智利研究:一劑科興毫無保護力

162 回覆
166 Like 2 Dislike
2021-04-08 10:01:07
仆街,我要落地獄
2021-04-08 10:01:59
2021-04-08 10:02:09
連登仔: 兩針都唔會有
2021-04-08 10:03:09
你估兩劑又有保護力
2021-04-08 10:03:20
打完科興爆血管死撚埋
仲邊會中武肺
2021-04-08 10:08:56
會唔會成為第一個溝針打嘅國家
2021-04-08 10:10:14
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.14.21251704v2

你嗰個係舊報告,新嘅報告證實輝瑞同莫德納對南非變種同打水無咩分別,對巴西變種效力低5倍。
2021-04-08 10:11:17
物理抗體
2021-04-08 10:12:54
Similarly, neutralizing antibody responses were also significantly decreased for the Brazilian/Japanese P.1 strain (6.7-fold for BNT162b2, p < 0.0001; 4.5-fold for mRNA-1273, p < 0.001), which harbors three mutations in RBD (K417T, E484K, and N501Y) and has also been found in cases of re-infection (nuno_faria 2021).

Strikingly, neutralization of all three South African B.1.351 strains was substantially decreased for both 2-dose vaccines (v1: 34.5-fold for BNT162b2 and 27.7-fold for mRNA-1273; v2: 41.2-fold for BNT162b2 and 20.8-fold for mRNA-1273; v3: 42.4-fold for BNT162b2 and 19.2-fold for mRNA-1273; p < 0.0001 for all comparisons)

打兩針後對南非變種效力低42.4 倍,咁同無打有咩分別?
2021-04-08 10:15:23
支那假疫苗事件2021
2021-04-08 10:15:43
你拎份2月14號pub嘅
未有Peer-review嘅紙
去話一份NEJM 3月8號update嘅紙
係舊報告


MedRXiv你都好拎出嚟打NEJM同Nature Medicine
2021-04-08 10:15:45
0x幾多次,結果都係0
2021-04-08 10:18:56
你個兩個所為報告個sample size 連20 都無,仲要係用engineered 嘅假病毒,真係無咩代表性窩。
2021-04-08 10:21:15
https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210309/s-african-variant-challenges-pfizer-moderna-vaccines

唔啱又睇下呢個,呢個有40+ sample(都係少), 用真變種病毒。
結果係輝瑞同莫德納效力低10 -12倍。
2021-04-08 10:22:06
你拎份冇Peer review過嘅紙出嚟添
“Preprints are preliminary reports of work that have not been certified by peer review. They should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/about-medrxiv
2021-04-08 10:23:07
你邊個報告有話peer review 左?
2021-04-08 10:24:00
去到拎WebMD出嚟做source?
大佬呀你唔好柒成咁啦
2021-04-08 10:24:53
2021-04-08 10:26:10
個報告係響Nature publish 咁,發雞盲。
2021-04-08 10:27:08

2021-04-08 10:28:03
大和田
2021-04-08 10:28:40
執多劑
2021-04-08 10:31:09
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03398-2

就係呢個報告,係響Nature 發表。

D 藥廠用人造假病毒黎測試,然後話比人聽有效。。。
點知之後用真病毒一試就發現原來係無撚用。
2021-04-08 10:32:58
第一劑無效
第二劑有效 你信唔信

往死裡打就有效
2021-04-08 10:35:51
NEJM同Nature Medicine都冇Peer-review?
你識唔識架

就算冇Peer review
NEJM同Nature medicine都大粒過你啲MedRXiv

嗱畀多兩份你
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2103740
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2104036
吹水台自選台熱 門最 新手機台時事台政事台World體育台娛樂台動漫台Apps台遊戲台影視台講故台健康台感情台潮流台上班台財經台房屋台飲食台旅遊台學術台校園台汽車台音樂台創意台硬件台攝影台玩具台寵物台軟件台活動台電訊台直播台站務台成人台黑 洞