3 ms·

> I wasn't making a direct comparison You were quite obviously comparing Xinjiang to the Holocaust. If you're backing off from that offensive comment, then tha

> I wasn't making a direct comparison You were quite obviously comparing Xinjiang to the Holocaust. If you're backing off from that offensive comment, then that's good, but you did indeed draw the connection. > You claim Vaccine disinfo by the NYTs. You point out that actually, Chinese vaccines are as good if not better than the other, worst performing vaccines (Russian, etc.). The Russian Sputnik-V vaccine is actually one of the most effective vaccines. Based on phase-III trial data, it's similar to Moderna and BioNTech/Pfizer. The Mongolian Health Ministry found not only that Sinopharm performed better than the Russian vaccine, but that it also performed better than the British AstraZeneca vaccine, which is one of the most widely used vaccines in the West. > Chinese vaccine makers specifically refuse to release their user data proving efficacy (unlike western vaccines that continually do so) so we are left to guess how effective they are. This is simply not true. There are multiple peer-reviewed papers reporting on the results of phase-III trials of the Sinopharm and Sinovac vaccines (e.g., [1,2]). This is in addition to several reports by national health agencies from across the world about the efficacy of these vaccines (e.g., [3]). There is a lot of data in the public domain, and the efficacy of these vaccines is well understood. > But the director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Gao Fu, said at a conference Saturday their efficacy rates needed improving. Gao Fu was widely misquoted in the Western press. He made some general comments about how to improve efficacy of vaccines, and proposed very similar ideas as are being considered in the West with AstraZeneca and J&J. That was then spun as an "admission" that Chinese vaccines don't work. Gao Fu even publicly complained about how his words were being misrepresented, but that didn't stop various irresponsible newspapers from continuing to misrepresent his statements. > China has all but shut down their country because they have no confidence their vaccines work against Delta. China is reacting strongly to the latest outbreak because China has a zero-tolerance strategy. Even if they were using the Moderna or BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine, they would follow the exact same policy. After all, SARS-CoV-2 still continues to spread in countries that have more than 50% vaccination rates with mRNA vaccines, and that's completely unacceptable to Chinese society. They are set of getting back to zero incidence. > I'm thoroughly unimpressed by your only example of this claimed bias I raised one example, just to illustrate the problem. The example I raised was one of the most respected newspapers in the US promoting unscientific anti-vax narratives. That's pretty bad. In your response, you delivered a second example of bad reporting on China: Gao Fu's misconstrued comments. I don't mean to be impolite, but in your comments here, you've very confidently repeated a number of false claims about Chinese vaccines that are very widely believed in the West, largely because of the low quality and nationalistic bent of reporting on China. > But it's clear you have made up your mind which "side" you are on in all this. I'm on the "side" that says we should have an accurate picture of China. I don't want a glowing picture of the country. I just object to the extremely distorted, narrow image that's become widespread in the US and Europe over the last few years. As I said at the outset, for people who are at all familiar with China, the "China" that you read about in the news is totally unrecognizable. I don't think demonizing a major country that most people know next to nothing about is a good idea. > Does your livelihood depend on them in any way? Please read HN's rules about these sorts of accusations. 1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34037666/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34037666/ 2. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34246358/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34246358/ 3. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2107715 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2107715

