Covid19 - Unusually high adverse cases in Pfizer vaccine in Singapore

 

SINGAPORE — A total of 432 adverse events from the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were reported by healthcare professionals in Singapore to the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) as of Wednesday (27 January), of which three were cases of anaphylaxis, a rapid onset of severe and potentially life-threatening allergic reactions....

The three individuals, in their 20s and 30s, had developed multiple symptoms such as rash, breathlessness, lip swelling, throat tightness and giddiness....

 More than 113,000 people in Singapore have received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. This currently brings the incidence rate of anaphylaxis locally to about 2.7 per 100,000 doses administered, said the MOH.

The ministry also noted that incidence rates reported abroad are around one to two per 100,000 doses administered, after they have administered millions of vaccine doses. In the US, allergic reactions are occurring at a rate of 11.1 per 1 million vaccinations, according to local health officials. By comparison, flu vaccines cause about 1.3 such reactions per million doses administered.  Yahoo News

The adverse cases in Singapore seem to be abnormally high. Is it because we are reporting the truth and others were reporting half truths, hiding the adverse numbers? Singapore's 2.7 against lying US number of 1.11 per 100,000, this is more than twice the number.  With the American track records, proven millions of times during Trump's lying Administration, the number for the US is likely to be very much higher. This nation of liars cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Only the sillies still believe in their lies.

With the congenital liar Trump and professional liar Pompeo gone, including the swamp in the White House, the new Administration under Biden is not going to be more trustworthy. 

Compare to flu vaccines, the adverse effects of Pfizer vaccine has 10 times more adverse effects for the world. And Singapore's number is more than 20 times that of the world. Are the numbers really safe or acceptable? 432 adverse cases and 3 could be deadly cannot be taken lightly.

When these vaccines were first approved for use, they said that the young and old should not be vaccinated as a precaution. What they meant was that the vaccines would be safe for the adults in between the young and the old. The adverse cases in Singapore were young people in their 20s and 30s. This creates another doubt about the danger of these vaccines.

The 33 cases of death in Norway are not so innocent as the West would want the world to believe. Not related to the vaccines?

Latest from CNA.

PARIS: French President Emmanuel Macron said on Friday (Jan 29) that AstraZeneca's coronavirus vaccine appeared not to be effective for people over 65 years of age.

Speaking to reporters only hours before the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommended the vaccine for adults of all ages, Macron also questioned Britain's decision to delay the second dose of Covid vaccines to inoculate more people.

Macron said there was "very little information" available for the vaccine developed by the British-Swedish company and Oxford University.

"Today we think that it is quasi-ineffective for people over 65," he told the reporters, his office confirmed to AFP.

'German panel advises against AstraZeneca Covid19 jab for over 65s. '

Is Singapore using AstraZeneca vaccine on its senior citizens?

The big strategic game in Asia isn’t military but economic - posted by KM

 The big strategic game in Asia isn’t military but economic

Australia, India, Japan, and the United States will be uncomfortable living with a more powerful China. It’s legitimate for them to hedge by cooperating in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, informally known as the Quad. Unfortunately, the Quad will not alter the course of Asian history for two simple reasons: First, the four countries have different geopolitical interests and vulnerabilities. Second, and more fundamentally, they are in the wrong game. The big strategic game in Asia isn’t military but economic.

Australia is the most vulnerable. Its economy is highly dependent on China. Australians have been proud of their remarkable three decades of recession-free growth. That happened only because Australia became, functionally, an economic province of China : In 2018-2019, 33 percent of its exports went to China, whereas only 5 percent went to the United States.

This is why it was unwise for Australia to slap China in the face publicly by calling for an international inquiry on China and COVID-19. Now Australia has dug itself into a hole. All of Asia is watching intently to see who will blink in the current Australia-China standoff. In many ways, the outcome is pre-determined. If Beijing blinks, other countries may follow Australia in humiliating China. Hence, effectively, Australia has blocked it into a corner.

And China can afford to wait. The problem for Canberra is that China holds most of the cards. Power in international relations lies with the country that can impose high costs on another country at a low cost to itself. This is what China can do to Australia, but Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and his colleagues do not seem to understand that.

No countries can compare with China and Japan in terms of the length of their historical contact: 1,500 years.” China and Japan maintained deep cultural ties throughout much of their past, but China, with its great civilization and resources, had the upper hand. If, for most of 1,500 years, Japan could live in peace with China, it can revert to that pattern again for the next 1,000 years. However, as in the famously slow Kabuki plays in Japan, the changes in the relationship will be very slight and incremental, with both sides moving gradually and subtly into a new modus vivendi. They will not become friends anytime soon, but Japan will signal subtly that it understands China’s core interests. Yes, there will be bumps along the way, but China and Japan will adjust slowly and steadily.

