JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Friday, April 4, 2025

PM, PAHO, Chinese Embassy condemn news report on Sinopharm

by

Rishard Khan
1201 days ago
20211219

rishard.khan@guardian.co.tt

The Chi­nese Em­bassy, Prime Min­is­ter Dr Kei­th Row­ley, the Pan Amer­i­can Health Or­ga­ni­za­tion (PA­HO) and the St Au­gus­tine Med­ical Lab­o­ra­to­ry (STAML), have all con­demned an Ex­press news­pa­per ar­ti­cle that chal­lenged the ef­fi­ca­cy of the Sinopharm vac­cine.

The ar­ti­cle, pub­lished in the news­pa­per’s Sun­day edi­tion, im­plied the Sinopharm COVID-19 vac­cine is in­ef­fec­tive at gen­er­at­ing im­mu­ni­ty against the dis­ease.

Four titer an­ti­body tests done by STAML were used as part of a re­port which sought to com­pare an­ti­body lev­els be­tween peo­ple vac­ci­nat­ed with Sinopharm and As­traZeneca. The re­port has since gar­nered heavy crit­i­cism.

Dr Row­ley last evening de­scribed the re­port as the “worst piece of ir­re­spon­si­ble jour­nal­ism” he’s ever seen and even called for some­one to be fired.

“In a pan­dem­ic, where thou­sands of doc­tors and many in­ter­na­tion­al agen­cies and hun­dreds of thou­sands of news­pa­pers and oth­er me­dia en­ti­ties are present and re­port­ing, the Ex­press has made the dis­cov­ery as pub­lished to un­der­mine a vac­cine which might very well be a vic­tim of geopol­i­tics,” he said.

“Where is the sci­ence here? Who are the peo­ple re­spon­si­ble for this da­ta set be­ing pub­lished in this way? It’s not on­ly em­bar­rass­ing it is down­right de­struc­tive and wor­ri­some. Who will be fired here? To at­tempt to un­der­mine a na­tion’s vac­ci­na­tion pro­gram in a pan­dem­ic is noth­ing short of crim­i­nal!”

PA­HO al­so is­sued a re­lease last evening re­as­sur­ing that all World Health Or­gan­i­sa­tion (WHO) Emer­gency Use Li­censed (EUL) vac­cines are safe and ef­fec­tive.

“PA­HO/WHO re­as­sures the pub­lic that all EUL-ap­proved vac­cines are proven to be ef­fec­tive in pre­vent­ing se­vere dis­ease, hos­pi­tal­i­sa­tion and death. In­fec­tion can be pre­vent­ed through boost­er dos­es in the case of Sinopharm AND the rig­or­ous ap­pli­ca­tion of the mit­i­ga­tion mea­sures,” she said.

“Sinopharm has an ef­fi­ca­cy rate of 79 per cent against symp­to­matic dis­ease and 79 per cent against hos­pi­tal­iza­tion. Min­i­mal and ex­treme­ly rare ad­verse events have been re­port­ed since the vac­cine’s in­tro­duc­tion in the gen­er­al pop­u­la­tion.”

In a re­lease last evening, the Chi­nese Em­bassy de­scribed the re­port as a “farce.”

“The con­clu­sions of the news re­port are based on a crude and am­a­teur­ish “study” with on­ly 4 sam­ples, and thus com­plete­ly a farce,” it said.

“This most ir­re­spon­si­ble me­dia re­port has bla­tant­ly ig­nored plen­ty of the world-recog­nised sci­en­tif­ic re­search­es, dis­tort­ed the facts, vi­o­lat­ed jour­nal­ism ethics, cre­at­ed pub­lic pan­ic and meant to un­der­mine the re­solve and ac­tions of the Trinidad and To­ba­go peo­ple in their brave bat­tle against this pan­dem­ic at this crit­i­cal mo­ment. We deeply de­plore and firm­ly op­pose this me­dia re­port, urge rel­e­vant par­ties to im­me­di­ate­ly rec­ti­fy its wrong­do­ing, take con­crete mea­sures to un­do the dam­age, and not to move fur­ther down the wrong path.”

While the St Au­gus­tine lab per­formed the titer an­ti­body tests, it said in a re­lease it was not con­tract­ed by the me­dia house to per­form any tests for its re­port.

“STAML was nev­er en­gaged by any me­dia house or me­dia per­son­nel to

par­tic­i­pate in any analy­sis for the pur­pose of as­sess­ing the re­li­a­bil­i­ty of any vac­cine, and state­ments al­lud­ing to same are whol­ly un­true and reck­less,” it said.

STAML di­rec­tor Dr Shari Ram­saran told Guardian Me­dia yes­ter­day that the test they per­formed that was ob­tained by the me­dia house is not the right one to draw the con­clu­sion the ar­ti­cle at­tempt­ed to do.

“The way in which this test was used to gen­er­ate that con­clu­sion was ab­solute­ly false and it’s ter­ri­ble mis­in­for­ma­tion go­ing out to­wards the pub­lic,” she said.

“What was ac­tu­al­ly in­ter­pret­ed from an an­ti­body re­port is just - in putting it nice­ly - it was ut­ter garbage to read and dis­ap­point­ing.”

She said the tests need­ed to eval­u­ate what the ar­ti­cle want­ed would need to be done at a re­search lab­o­ra­to­ry, not a clin­i­cal lab­o­ra­to­ry, like STAML.

Fur­ther­more, she said us­ing four pa­tients as the sam­ple is gross­ly in­ad­e­quate to gen­er­ate a gen­er­alised con­clu­sion as the ar­ti­cle did - es­pe­cial­ly as a num­ber of vari­ables weren’t tak­en in­to con­sid­er­a­tion.

She feared the ar­ti­cle will do noth­ing but gen­er­ate pan­ic among the pub­lic, many of whom are al­ready vac­cine-hes­i­tant.

“It puts so much doubt (in­to the pub­lic) and re­al­ly turns all the work around that oth­er bod­ies have done en­cour­ag­ing vac­ci­na­tions thus far,” she said.

Dr Ram­saran said what the tests did show was, in fact, that the vac­cine does work and does gen­er­ate an an­ti­body re­sponse.

“That’s what the dis­cus­sion should have been be­cause that what the re­sult proves, that every vac­cine that has been giv­en to pa­tients pro­duces an an­ti­body re­sponse so they have the fight against COVID so for the layper­son sit­ting down there, that should be the mes­sage go get vac­ci­nat­ed. Look at the an­ti­body re­sponse, it couldn’t be clear­er,” she said.

Se­nior of­fi­cials at the Ex­press could not be reached for com­ment.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored