pfizer, but this doesn't mean it was something specific against Pfizer. Sinovac, on the other hand, was strongly pushed by one of his main political rivals (Joao Doria, governor of Sao Paulo), was brought about on Doria's initiative, involved testing conducted by a trusted brazillian institute in Sao Paulo, and was ready before any federal plans had a chance of getting off the ground, so Sinovac was effectively an enemy. Also, he never particularly touted Sputnik as a solution (a Sputnik purchase agreement was secured by a couple of southern Brazil governors, but these didn't involve that big of a scope). Since then, with the hit in popularity he took in december/january, he's flipflopped on the issue (as is expected from the likes of Bolsonaro and Trump) claiming he was in favor of vaccines since the beggining, while only half-heartedly working towards vaccination. Sputnik was kind of the 4th vaccine on everyones list, with Sinovac and AZ the main vaccines being distributed (AZ being the "federal" one), and Pfizer being number 3 with some doses entering the country now. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On April 30 2021 01:12 JimmiC wrote: What separates sputnik v is they seem to hit the targets, it is just not the same stuff as what was approved. Not getting what you paid for and expected is a big problem, getting the amount you paid for but a untested, different thing is criminal and who knows how terrible it could work out. As far as the vaccine diplomacy goes Russia was looking very competent and positive. Now it is beginning to swing in the other direction where I'm not sure they will ever be trusted. I heard there was a lot of pride also with it being the first exported product (not a resource) from Russia that was sought out for people around the world and now that is all changing. Many businesses are upset because people wont trust them based on this which they had nothing to do with. It does seem like Pfizer is the only one to be able to do the production levels and keep the quality. I am not a fan of big pharma, but this appears to be a situation where having a company like that is beneficial. Part of hitting production targets is quality control. J&J and AZ had to destroy incorrectly produced vaccines. I've read the linked Slovak report and can't tell if the problem is due to manufacturing errors or fraud. Wouldn't put it past Putin to do a bait and switch but I would like to err on the side of poor quality control at present. The article did seem to hint that it may be more than that though. Pfizer does look like they really know what they are doing. Their vaccine seems to be the most delicate of all because of the cold storage requirements. It was also the first or second to be approved in many developed countries. The lack of any bad news so far is a point in their favor. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6216 Posts
On April 30 2021 07:46 andrewlt wrote: Part of hitting production targets is quality control. J&J and AZ had to destroy incorrectly produced vaccines. I've read the linked Slovak report and can't tell if the problem is due to manufacturing errors or fraud. Wouldn't put it past Putin to do a bait and switch but I would like to err on the side of poor quality control at present. The article did seem to hint that it may be more than that though. Pfizer does look like they really know what they are doing. Their vaccine seems to be the most delicate of all because of the cold storage requirements. It was also the first or second to be approved in many developed countries. The lack of any bad news so far is a point in their favor. The only "bad" news for Pfizer was earlier this year they temporarily halted/reduced shipments in order to make upgrades to production lines. We're reaping the benefits of that delay now, because they've scaled far beyond our best hopes at the beginning of the year, delivering well ahead of schedule now. It was a couple of poor weeks but it's well behind at this point, and none of it was safety related. Here in BC, we're running Pfizer down to the wire because they've proven to be able to deliver like clockwork. We have run our inventory of Pfizer to under a day's worth of doses (less than 10k doses left) every week for weeks now. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
https://apnews.com/article/health-global-trade-brazil-russia-business-b92f2914cc338beb44e594b6472cf42f Here in CA, a lot of people I know, including me, got the Moderna vaccine. They don't have the global reach that Pfizer has but I think they are doing really well for the countries that bought their vaccine. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
They (on either side) do not, however, typically believe that people on the other side are necessarily stupid. Much rather they think that otherwise reasonable people are mainly being led by fear. I think this might be something to consider when talking to people who hold opposing views. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4733 Posts
The way i see it, treating them like their postion has any legitamcy and warrants discussion is wrong and leads nowhere. | ||
| ||
