national

Shionogi applies for COVID-19 vaccine approval

21 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

21 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

it may become an option

The key word is option.

8 ( +15 / -7 )

Since I didn't rush out to get an mRNA vaccination and have complete freedom to choose, I'm probably going to go with this one. More time and research was put into this vaccine, and likely, it is a safer and more effective product.

Also, this company has a considerably smaller level of global influence than Pfizer; so if you get this vaccine, you are effectively sticking one to Pfizer, and their regime of political control and information censorship.

-1 ( +11 / -12 )

The key word is option.

Yes, because people can still choose (or have as their only option for valid medical reasons) to get the full risks of infection that are much more important than side effects from any of the vaccines approved for use in the public. This could become yet another way to avoid the worst of the options available, the infection.

-12 ( +5 / -17 )

No thank you, why reinvent the wheel or even grease when it's running just fine.

-1 ( +10 / -11 )

More time and research was put into this vaccine, and likely, it is a safer and more effective product.

According to the article that is false, neutralizing antibodies are a good surrogate for protection, but if the previous vaccines underwent clinical trials that directly showed this protection that means they have a much stronger claim of efficacy.

Also, this company has a considerably smaller level of global influence than Pfizer; so if you get this vaccine, you are effectively sticking one to Pfizer, and their regime of political control and information censorship.

Since this regime is mostly imaginary so would be the sticking. No company is censoring false information from antiscientific/antivaxxer groups, the scientific and medical community is, because that is their responsibility, to discard from the discussion falsehoods that put in risk the public health.

-11 ( +6 / -17 )

If I had to get a Covid injection, I would rather get a protein-based one like this one instead of the mRNA lipid nanoparticle ones, which have way too many serious adverse effects.

But I'm good, I have natural immunity, which is far superior to and longer lasting than that produced by the current injections.

0 ( +11 / -11 )

this might be better than the commercialized Pfizer etc

1 ( +7 / -6 )

just another business.

pokus-omyl.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

which have way too many serious adverse effects

Protein based vaccines are also included in those that have more serious adverse effects, and lower efficacy.

But I'm good, I have natural immunity, which is far superior to and longer lasting than that produced by the current injections.

Only in the same sense as losing your hand is a superior way to avoid injuring that hand, if you are going to get all the risks and negative effects you are trying to prevent in the first place that is not "best" in any sense.

-10 ( +7 / -17 )

Continuing this discussion.

No company is censoring false information from antiscientific/antivaxxer groups, the scientific and medical community is

The "scientific and medical community" do not exist in some kind of neutral, non-partisan vacuum free from bias or outside influence. They either work for the vaccine manufacturers directly/indirectly, or are given grant money to do "research" which heavily favors the product being sold.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

Protein based vaccines are also included in those that have more serious adverse effects, and lower efficacy.

Yeah, I am sure they to have risks. But they do not have those inherent to the lipid nanoparticles, which accumulates around various important organs; or the mRNA (and its pseudouridines) which circulates throughout the body for several weeks.

But I'm good, I have natural immunity, which is far superior to and longer lasting than that produced by the current injections.

Only in the same sense as losing your hand is a superior way to avoid injuring that hand, if you are going to get all the risks and negative effects you are trying to prevent in the first place that is not "best" in any sense.

For anyone below 60 or so, healthy, and not vitamin D defficient, the risks from the injection is far greater than from the virus. That was already true with the original virus, and is much more true now with omicron, especially if they have access to certain products...

5 ( +9 / -4 )

But they do not have those inherent to the lipid nanoparticles

They have those inherent to protein based vaccines, which are well recognized and not easy to prevent.

which accumulates around various important organs

Not to the degree to being a risk under therapeutic use, and obviously not even close to the accumulation (including all other viral proteins as well) that accumulate much more during the viral infection. If protein accumulation in organs is a concern that would make infection a hugely much worse option.

or the mRNA (and its pseudouridines) which circulates throughout the body for several weeks.

For barely detectable levels that do not represent a significant risk.

For anyone below 60 or so, healthy, and not vitamin D defficient, the risks from the injection is far greater than from the virus.

That is false information clearly debunked by scientific data, repeating it does not make it less false. There is no population for which the vaccines are recommended where the risk of the vaccine is even comparable with the much higher risk from the disease, much less greater.

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

this might be better than the commercialized Pfizer etc

You realize that this is also a commercial product developed to make money, right?

10 ( +10 / -0 )

this might be better than the commercialized Pfizer etc

You realize that this is also a commercial product developed to make money, right?

True, but I wonder whether Shionigi has as bad a record as Pfizer, who has been convicted a number of times for falsifying data, bribery, fraud....

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Protein based vaccines are also included in those that have more serious adverse effects, and lower efficacy.

These types of comments contribute to hesitancy.

Why are you trying to dissuade people from taking Shinogi's product?

5 ( +9 / -4 )

At least the massive amounts of money from “maybe work” vaccines will go to Japanese companies and not to dodgy US ones when the yen is between 139-150.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

messenger RNA vaccines developed by Pfizer Inc or Moderna Inc

I understand they have patented up this area so densely that no other company can reasonably develop in this area.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Sanji,

Pfizer definitely isn’t a corporate angel

Nobody ever said they were. They are a for-profit business, complete with everything that entails in a highly competitive market.

and isn’t making decisions in the publics best interest/health…otherwise why did they settle the biggest fraud case with the USgov!!??

Why? Because they are a for-profit business. Settling was in all likelihood the way to prevent a more expensive court ruling. The case had nothing to do with health issues, by the way, it was about illegal promotion of off-label drug usage.

This is not a defense for Pfizer, but boy, if you shunned all products by big corporate outfits that had lost some random lawsuit in their past, your selection of goods would be seriously limited.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I am not sold on mRNA tech for airborne viruses atm from what I have read and seen.

Have seen some promise for cancers and non mutable types of diseases where it doesn't need to constantly change and become obsolete so quickly.

The risk / reward for these seems more appropriate also imo.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

TakimataToday  03:07 pm JST

This is not a defense for Pfizer, but boy, if you shunned all products by big corporate outfits that had lost some random lawsuit in their past, your selection of goods would be seriously limited

Wow some random 2.4 billion dollar lawsuit loss for willfully misleading public to make money...yeh squeaky clean. Oh dear. Also it's not random Pfizer has lost multiple law suits of this nature!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Sanji,

2.4 billion dollar lawsuit loss for willfully misleading public

Say, do you even read the links you yourself post? It was not "willfully misleading the public", it was illegal marketing to doctors. As the Justice Department states: "Pfizer promoted the sale of Bextra for several uses and dosages that the FDA specifically declined to approve due to safety concerns." More specifically, they sent out promotional samples to doctors, with a description and in doses not approved by the FDA. They also offered kickbacks to doctors prescribing their drugs, which of course is despicable. The "public" is only involved insofar the Justice Department argues the public needs to be able to rely on the independent judgement of doctors.

Details, so important.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites