回复 101楼healthbear的帖子 所以我贴的这个是假的吗? 我个人还是认为辉瑞的保护效果应该更好,不过这里的数据是科兴胜出 https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/uruguay-study-of-862000-sinovac-prevents-97-deaths Uruguay study of 862,000: Sinovac prevents 97% deaths Similar to Thailand, Uruguay relies heavily on the Sinovac vaccine, administering it for the majority of people. the Sinovac vaccine outdid the Pfizer trials at preventing death though, with Pfizer recipients finding 80% efficacy in preventing fatalities versus Sinovac’s 97%.
回复 101楼healthbear的帖子 所以我贴的这个是假的吗? 我个人还是认为辉瑞的保护效果应该更好,不过这里的数据是科兴胜出 https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/uruguay-study-of-862000-sinovac-prevents-97-deaths Uruguay study of 862,000: Sinovac prevents 97% deaths Similar to Thailand, Uruguay relies heavily on the Sinovac vaccine, administering it for the majority of people. the Sinovac vaccine outdid the Pfizer trials at preventing death though, with Pfizer recipients finding 80% efficacy in preventing fatalities versus Sinovac’s 97%. pingpingpang 发表于 2021-06-20 22:27
回复 101楼healthbear的帖子 所以我贴的这个是假的吗? 我个人还是认为辉瑞的保护效果应该更好,不过这里的数据是科兴胜出 https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/uruguay-study-of-862000-sinovac-prevents-97-deaths Uruguay study of 862,000: Sinovac prevents 97% deaths Similar to Thailand, Uruguay relies heavily on the Sinovac vaccine, administering it for the majority of people. the Sinovac vaccine outdid the Pfizer trials at preventing death though, with Pfizer recipients finding 80% efficacy in preventing fatalities versus Sinovac’s 97%. pingpingpang 发表于 2021-06-20 22:27
回复 101楼healthbear的帖子 所以我贴的这个是假的吗? 我个人还是认为辉瑞的保护效果应该更好,不过这里的数据是科兴胜出 https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/uruguay-study-of-862000-sinovac-prevents-97-deaths Uruguay study of 862,000: Sinovac prevents 97% deaths Similar to Thailand, Uruguay relies heavily on the Sinovac vaccine, administering it for the majority of people. the Sinovac vaccine outdid the Pfizer trials at preventing death though, with Pfizer recipients finding 80% efficacy in preventing fatalities versus Sinovac’s 97%. pingpingpang 发表于 2021-06-20 22:27
回复 101楼healthbear的帖子 所以我贴的这个是假的吗? 我个人还是认为辉瑞的保护效果应该更好,不过这里的数据是科兴胜出 https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/uruguay-study-of-862000-sinovac-prevents-97-deaths Uruguay study of 862,000: Sinovac prevents 97% deaths Similar to Thailand, Uruguay relies heavily on the Sinovac vaccine, administering it for the majority of people. the Sinovac vaccine outdid the Pfizer trials at preventing death though, with Pfizer recipients finding 80% efficacy in preventing fatalities versus Sinovac’s 97%. pingpingpang 发表于 2021-06-20 22:27
A total of 795,684 people – health workers and members of the general population between the ages of 18 and 69 – at least 14 days after receiving their second dose of Sinovac’s CoronaVac were compared to unvaccinated people to determine the real-world vaccine effectiveness, the government said in a report. The government also studied the effectiveness of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine among 162,047 health workers and people over 80 years old. The shot was 94% effective at preventing intensive care unit admissions and deaths, and reduced infections by 78%, the report said. 科兴注射人群18到69岁,辉瑞注射人群医务工作者和80岁以上人群。 没有这么比死亡率的
A total of 795,684 people – health workers and members of the general population between the ages of 18 and 69 – at least 14 days after receiving their second dose of Sinovac’s CoronaVac were compared to unvaccinated people to determine the real-world vaccine effectiveness, the government said in a report. The government also studied the effectiveness of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine among 162,047 health workers and people over 80 years old. The shot was 94% effective at preventing intensive care unit admissions and deaths, and reduced infections by 78%, the report said. 科兴注射人群18到69岁,辉瑞注射人群医务工作者和80岁以上人群。 没有这么比死亡率的 chali1234 发表于 2021-06-20 23:37
回复 119楼chali1234的帖子 你这个时候又觉得不公平了? 你们怎么算无所谓,反正国产疫苗的表现符合给WHO的数据和预期,这个没有争议吧? 一堆人非要歪曲基本的事实,说国产疫苗无效 Results from their Pfizer vaccinations show that jab was more effective at preventing Covid-19, 75% to Sinovac’s 57%, and slightly better at preventing intensive care cases (99% to 95%). The Sinovac vaccine outdid the Pfizer trials at preventing death though, with Pfizer recipients finding 80% efficacy in preventing fatalities versus Sinovac’s 97%.
