Korea cuts back ScoMo’s dodgy vaccine

Readers will recall that the process behind the Morrison’s Government choice of vaccine posed some sticky questions:

Since then we have seen:

  • Questionable results when AZ accidentally administered the wrong doses to its trial patients.
  • Much lower efficacy of 62% than alternatives, though that is still not bad in the scheme of things.
  • It has run afoul of church groups because it uses aborted fetal cells in production.
  • South Africa cutting it because it is ineffective against that strain.

Today, there is more bad news with South Korea winding back its use:

  • For the elderly owing to production problems.
  • And to wait for greater clarity on its efficacy in the elderly.

AZ has begun work on adapting the vaccine to address the new variants.

Basically, other than ScoMo’s mate running AZ, the other features of its vaccine is that it is cheap, as well as easy to produce and transport:

And for those of you waiting to pounce on me for arguing this morning that we should make vaccines mandatory for the elderly, remember I said they should have a choice of which one!

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)

Comments

  1. happy valleyMEMBER

    All good – nothing to see – hasn’t the TGA today ticked off on the AZ vaccine and they’re the experts that SFM and Greg Hunt like to rest their case on?

    • Frank DrebinMEMBER

      Thankfully Chairman Dan has just released a new innovative Covid product to keep us all safe – the garbage bag to be worn over your head.

      Utopia is more and more like Victoria every day…..

  2. That’s a really useful table, DLS, thanks for sharing.

    So, basically, AZ is provisional, so you can’t give it to >65s en masse…nor to kiddies < 18. So anyone with travel hesitancy eg "I want to be vaccinated in order to fly" is going to baulk if they're 65, 65s and <18s.

    Are we looking at Moderna and where is Novavax at?

    And, are we getting access to more Pfizer/BioNTech?

  3. DLS, what parameters would guide a decision that allows you to view AZ as safe, and not dodgy? It seems to me that because TGA has given adult approval, and >65s on a case by case basis, it’s safe? Unless you think the TGA has rushed this (they say not), or you think their process has been compromised (they say not). It kind of infers the TGA hasn’t done their job?

    Genuine q, not snark.

  4. Jumping jack flash

    “Much lower efficacy of 62% than alternatives, though that is still not bad.”

    Better than or at least as good as the regular flu shot, and everyone loves those.

    But im sure as with all good science, these results are cherry picked for all they can be.

  5. do I want to take a vaccine that has a very short history of its potential long term side-effects, while boasting a 62% effectiveness in combatting the virus? yeah, nah!

  6. Seriously Scomo, when there are vaccines out there with over 90% efficacy, why the fk would our great nation throw the kitchen sink at mass producing (for its population) a vaccine that is 62% effective? I’m no mathematician, but this just doesn’t stack up.

    I mean, one should ask themselves would they prefer a 90 plus % chance of not becoming seriously ill from a lethal virus, or a 62% chance of not becoming seriously ill from the lethal virus?

    I’m a 90 plus % kinda guy, I’ll wait for the real deal thanks 🙂

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in now