CCSA approves Sputnik vaccine, allowing Russian Sandboxers

[Poolie]

2 minutes ago, Paco said:

Well is my experience with Russians blame your fellow citizens... land of smile.. Russians do not smile, I met many and they grumpy.. my experience

 

Maybe you rub them up the wrong way?

[EdwardV]

4 hours ago, Poolie said:

Strange.

I find it strange you seem to think those two sentences are the same. Do we really need to define the words “primarily” and “only”? 

[Poolie]

12 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

I find it strange you seem to think those two sentences are the same. Do we really need to define the words “primarily” and “only”? 

Yes.

[EdwardV]

4 minutes ago, Poolie said:

Yes.

Only: and no one or nothing more besides; solely or exclusively. Primarily: for the most part, mainly. 
 

Do we need more explanation or can you take it from here? 

[Poolie]

3 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

Only: and no one or nothing more besides; solely or exclusively. Primarily: for the most part, mainly. 
 

Do we need more explanation or can you take it from here? 

No, give me more.

[EdwardV]

1 minute ago, Poolie said:

No, give me more.

It’s nice to see you haven’t lost your sense of humor. 

[Bob20]

I didn't realise that the personality of Russians had any relevance as to whether they can produce a good vaccine so I'll stay away from that discussion

More importantly: the health authorities better have an incredibly good registration system here to record who receives which vaccine and when. 

While the rest of the world receives well researched and documented vaccines, we are getting numerous vaccines "from wherever the government can get them" and then mixed and matched without any research, while only the government says "don't worry, it's okay".

Let's hope it goes well. But if there are problems later, we should know in detail who received what and when!

[Bob20]

Here's a cumulative list of research results until now regarding the different vaccines (so not only a good result for promotion or a bad result to criticise, but the average of all available research):

The AZD1222 vaccine (manufactured in Europe) against COVID-19 has an efficacy of 63.09% against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.
The Sinovac-Coronavac vaccine against COVID-19 has an efficacy of 51% against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.
The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine against COVID-19 has an efficacy of 95% against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.
The Moderna vaccine has an efficacy of 94.1% against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.
The AZ vaccine (manufactured in Thailand) has not yet been listed by the WHO and insufficient data are available although they should more or less mirror AZ manufactured in Europe.
The Sputnik vaccine has not yet been listed by the WHO.

No vaccines have been officially certified and approved. All have only been granted -temporary approval- for -emergency use-.

And there have been no scientific studies released on mixing Sinovac and AstraZeneca.

Just factual information. Draw your own conclusions...

https://www.biospace.com/article/comparing-covid-19-vaccines-pfizer-biontech-moderna-astrazeneca-oxford-j-and-j-russia-s-sputnik-v/

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/the-moderna-covid-19-mrna-1273-vaccine-what-you-need-to-know

http://www.sinovac.com/

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/who-can-take-the-pfizer-biontech-covid-19--vaccine

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/the-oxford-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-what-you-need-to-know?gclid=CjwKCAjwgviIBhBkEiwA10D2j-NgMbjC4PLbaAHQ1U2p4BbYy_CG8-1bXojeeA2oxqEgewkU6hrrkBoCi0wQAvD_BwE

 

[Guevara]

11 hours ago, JTCarius said:

WHO approval means nothing. 

I think you could simply write WHO mean nothing. They used to be well respected but then along comes Tedros and his flunkies.

[Bob20]

16 minutes ago, Guevara said:

I think you could simply write WHO mean nothing. They used to be well respected but then along comes Tedros and his flunkies.

A bit polarised...

It's a huge organisation that does a lot of good all over the world.

Do they always get it right? No. But neither do you and I.

Are they useless? Of course not.

But at least they are an organisation that you are allowed to criticise (as many here do) so discussion and correction is possible. Thats not the case in many other places

[Poolie]

56 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

It’s nice to see you haven’t lost your sense of humor. 

Everybody is taking everything out of context and it seems that it's the best way to be honest.

[Soidog]

12 hours ago, JTCarius said:

WHO approval means nothing. 

