I qualified it, but feel free to continue to quibble about it.
Not to "quibble" but to clarify your statement. My response would have been different if it was posed as a question.........but it was not.
My response was to your still baseless claim that their initial efficacy turned out to be untrue. Re-read my post as to why the efficacy was high in the Serrano study, plus the fact that you misinterpreted the 95% death efficacy number. Phase 3 trials resulted in an efficacy of 50.7%
And my response was, too many people relied on those numbers coming out of all the studies.........and lined up for the jabs.......well before it was even accepted by the WHO for emergency use authorization. So it begs the question......On what basis were people taking the Si No Vac vaccine?
I'm still waiting for a link to your claim that the Chinese funded the studies.
I gave you a link from the Global Times. When China "partners" with you.........there is a quid pro quo. It is not hard to understand...........if you understand the Chinese way of doing things.
By way of example, the WHO report on the origins of Covid was a Joint Statement approved by the Chinese government. They demanded to approve it before review and release as a condition for access to the lab in Wuhan. Further they retained veto rights on which scientists/researchers/medical people were allowed into the facility............and did veto a number of individuals.
And while I still refer to it as common sense.............some may refer to it as paranoia.................a healthy paranoia if you will.
If it's out there - post it. It would be refreshing to have some actual facts for a change. So far, you have offered nothing but speculation, conjecture, and deduction fallacies.
The multiple initial claims are out there of its prowess............and also of its less than stellar performance.........and of the deaths of people after taking Covid. Lots of it posted in many of the Covid threads here............
That's already been answered.
And that should provide one with the common sense I refer to.............or in your words "paranoia."
I'm not defending it. I will, however, dispute baseless claims.
Again, I have read enough and posted many links about the virus, its origins and the Chinese vaccine so as to remain skeptical. That skepticism is hardly baseless.
But if you trust liars/thieves, that is your prerogative.
Has anyone seen Dr. Ai Fen or know who Dr Li Wenliang is?
When I start to see respected independent research on Si No Vac............then and only then will I start to believe that it is not mere placebo-like..............and to date research claims that have been with a "partner" carry little validity for me.
Respectfully,
Playacaribe2