As two old civilizations, India and China have also lived side by side over millenniums. However, they had few direct contacts, effectively kept apart by the Himalayas. Unfortunately, modern technology has no longer made the Himalayas insurmountable. Hence, the increasing number of face-to-face encounters between Chinese and Indian soldiers. Such encounters always lead to accidents, one of which happened in June 2020. Since then, a tsunami of anti-China sentiment has swept across India. Over the next few years, relations will go downhill. The avalanche has been triggered.

Yet China will be patient because time is working in its favor. In 1980, the economies of China and India were the same size. By 2020, China’s had grown five times larger. The longer-term relationship between two powers always depends, in the long run, on the relative size of the two economies. The Soviet Union lost the Cold War because the U.S. economy could vastly outspend it. Similarly, just as the United States presented China with a major geopolitical gift by withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement in 2017, India did China a major geopolitical favor by not joining the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Economics is where the big game is playing. With the United States staying out of TPP and India out of RCEP, a massive economic ecosystem centered on China is evolving in the region.

[ K M ]

Attack on Capitol Hill - More white lies to cover one big lie

 

 The fumbling and confusion in the line of command and control of the National Guard during the invasion of Capitol Hill start to flow and becoming clearer as to why it was so ridiculous and dangerous and a level of incompetence unimaginable in the world's most powerful military country. How so?

Two points stood out glaringly that were just unbelieveable even to a novice or layman on the deployment of the National Guards in an emergency situation or national crisis. The first point was that when Capitol Hill called for military assistance, when violence broke out, shots were fired, rioters inside the Capitol Building and the lives and safety of the senators and representatives were on the chopping block, the commander of the National Guards would not move, because he needed an order from the Pentagon or the White House.

Can you believe that, a clear and present danger of lives at stake, not ordinary lives but the leaders of the country, no military commander would step out and take action. They sat on their asses, refused to move, would only move if ordered to?  Anyone that is familiar with the myths of Hollywood and how it glorified the dare daring and gungho military commanders to rise above the call of duty during an imminent crisis, risking personal safety and acting without orders when the ground situations demanded, to just do it, would have their mouths gaping wide in shock. Huh, the lives of senators and house representatives on the line and they would not do anything? Is this America, are these American soldiers, the National Guards?

Secondly, another general tried to explain the inaction away, saying that it was super fast, the fastest they could ever do, to get to  Capitol Hill in 8 hours. Could not do it earlier. Credit must go to the Guards for acting so fast?

His justification, when an order was received to move the troops, they must assess the threats, the type of threats, then to decide what kinds of arms to bring along, then to draw arms from the armoury, get all the logistical support, get them men dressed before moving.  All these took times, no matter how urgent, how serious, the soldiers must go through their routines before they could march to Capitol Hill?

Can you believe this crap? Were they preparing to attack Iraq or Syria? The Capitol Hill was attacked and breached by a mob. What special considerations and special equipment and arms do they need, they need to assess the threats and equip themselves? What were soldiers on stand by for if they were not prepared and fully equipped for such an emergency? Even one hour was too long. The soldiers, the Guards on standby were expected to move almost immediately when the alarm was raised to move out.

Who was that clownish general trying to bluff? Why was he lying about the readiness to answer an emergency situation, and claiming that 8 hours was reasonable and creditable? The Capitol would be taken in 2 hours in a real situation.  The senators and representatives would have been lynched by the mobs.

It takes many white lies to cover a white lie. And this certainly was what happened on 6 Jan 21. If the National Guards needed 8 hours to activate, the war is over. The USA would be been bombed to the ground. And to think that the generals refused to move the National Guards when their assistance was called for by Capitol Hill.

How many more lies would the Americans want to tell the world, oh, in this case, to their daft Americans? Of course those in the know would not be conned by such cheap excuses. Lives were at stake!

PS. Lt Gen Charles Flint, brother of 'pardoned' Lt Gen Mike Flint, Trump special confidante, was there when the order to move the Guards was received, but the Guards were not ordered to move until several hours later.

Why are Singaporeans so upset about FTs coming to this little red dot?

 

Anonymous said...