It depends what you mean by that? If you mean in terms of efficacy then fine. However, many countries will either not accept you or treat you differently in terms of quarantine rules unless you have a vaccine approved locally and/or by the WHO

[Soidog]

6 hours ago, KRLMRX said:

dude.  Russians, of course, are not the most outwardly positive people on the planet, but to say that we are ALWAYS evil is too much.

Fair point. People as a whole are not evil, only individuals are. However, as someone who generally gets along with most people (save for the odd person in life), my experience with Russian tourists (or possibly countries from the former Soviet Union) in Phuket and Pattaya has always been at best unwelcoming and at worst dangerous.

[JTCarius]

28 minutes ago, Soidog said:

It depends what you mean by that? If you mean in terms of efficacy then fine. However, many countries will either not accept you or treat you differently in terms of quarantine rules unless you have a vaccine approved locally and/or by the WHO

Yes, that does need clarification. I mean to say that WHO opinion of the Covid-19 shots safety or efficacy means nothing to me personally.

Edited August 19, 2021 by JTCarius

[Cornelius]

This is probably a sensible move because Thailand desperately needs the Russian tourist income and against all expectations the Sputnik seems to work very well (from very recent large-scale studies published in Nature and the Lancet). The WHO hasn't approved it partly because of some quality control issues and partly because Russia hasn't tested for rare side effects (and possibly never will). 

However, only 15% of Russians have been vaccinated and it seems that Russians have an extreme dislike of anything medical, so vaccine uptake is expected to be low. Still, I am imagine that the many well-off potential Russian visitors will find a way to get vaccinated, so this might help Phuket have a decent high-season tourism income, if they can control Covid-19. A big 'if' though because the Delta variant is defeating a lot of countries.

[vvdb.fr]

It has been almost 8 months since the homologation file submitted by Russia is incomplete: studies are missing.

The manufacturing plant in Russia is too obsolete to be homologated.

Factories must be approved. for AstraZeneca the factories in India are not approved (the one in Thailand no longer) the batches produced will not be recognized by the European authorities ... as if you had not received anything!

 

[Paco]

3 hours ago, Poolie said:

Maybe you rub them up the wrong way?

i do not speak to them at all, the fast angry, and anyway why speak to them, they never understand English anyway

[Poolie]

6 minutes ago, Paco said:

i do not speak to them at all, the fast angry, and anyway why speak to them, they never understand English anyway

How dare they not speak English!!!!!

[Soidog]

53 minutes ago, JTCarius said:

Yes, that does need clarification. I mean to say that WHO opinion of the Covid-19 shots safety or efficacy means nothing to me personally.

Yes I agree with that. With this pandemic I’ve lost any respect I previously held for the WHO.  Somewhat naively I assumed part of the WHO’s role was to have an agreed international response to a global pandemic all set up and ready to pull off the shelf. All they appear to do, is put Tadros in front of the camera once a month to lecture developed countries on what they and they alone should be doing. 

[Bob20]

55 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Yes I agree with that. With this pandemic I’ve lost any respect I previously held for the WHO.  Somewhat naively I assumed part of the WHO’s role was to have an agreed international response to a global pandemic all set up and ready to pull off the shelf. All they appear to do, is put Tadros in front of the camera once a month to lecture developed countries on what they and they alone should be doing. 

I don't work for the WHO, but do know a bit about them.

Firstly, they are funded by member countries and by voluntary contributions.

Secondly, research is mostly done by scientists and funded by governments and private partnerships.

Thirdly, scientists have requested funding for research to plan a next pandemic for more than 25 years! Even before SARS1, MERS and Ebola. But there is never any money. Same as when health care workers want better pay.

But guess what?

There is enough money for the Wuhan Institute of Virology to tinker with Corona viruses and for the Americans to subsidise it.

And there is enough money when 100's of billions are spent on the pandemic, or trillions for a 20-year war in Afghanistan for that matter.

So it's not completely fair to dump it all at the WHO's doorstep.

Besides, if you look at how governments ignore scientific advice and instead take political decisions, you wonder why anyone bothers giving solid advice.

Edited August 19, 2021 by Bob20

[Poolie]

The best thing to happen was when Donald Trump couldn't get his way with them and threw a flounce.

How I laughed.