3 ms·
60% is pretty good for an inactivated full virus vaccine. That's about what the trivalent seasonal influenza vaccines (using the same general technique) achieve
by superkuh 6y ago
60% is pretty good for an inactivated full virus vaccine. That's about what the trivalent seasonal influenza vaccines (using the same general technique) achieve.
- gruez 6y ago>That's about what the trivalent seasonal influenza vaccines (using the same general technique) achieve. Doesn't the seasonal flu vaccine also have the issue that they have to "predict" what strains would be active? Is that already factored into the effectiveness rate?
- sanxiyn 6y agoYes it is already factored in. Influenza vaccine efficacy is usually calculated separately for "matched" influenza and all influenza. 60% range is for matched.
- ulfw 6y agoWhy the constant "flu" comparisons? It's a different virus.
- rimliu 6y agoBesides that other comments said: we cannot compare to other coronaviruses, because we do not have vaccine for a common cold.
- slaw 6y agoBoth are respiratory diseases with similar symptoms. Most of the times you need laboratory test to confirm which one you have.
- dehrmann 6y agoIn this case, part of it was because the vaccines are "...using the same general technique," so it's comparing the vaccines more than the viruses.
- dehrmann 6y agoI'd still rather have an inactivated virus vaccine over an mRNA one because the technology has such a long track record.
- contravariant 6y agoPerhaps, but the last time I checked you needed around 60% of the population to be immune in order to halt the pandemic, so I'm not sure if 60% is good enough in this case.
- majewsky 6y agoAt the rates at which we're going, 10-20% of the population is going to be immune by other means by the time everyone who wants it has been vaccinated.