Why are Singaporeans so upset about FTs coming to this little red dot? Is it because Singaporeans are jealous when they see others earning good salary? If you are as good as these FTs then you too will be able to earn that kind of money. The fact that they are here means these FTs are needed to do the jobs that are beyond the capability of Singaporeans. Let us look at banking. The FTs from India are definitely much more capable that Singaporeans. They are better in the banking sector. Also in technology, the Indian and the PRC FTs are miles better than the Singaporeans. Singapore often boasts that the country has the best education system. But when it comes to thinking out of the box, Singaporeans are miles behind the lean and mean FTs from India, China, Malaysia and most Asean countries. So, please remember that FTs are needed to oil the machinery of Singapore. Without FTs Singapore cannot survive.  

January 22, 2021 2:04 am

The above post by Anonymous merits serious reflection on the fate of Singapore and Singaporeans. If what were said are true, a mismatch or outdated education system that could not prepare our young for the new world, unsuitable for employment, that all the boasts about how good our education is, how expensive it is and value for money, are all hogwash.

If it is true that the foreigners are better than Singaporeans, because their education system are better or they are better, then the future of Singaporeans is cooked, finito. There is no fight and Singaporeans should rightly choose to take on jobs as hawkers, PHV drivers, food deliverers, security guards, cashiers, sitting at the entrance of buildings and shopping centres to take temperature and check in people. These are about the best jobs remaining for the unsuitably qualified Singaporeans. 

If it is true, then with these neighbouring countries overflowing with talents that are better than Singaporeans, these countries would be more developed and better managed than Singapore. Is that the case? And the talents that came to Singapore are not their best as these are the unsuitable talents in their home countries, unable to find jobs there as their jobs are taken by their better talents. These are their rejects.

Can you imagine that Singapore is only taking their rejects and their rejects are better than many Singaporeans. And the funny thing is that their countries are still struggling to climb out of the third world label, many still filled with slums and dysfunctional govts?

Singaporeans are doomed, and so would Singapore when these rejected talents take over this island, for sure they can't do better than their home countries. They could only pluck the low hanging fruits and after these are gone, they would run out of ideas, like the one trick ponies.  Singapore will then join their home countries as third world slum countries.

What do you think?

 

In the eyes of Western elites, Westerners can have the privilege to eat meat while Chinese should just eat grass.

 

Anonymous said...

In the eyes of Western elites, Westerners can have the privilege to eat meat while Chinese should just eat grass.

Time magazine on Friday posted an article entitled "How China could change the world by taking meat off the menu." The author draws a connection between Chinese eating meat and global environmental problems. It said: "Livestock farming produces 20 percent to 50 percent of all man-made greenhouse gases… Halving China's animal-agriculture sector could result in a 1 billion metric-ton reduction of CO2 emissions."

In 2018, the Atlantic published a piece with the headline of "China's love for meat is threatening its green movement." In 2019, the Economist released an article entitled "The planet needs China to curb its appetite for meat." It is reported in June 2020 that Pat Brown, chief executive of Impossible Foods, a company developing plant-based substitutes for meat products, even said, "Every time someone in China eats a piece of meat, a little puff of smoke goes up in the Amazon."

Chinese people's eating patterns remarkably differ from people in the West. Chinese mainly eat grain and vegetables, supplemented by meat, while for Westerners, meat has been their staple food. The proportion of meat in the diet of Westerners is much higher than that of Chinese.

The Time article states that China consumes 28 percent of the world's meat. This data has been cited by Western media outlets since 2016. Western media tend to criticize China by referring to the total amount. As China is the most populous country in the world, using a total figure as a benchmark is unfair to China. Yet based on meat consumption per capita, the West far exceeds that of China.

In terms of beef, the OECD shows in 2020 that China's consumption of 4.2 kilograms per capita lagged behind the world average at 6.4 kilos. The figure for Argentina was about nine times as much as that of China, and the US more than six times that of China. The consumption of many Western countries, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK, was also much higher than China's.

According to media report, beef production causes five times more climate-warming emissions than pork. If having less meat is essential to "change the world," it is more than fair to urge the West to reduce its beef consumption. The US consumed far more meat per capita in 2020 alone, so how can they pass the buck of Amazon destruction to China?

When interviewed by an Australian media outlet in 2010, former US president Barack Obama said, "If over a billion Chinese citizens have the same living patterns as Australians and Americans do right now, then all of us are in for a very miserable time. The planet just can't sustain it."

In the eyes of some Western elites, Westerners can have the privilege to eat meat while Chinese should just eat grass. They are reluctant to see Chinese are living an increasingly abundant life, and that the living standards of the Chinese are getting closer to the Westerners. They feel their sense of superiority including the one toward their political system challenged when they see Chinese, whose political path and values sharply differ from them, can also enjoy a better life.

January 25, 2021 12:20 pm

By Anonymous