回复 119楼chali1234的帖子 你这个时候又觉得不公平了? 你们怎么算无所谓,反正国产疫苗的表现符合给WHO的数据和预期,这个没有争议吧? 一堆人非要歪曲基本的事实,说国产疫苗无效 Results from their Pfizer vaccinations show that jab was more effective at preventing Covid-19, 75% to Sinovac’s 57%, and slightly better at preventing intensive care cases (99% to 95%). The Sinovac vaccine outdid the Pfizer trials at preventing death though, with Pfizer recipients finding 80% efficacy in preventing fatalities versus Sinovac’s 97%. pingpingpang 发表于 2021-06-21 00:19
一个是1%生理盐水,一个是3%的,混在一起打2%,正好无害
主要问题是打了没产生抗体, 或者有抗体, 但是过2个月就消失了。
中国提供了0 数据,没有数据,如何比较?这不是理论问题而是实际问题。
千真万确,那个朋友是我一个网友,认识了十几年了.平时偶尔也会聊聊国内国外的事情,我们都很理智讨论,大家都心里明白. 他做的公司里面有1w人.有多少人打了针就不知道,但发生了这位同事的意外之后,很多同事都没敢打,我朋友就是其中一个.他到现在都没打.我也劝他先不要打,反正国内确诊病例也不多.真没必要打.
0数据怎么让WHO批准的?
这不是实际问题是智商问题。。
所以我贴的这个是假的吗?
我个人还是认为辉瑞的保护效果应该更好,不过这里的数据是科兴胜出
https://thethaiger.com/coronavirus/uruguay-study-of-862000-sinovac-prevents-97-deaths
Uruguay study of 862,000: Sinovac prevents 97% deaths
Similar to Thailand, Uruguay relies heavily on the Sinovac vaccine, administering it for the majority of people.
the Sinovac vaccine outdid the Pfizer trials at preventing death though, with Pfizer recipients finding 80% efficacy in preventing fatalities versus Sinovac’s 97%.
怎么算出来的?
那你没看到他们是给医护人员和高危人群打的辉瑞? 这难道不是说明更相信辉瑞的作用?
现在不比半年前了,国产疫苗接种率高了。不用撤谁的实验数据好看,就看大家什么时候开放,什么时候飞行不用隔离。开放才是硬标准。
我表姐表嫂都说打完特别特别累,我表姐说快要晕倒的感觉,科兴疫苗,而且她们都是非常粉红的那种,绝对不可能黑国产疫苗
小时候打各种疫苗也没啥反应啊,难道一定要有反应才好????
如果辉瑞只有80%防止死亡,也就是说,同样的人群打了疫苗的死20个,没打的死了100个。因为感染率应该大大高于病死率,所以有效率应该远低于80%。这个显然是和辉瑞的有效率相差太远。
从给WHO的数据看,起码没有DELTA变种前,PFIZER的保护效果更好,这个没有争议吧? 这里的说法是国产疫苗没有用!这就胡说八道了
一人确诊, 2万师生不得离校。 楼里要求开放国门的, 我知道你们都不怀好意, 呵呵
如果大陆还普遍使用印度变种这个词汇,那么使用中国原种这个词汇就是天经地义,没有原种,哪来变种。
疫苗施打率高了,肯定要开放的
而且这个会有政治的考量,比如国内还没有给辉瑞药证,欧盟的疫苗签证没有认可国内的疫苗
现在有了DELTA的变种,也是对各种疫苗的考验
新闻的标题是我说的意思 你怎么算都可以,我没有意见
我反对的是这里面一堆胡说八道,把国产疫苗说的一无是处
你做五毛就做五毛,为啥不能像你同事NAMAMA之类一样心平气和地扯淡?非得这么心浮气躁的恶毒?
A total of 795,684 people – health workers and members of the general population between the ages of 18 and 69 – at least 14 days after receiving their second dose of Sinovac’s CoronaVac were compared to unvaccinated people to determine the real-world vaccine effectiveness, the government said in a report.
The government also studied the effectiveness of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine among 162,047 health workers and people over 80 years old. The shot was 94% effective at preventing intensive care unit admissions and deaths, and reduced infections by 78%, the report said.
科兴注射人群18到69岁,辉瑞注射人群医务工作者和80岁以上人群。 没有这么比死亡率的
那个ping 什么的迫不及待,连事情本身如何也搞不清楚。
說沒用太誇張了 只不過效果比現在主打的那幾個差不少 但滅活的副作用相對也比較小 除非那些國家的臨床數據都是騙人的 不然怎麼能說無效呢? 另外 從各項報導顯示 國藥很可能比科興效果要好
你这个时候又觉得不公平了?
