China Biotech Bulletin #15
Chinese media is fomenting a vaccine backlash that may only hurt...China
Welcome to another edition of the CBB. This week, I’m looking at how international backlash has started to arise against China and its vaccine push, which had previously been framed as a US-China competition.
As the US begins a slow rollout of vaccines with high effectiveness rates, China has adopted a defensive posture and has even issued statements questioning the efficacy of Western-developed vaccines, even as it begins to import one of these vaccines into Hong Kong. Read more below.
To lead off: a great summary of the current situation from the NY Times.
China’s coronavirus vaccines were supposed to deliver a geopolitical win that showcased the country’s scientific prowess and generosity. Instead, in some places, they have set off a backlash.
Officials in Brazil and Turkey have complained that Chinese companies have been slow to ship the doses and ingredients. Disclosures about the Chinese vaccines have been slow and spotty. The few announcements that have trickled out suggest that China’s vaccines, while considered effective, cannot stop the virus as well as those developed by Pfizer and Moderna, the American drugmakers.
Beijing officials who had hoped the vaccines would burnish China’s global reputation are now on the defensive. State media has started a misinformation campaign against the American vaccines, questioning the safety of the Pfizer and Moderna shots and promoting the Chinese vaccines as a better alternative. It has also distributed online videos that have been shared by the anti-vaccine movement in the United States.
What exactly are Chinese authorities saying? See below for recent rhetoric, then compare with past statements from previous editions of the CBB.
Foreign Ministry’s Spokeswoman Hua Chunying’s Press Conference, Jan. 20, 2021
why cannot Chinese media report on something already covered by western media? Even when Chinese media report facts objectively, they are rejected as propaganda or even disinformation. This very idea reveals the deep-seated ideological bias and appalling injustice against China. Why cannot Chinese media report facts when those in the west can say whatever they like? Where is the freedom of press and freedom of speech? Aren't Chinese media and netizens entitled to the freedom of speech?
You should have noticed this interesting phenomenon: whenever there is any negative news about Chinese vaccines, western media always rush to report on it. For example, when a volunteer taking part in Chinese vaccine trails in Brazil passed away, before the reasons were found, western media wrote headlines about the incident, which later proved to be unrelated to the vaccine. Do I remember correctly? But later not one of the western media agencies apologized to China for the mistake in their reports.
It is the urgent task at hand for all of us to fight the virus. Vaccines themselves are a serious scientific issue. Against the grave situation, more vaccines being applied, especially in developing countries, would be of great help to our joint defence against the virus. At stake here is the fundamental interests of all humanity. But we are observing an abnormal phenomenon now. A handful of US and UK media have been taking the lead in pinning invisible geopolitical labels to vaccines and projecting political positions to their reporting. They want to promote Pfizer's vaccine and trash Chinese vaccines. But China is not affected by such narrow geopolitical bias. We are ready to contribute to vaccine accessibility and affordability and would be glad to see developed countries sharing their vaccines with developing ones. That's what we hope to see, not a zero-sum game. The double standard that has been exposed on the issue of vaccines reflect a thought-provoking and profound phenomenon that is not conducive to international anti-epidemic cooperation.
Countries like Australia, which is expected to soon give the green light to Pfizer-BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine for use in elderly people, need to suspend their approval procedures to wait for the World Health Organization (WHO) and Norway to investigate deaths in Norway, Chinese health experts said.
They said that for mass vaccination programs, Australia should broaden its choices of COVID-19 vaccines, such as purchasing Chinese-produced inactivated vaccines.
For Australia's mass vaccination program, which is expected to kick off next month, Chinese experts advised Australia to broaden its choice of vaccines, including purchasing Chinese-developed inactivated vaccines, which are relatively safer due to their mature technology.
Twenty-three elderly Norwegian people died after receiving Pfizer vaccines. Thirteen of them have been assessed and common side effects may have contributed to severe reactions in them, according to the Norwegian Medicines Agency.
Norway is a small Northern European country and only about 25,000 people have been vaccinated with Pfizer vaccines. Twenty-three deaths are a large number. But surprisingly, mainstream English-language media did not report the incident immediately, as if they had already reached a consensus. Major US and UK media were obviously downplaying their deaths.
In contrast, those major Western media will immediately hype any unfavorable information about Chinese vaccines and try to amplify their impact on public psychology. For example, the data of China's Sinovac vaccine was lower than expected in Brazil, and it was reported everywhere in Western media. The death of a Brazilian volunteer who participated in the trials also became a major event in Western media. But it was later proven that the death had nothing to do with the vaccination, and Western media lost their interest.
Could the Pfizer vaccine's real efficacy be as low as 19 percent, instead of 95 percent as it claims?
Questions raised by Peter Doshi, an assistant professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, have triggered heated discussion on Chinese social media.
Doshi's opinion was disputed among Chinese vaccine experts interviewed by the Global Times. Many experts agreed that Pfizer should provide more raw data for peer review but said Doshi's methodology may be flawed.
Nearly 4,400 adverse events were reported after receipt of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine as of Dec. 23, with 21 cases determined to be anaphylaxis, according to a reported released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Wednesday.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued an Emergency Use Authorization for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine on Dec. 11, administered as 2 doses separated by 21 days.
A problem with many of these reports is that they undermine the credibility of China’s own efforts for international collaboration and cooperation.
At the high level, China has called for global cooperation, with the State Council Information Office unveiling a white paper in June saying that the international community should resist finger-pointing and politicising the virus. (Reuters)
“A vaccine is still the fundamental strategy in our effort to overcome the new coronavirus,” Science and Technology Minister Wang Zhigang told a news conference in Beijing.
Concretely, China has had state TV hosts cast doubt via Twitter on the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine, even as Hong Kong prepares to import it via the Chinese distributor Fosun, one of the rare examples of international vaccine cooperation.
On Saturday night, the government clarified that the shots to be supplied to Hong Kong will be manufactured in Europe and that the first batch of one million doses is expected to be delivered in the first quarter at the earliest. (The Standard)
While Fosun Pharma is responsible for clinical trials, regulatory applications, sales and marketing of the jabs in China, the injections will be provided by BioNTech.
Carrie Lam, the Chief Executive of Hong Kong, seems to be walking a fine line. She said in a statement that “There have been all sorts of things happening in the European Union and this vaccine is manufactured in Germany, so we have to watch the situation very carefully. But since we have a contract to buy, I hope that all the other organisations will respect this contractual relationship and allow the Fosun Pharma/BioNTech vaccine to come to Hong Kong by the end of this month and the vaccination programme will be able to start almost immediately.”
Back in November, the same Chinese media that is denouncing the Pfizer vaccine now was citing Chinese CEO Guo Guangchang, the billionaire chairman of majority shareholder Fosun International, who described the partnership as “a victory for science, a victory for global cooperation … it is a landmark moment marking the light at the end of the tunnel in our fight against the novel coronavirus.” (Global Times, SCMP)
Will China pull back on its rhetoric on vaccines? Next time I’m going to look at a timeline and examine what the next phase of Chinese and US vaccination efforts could look like.