> How many times do I have to repeat that the Sinovac and Sinopharm phase-III
You keep interchanging the Russian and Chinese trials, perhaps on purpose. The only study you quoted was a Russian government funded study, with incomplete data and heavily criticized conditions.
You aren't following. Without raw patient data, you can only study:
1. The data given to you by a government
2. The affects of the vaccine in real life trails, which has so many variables that it cannot alone tell you anything concrete about vaccine effectiveness.
The ONLY set of data that matter is the initial patient data the developers of a vaccine measured. Western vaccines released this data openly, Russian and China refused. And it's obvious why.
> A vaccine that reduces chance of hospitalization or death
50-60% is better than nothing, which is a separate argument that I agree with. Getting Chinese and Russian vaccine to the third world now is better than western vaccines a year from now. But that's not what is being discussed here.
> We do. It's right there in the Chilean study
Again, measuring a vaccine's effectiveness by giving it out and measuring outcome has so many variables it's almost useless. The only standard that would apply is a study controlling for variables, done by its manufacturers. Which, for the millionth time, authoritarian countries won't share.
"Of course western vaccines have higher efficacy". There's moving the goalposts, then there's whatever you just did there. Weird for you to argue for 3-4 posts that Chinese vaccines are just as effective then just flat out say they aren't.
> The US is battling a horrifying surge in cases and deaths. I don't expect to see a NY Times article titled, "They Relied on American Vaccines. Now They're Battling Outbreaks."
This is officially a bad faith interaction. You don't seem like an idiot. You surely must know that the surge in the US is due to UNVACCINATED individuals, which has absolutely fuck all to do with the discussion we are having about vaccines. Yet you bring it up with the smugness of having uncovered some Trump card.
We're done here.
> You still haven't answered my question
So why do you spend you days defending authoritarian governments on western news sites? I think I guessed correctly the first time, but i'm curious if you'll come clean.
> You aren't following. Without raw patient data, you can only study: 1. The data given to you by a government
Again, the phase-III trials for the Chinese vaccines were not done by the Chinese government. They were done in other countries, by various institutes. In Brazil, for example, the Sinovac study was conducted by the Butantan Institute, which has a very good reputation. Are you accusing the Butantan Institute of hiding data?
> Again, measuring a vaccine's effectiveness by giving it out and measuring outcome has so many variables it's almost useless.
Many countries carefully monitor real-world effectiveness of vaccines. This is incredibly informative data, and in the case of the Sinovac and Sinopharm vaccines, real-world data is matching the clinical study data.
> The only standard that would apply is a study controlling for variables, done by its manufacturers. Which, for the millionth time, authoritarian countries won't share.
China has no control over the phase-III data for Chinese vaccines developers. The studies were all done internationally. And once the vaccine is out there and is being widely administered, national health agencies can do their own studies, completely beyond China's control.
> You surely must know that the surge in the US is due to UNVACCINATED individuals, which has absolutely fuck all to do with the discussion we are having about vaccines.
In Chile and Mongolia, the epidemics were also heavily concentrated among the unvaccinated population. We know that because of the solid follow-up work that those countries' health agencies have done on the vaccines.
When it comes to US vaccines, you get it. All I have to do is change "Chinese" to "American," and you instantly recognize how outrageous the NY Times' headline is. The NY Times should not be using anecdotes about breakthrough infections to sow doubts about vaccines, regardless of whether the vaccines were developed in the US or China.
I'm not okay with anti-vax propaganda, regardless of which countries' vaccines it targets. It's upsetting that the NY Times will publish anti-vax propaganda for nationalistic reasons. That should upset you too.
The only citation you ever provided was to a Russia study, paid for by the Russia government.
> Many countries carefully monitor real-world effectiveness of vaccines. This is incredibly informative data
Yes they do, it's a very helpful supplement to clinical data. What it isn't meant to do is stand by itself, and in the case of Russian and Chinese vaccines third parties are left to scramble to determine efficacy because, again, raw patient data isn't released and gov-run studies are not to be trusted, ever.
You managed to not respond to a single thing I said and not give anything of substance in response. I'm not going to spend any more time trying to figure out why you are arguing against open and transparent vaccine development and in favor of dictatorships hiding/obscuring and lying about their products.
My guess is you sold your soul for a job and now you have to convince others (and yourself) that it was worth it, that the authoritarians really aren't that bad. Maybe this is all ideological and you never got over your Uni communist phase. Maybe you married in, idk.
> The only citation you ever provided was to a Russia study, paid for by the Russia government.
I also linked to phase-III studies carried out for Sinovac and Sinopharm (both conducted by institutions outside China), as well as a real-world study on the effectiveness of the Sinovac vaccine carried out by the Chilean Health Ministry.
> What it isn't meant to do is stand by itself, and in the case of Russian and Chinese vaccines third parties are left to scramble to determine efficacy because, again, raw patient data isn't released and gov-run studies are not to be trusted, ever.
I'm really puzzled. I've pointed out over and over again that the phase-III trials of the various Chinese vaccines were carried out outside of China, by institutions that have nothing to do with the Chinese government. Yet you keep saying that the Chinese government ran these studies and refuses to release the data. Am I not writing English?
> I'm not going to spend any more time trying to figure out why you are arguing against open and transparent vaccine development and in favor of dictatorships hiding/obscuring and lying about their products.
I'm pointing out that you don't understand how the trials were conducted. I haven't argued against transparent vaccine development. I've tried to explain to you that your belief that the vaccines we're discussing were not transparently developed is provably wrong. Just open up the papers I've linked and take note of which institutes carried out the Sinovac and Sinopharm studies, and where those institutes are located. That's already enough to show that your claims that the Chinese government won't release trial data make no sense.
You keep interchanging the Russian and Chinese trials, perhaps on purpose. The only study you quoted was a Russian government funded study, with incomplete data and heavily criticized conditions.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vaccin...
> Are you accusing the various institutes
You aren't following. Without raw patient data, you can only study:
1. The data given to you by a government 2. The affects of the vaccine in real life trails, which has so many variables that it cannot alone tell you anything concrete about vaccine effectiveness.
The ONLY set of data that matter is the initial patient data the developers of a vaccine measured. Western vaccines released this data openly, Russian and China refused. And it's obvious why.
> A vaccine that reduces chance of hospitalization or death
50-60% is better than nothing, which is a separate argument that I agree with. Getting Chinese and Russian vaccine to the third world now is better than western vaccines a year from now. But that's not what is being discussed here.
> We do. It's right there in the Chilean study
Again, measuring a vaccine's effectiveness by giving it out and measuring outcome has so many variables it's almost useless. The only standard that would apply is a study controlling for variables, done by its manufacturers. Which, for the millionth time, authoritarian countries won't share.
https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/26/data-needed-know-if-sput...
> That's not the world we live in, unfortunately.
"Of course western vaccines have higher efficacy". There's moving the goalposts, then there's whatever you just did there. Weird for you to argue for 3-4 posts that Chinese vaccines are just as effective then just flat out say they aren't.
> The US is battling a horrifying surge in cases and deaths. I don't expect to see a NY Times article titled, "They Relied on American Vaccines. Now They're Battling Outbreaks."
This is officially a bad faith interaction. You don't seem like an idiot. You surely must know that the surge in the US is due to UNVACCINATED individuals, which has absolutely fuck all to do with the discussion we are having about vaccines. Yet you bring it up with the smugness of having uncovered some Trump card.
We're done here.
> You still haven't answered my question
So why do you spend you days defending authoritarian governments on western news sites? I think I guessed correctly the first time, but i'm curious if you'll come clean.