你们怎么算无所谓,反正国产疫苗的表现符合给WHO的数据和预期,这个没有争议吧?
一堆人非要歪曲基本的事实,说国产疫苗无效
Results from their Pfizer vaccinations show that jab was more effective at preventing Covid-19, 75% to Sinovac’s 57%, and slightly better at preventing intensive care cases (99% to 95%). The Sinovac vaccine outdid the Pfizer trials at preventing death though, with Pfizer recipients finding 80% efficacy in preventing fatalities versus Sinovac’s 97%.
科兴防病毒的能力比不上辉瑞(这个符合给WHO的数据,而且也要求高的施打率)
但是在避免重症和死亡还是不错的,或者目前数据看几款疫苗在预防重症和死亡的能力上基本一致
无用不是本身无用,而是50%的保护率就算全部人群注射也达不到群体免疫的最低要求。早点打加强针才能到达群体免疫
那么现在90% 有资格的人应当已经接种.
不要往别人嘴里塞话 这个是个中肯的报道 确实有打了科兴再感染的情况 但印尼医护人员感染后死亡率在接钟后已经大大下降 新加坡同时也有很多机场工作人员打了两针pfizer或moderna的照样感染
不断诬陷中国的灭活疫苗不知道有什么意义 灭活和mrna本身在技术上刺激人体免疫反应的机制和强度就不一样
整天以国内不开国门来嘲笑国内的疫苗不是很可笑吗? 人口基数那么大,就算接种10亿剂次,也不到50%的接种率 美国在不到50%的接种率时是什么状况?
自从我们那里打疫苗送鸡蛋后,家里老人都很踊跃,基本都打了
百分五十时候热门饭店停车位也都找不到了,早都乱来的状态啊。。我一直觉得这边是真不怕死。去年也一堆人在旅游啊飞机啊。。
阿联酋80%的人口都是expat,和国外关系密切。
微博豆瓣之类的网站,有分享疫苗副作用的帖撑不到半天就被删,根本就不允许分享
香港大学对科兴和辉瑞都做了回访,抗体检测结果是辉瑞抗体很高,而科兴几乎查不到,所以建议打科兴的人去补针。
https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/health-environment/article/3137955/coronavirus-those-biontech-jabs-have-stronger
https://udn.com/news/story/121707/5543911
啥玩意儿,你的都是同事?
基于新加坡有人打了科兴(听说很多是山东外劳,活在微信群里的国人,以及个别被忽悠的新加坡boomer),可以考虑在新加坡开展一个实验,就是测抗体。
Pfizer, Modena, Sinovac, 两剂打完两周后测抗体,公布结果,是骡子是马,一目了然。
Ps, Sinovac的董事长好像是中专还是大专毕业,在新加坡国立大学混了个EMBA(这个好像花钱就能上)。
香港大學已經做了這個檢測了,科興的抗體不行
https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/health-environment/article/3137955/coronavirus-those-biontech-jabs-have-stronger
多做一下这种测试,有助于提高某些人智商,哈哈。
微信群五毛是这么洗地的— 香港的一小撮人掌控的媒体造谣,硬是起哄打了科兴的无关死亡。至于抗体,抗体的产生因人而异,打了科兴的可能不产生抗体,打了辉瑞的也可能不产生抗体。我们爱打科兴,你们就别造谣了。
早做多做这种测试,可以避免今后血淋淋的悲惨事件发生。
垃圾疫苗啊
国门照关
垃圾疫苗
垃圾奶粉
垃圾建筑材料
系统提示:若遇到视频无法播放请点击下方链接
https://www.youtube.com/embed/jSnpzgF8hiA
Errrr, 你听得懂英文吗?新加坡有些boomer被忽悠了呗,他们以为中国是靠疫苗,作为武汉人,我知道中国是靠什么。
每个成年人的想法都应该被尊重,不能因为别人想的不一样就说别人被忽悠。不然不是思想霸陵么
不要回避,请正面回答,我说的,是不是事实?
而且,你的这套说辞也很讽刺,跟你在这论坛的行为完全相反。精分?
ps, 你们也给上级反映一下,不要忽悠外国人太过火,否则后果很严重。这些被忽悠相信中国疫苗的外国人,潜意识里认为中国疫苗是解药。放了毒,然后又能控制住,自然是因为解药在手。如果自己打的中国疫苗不够保护或出了问题,肯定会心怀怨愤,采取什么过激行动很难预料。
在病毒溯源方面,这些被忽悠的人其实早就认定了些什么。五毛当心,随时会被反噬。