COMMENT | Another perspective on the 'new' versus 'old' Covid-19 vaccines
COMMENT | I enjoyed reading Dr Jeyakumar's letter dated Jan 2021.
He raised many pertinent, relevant issues, and I am sure has been sitting in the back of the minds of many of us. The tone of Dr Jeyakumar's letter contrasts 180 degrees against an earlier letter from four NGOs who are more bent on allegations and rhetorics than a really genuine search for solutions.
I will try and tease some of the major issues which he has raised and offer a perspective which I hope is founded on good science, which in our fraternity is described as evidence-based medicine (EBM).
Much of the concerns are directed towards the utilisation of "new" mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna-National Institute of Health) and DNA viral vector technology (AstraZeneca-University of Oxford) vaccines versus the "old" classical live-attenuated, inactivated (Sinovac, Sinopharm, Bharat) or the protein-based vaccines (Novavax, EpiVacCorona-Russian Vector Institute).
Up until today, Jan 29, 2021, there are 102 million global cases of Covid-19, with 2.2 million deaths. In combination with public health measures of masking, distancing, hygiene, 3Ws (wash, wear, warn), avoiding 3Cs (crowded, confined, close) spaces, good ventilation, vaccines are a major tool to exit from this raging pandemic.
I am not sure how much longer you can wait for a vaccine to accelerate this end-game strategy to allow a return to near normalcy. Personally, I think we should not wait a minute longer...
RM12.50 / month
- Unlimited access to award-winning journalism
- Comment and share your opinions on all our articles
- Gift interesting stories to your friends
- Tax deductable