By Koo Lap

One, two, then three. Three have died consecutively after receiving the Sinovac vaccine. As soon as the news was reported, the percentage of people who had scheduled appointments for vaccination had dropped from 90% to 72%. At this rate, people are only going to be more reluctant. Patrick Nip, who is in charge of this, claimed that the deaths were unrelated to the vaccine, and experts are awaiting autopsy reports. Professor Ivan Hung Fan-ngai, co-convener of the committee assessing clinical cases related to vaccines, said that proportion remains low, meaning that the Sinovac vaccines are safe. Prior to this, professor Hung’s teacher, veteran anti-epidemic expert and 64-year-old Yuen Kwok-yung set an example himself by getting himself vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, which he described as “stronger”, rather than opting for Sinovac’s. There is no need for debate on which vaccine to choose.

Carrie Lam’s administration has been stressing that epidemic prevention and fight should be based on science, and certain vaccines should not be smeared by politics. One million doses of the Sinovac vaccine arrived in Hong Kong on Feb. 19. They were personally received by Patrick Nip and Sophia Chan, declaring “heartfelt thanks to the Central People’s Government for its full support”. On Mar. 7, 750,000 doses of Pfizer vaccine arrived in Hong Kong. They were received by no high-ranking officials, let alone sweeping gratitude. On Feb. 22, the Sinovac vaccination began. With Carrie Lam as the lead, senior officials, Executive Council members, and President of the Legislative Council were vaccinated on television. On Mar. 9, the Pfizer vaccination began. There were no gongs and drums and no yapping about the event. It is self-evident who has been using the vaccine for political propaganda and demonstrating patriotic education.

Back to science. What are the views of the 12 experts appointed by Carrie Lam on the two vaccines? After reviewing the clinical reports, they believed that both vaccines can be used. As Sophia Chan puts it, better to be vaccinated than not. The effective rate of Sinovac is 50.6%, which barely meets the minimum requirement of 50% as set by the WHO – the efficacy of the vaccine is like tossing a coin, head or tail, 50-50. In contrast, Pfizer has an effective rate of more than 95%. Between the two, it is no wonder that Yuen Kwok-yung prefers the “stronger” Pfizer. In the end, experts believe in numbers and their actions are the most honest.

For that 0.6% benefit of “better vaccinated than not”, experts have listed a total of 17 items to note when getting Sinovac. The first two are especially related to the insufficient data: 1) Insufficient data of protection persistence, virus-prevention defense measures must be maintained after vaccination. 2) Insufficient data of efficacy in people aged 60 and above, such people must pay special attention to their physical health conditions and related risks when vaccinating. It is especially necessary to increase vigilance after the injection, since there is no knowing of how long the effect will be maintained, proving the 0.6% advantage from vaccination. At the same time, there could be allergic reactions and other risks such as facial paralysis. One can’t help but ask: better to be vaccinated than not?

In contrast, experts have listed much fewer items to note when getting Pfizer. Other than common phenomena that follow vaccinations, such as allergies and pain from the needle, there are two main items regarding insufficient data: 1) For people on immune system suppression drugs, there is not sufficient data of efficacy. 2) Insufficient data of protection persistence. In addition, special attention should be paid to the storage of the vaccine – at a very low temperature of -90℃ to -60℃. Nothing has been said about people over 60 taking extra precautions.

In addition to the comparisons of efficacy and side effects, the expert report also listed the response towards the two vaccines from different countries, and pointed out that the countries that have permitted the use of Sinovac include Indonesia, Turkey, Brazil, Chile, and China; countries that have permitted the use of Pfizer include the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, Switzerland, Singapore, the European Union, Israel, Norway, etc. Israel, the United Kingdom, and the United States are the regions with the highest rates of vaccination. Hong Kong has always followed the lead of these European and American “developed countries”. Considering facts, data, and freedom of choice, are experts going to follow the leads of Indonesia, Turkey and Brazil to recommend Sinovac? Putting Sinovac, with its insufficient data, and Pfizer, with its almost perfect score, side by side, it definitely looks more like political decisions than science.

Prior to the Handover, Hong Kong was an authentic world-class metropolis and an international financial center. It had a clean government, and the freest economy. It also had what Chris Patten called the world’s most superior civil servants, and a police force that topped the Asia-Pacific region. Since the Handover, Hong Kong has not exemplified the words of Jiang Zemin to become better, but has found itself on the reverse train of speeding towards a complete “one system” of authoritarianism. Today, the only thing left for Hongkongers to take pride in is the medical system established a century ago by British Hong Kong. However, with the rampage of the Wuhan Virus and this battle of the vaccine, it looks like medical experts are also becoming politically correct. With the breach of the medical system, how is Hong Kong to be spared from a full collapse?

Click here for Chinese version

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play