fortuna86 5y ago
> You were quite obviously comparing Xinjiang to the Holocaust. If you're backing off from that offensive comment, then that's good, but you did indeed draw the connection. Don't put words in other people's mouths, your assumptions haven't been right so far. I was making the argument that you don't need to physically be somewhere to understand what is happening there, a point you still haven't addressed. And no, XJ isn't the holocaust. There aren't ovens and people aren't shoved in them. But the holocaust started out as forced work camps with elements of torture as well. Trying to downplay that very real atrocity as "yes but it wasn't the holocaust" is pretty cynical. > The Russian Sputnik-V vaccine is actually one of the most effective vaccines I'm sorry is that your opinion? In this world, we work in data. And Russia, like China, have done all they can to obscure standardized third-party testing of their vaccines (because they are worried that less efficacy is a political loss). They limit the data, then turn on their propaganda machines to try and convince people they are the best. Apparently, it works. https://www.reuters.com/world/the-great-reboot/exclusive-european-efforts-assess-russias-sputnik-v-vaccine-stymied-by-data-gaps-2021-07-13/ https://www.reuters.com/world/the-great-reboot/exclusive-eur... Early "tests" done on the Russian vaccine were done by the government, with 0 oversight or transparency. Later Phase 3 trial data was made available, but there's still lots of evidence of political influence on the trails and data itself. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/11/russia-s-claim-successful-covid-19-vaccine-doesn-t-pass-smell-test-critics-say https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/11/russia-s-claim-succe... > There are multiple peer-reviewed papers reporting on the results of phase-III trials Results of trials. Results of data handed to them as a honeypot. The first rule of data analysis is you collect your own data, otherwise you could be setup. And China specifically forbid the release of the raw patient data, as I already mentioned. Honestly, I don't feel like continuing this. This is increasingly bad faith, you feel attacked and continue to double down on literal state propaganda. > you've very confidently repeated a number of false claims about Chinese vaccines Up is down, left is right, war is peace. Gao Fu said what he said, it was translated directly. He walked it back (of course) because his political masters saw it as embarrassing. Chinese officials TO THIS DAY publicly claim they need to make their vaccines more efficient. https://twitter.com/StuartKLau/status/1423679708248555521 https://twitter.com/StuartKLau/status/1423679708248555521 You are arguing a position not even the CCP maintains. The whole world knows their vaccines aren't good enough, but here we are. > I'm on the "side" that says we should have an accurate picture of China. >As I said at the outset, for people who are at all familiar with China, the "China" that you read about in the news is totally unrecognizable. Isn't that the point? China shapes their domestic narrative to the point where most Han Chinese think the millions of people locked away in XJ are all "terrorists". They don't get to see the footage and testimonials from the camps. They couldn't speak out against them even if they wanted to. All you have to say is "China is misrepresented" - then tell me, how are we supposed to discuss an authoritarian country with prison camps and expansionist military and imperialist ambitions? More footage of Panda bears playing in zoos? If we can't honestly discuss what is happening, what's the point? According to conversations i've had with Chinese nationalists, their argument boil down to "you all did colonialism and expansionism before and now it's our turn". Which I obviously disagree with, do you?

fortuna86 5y ago

> You were quite obviously comparing Xinjiang to the Holocaust. If you're backing off from that offensive comment, then that's good, but you did indeed draw the connection. Don't put words in other people's mouths, your assumptions haven't been right so far. I was making the argument that you don't need to physically be somewhere to understand what is happening there, a point you still haven't addressed. And no, XJ isn't the holocaust. There aren't ovens and people aren't shoved in them. But the holocaust started out as forced work camps with elements of torture as well. Trying to downplay that very real atrocity as "yes but it wasn't the holocaust" is pretty cynical. > The Russian Sputnik-V vaccine is actually one of the most effective vaccines I'm sorry is that your opinion? In this world, we work in data. And Russia, like China, have done all they can to obscure standardized third-party testing of their vaccines (because they are worried that less efficacy is a political loss). They limit the data, then turn on their propaganda machines to try and convince people they are the best. Apparently, it works. https://www.reuters.com/world/the-great-reboot/exclusive-european-efforts-assess-russias-sputnik-v-vaccine-stymied-by-data-gaps-2021-07-13/ https://www.reuters.com/world/the-great-reboot/exclusive-eur... Early "tests" done on the Russian vaccine were done by the government, with 0 oversight or transparency. Later Phase 3 trial data was made available, but there's still lots of evidence of political influence on the trails and data itself. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/11/russia-s-claim-successful-covid-19-vaccine-doesn-t-pass-smell-test-critics-say https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/11/russia-s-claim-succe... > There are multiple peer-reviewed papers reporting on the results of phase-III trials Results of trials. Results of data handed to them as a honeypot. The first rule of data analysis is you collect your own data, otherwise you could be setup. And China specifically forbid the release of the raw patient data, as I already mentioned. Honestly, I don't feel like continuing this. This is increasingly bad faith, you feel attacked and continue to double down on literal state propaganda. > you've very confidently repeated a number of false claims about Chinese vaccines Up is down, left is right, war is peace. Gao Fu said what he said, it was translated directly. He walked it back (of course) because his political masters saw it as embarrassing. Chinese officials TO THIS DAY publicly claim they need to make their vaccines more efficient. https://twitter.com/StuartKLau/status/1423679708248555521 https://twitter.com/StuartKLau/status/1423679708248555521 You are arguing a position not even the CCP maintains. The whole world knows their vaccines aren't good enough, but here we are. > I'm on the "side" that says we should have an accurate picture of China. >As I said at the outset, for people who are at all familiar with China, the "China" that you read about in the news is totally unrecognizable. Isn't that the point? China shapes their domestic narrative to the point where most Han Chinese think the millions of people locked away in XJ are all "terrorists". They don't get to see the footage and testimonials from the camps. They couldn't speak out against them even if they wanted to. All you have to say is "China is misrepresented" - then tell me, how are we supposed to discuss an authoritarian country with prison camps and expansionist military and imperialist ambitions? More footage of Panda bears playing in zoos? If we can't honestly discuss what is happening, what's the point? According to conversations i've had with Chinese nationalists, their argument boil down to "you all did colonialism and expansionism before and now it's our turn". Which I obviously disagree with, do you?