Out of interest: here are the results of a Chinese C19 injection Phase 3 Clinical Trial published in July 2021

Note: “This online publication has been corrected. The corrected version first appeared at thelancet.com on January 27, 2022” so Lord knows who was paid what to affect what amendments!

From here (h/t krishna e bera on the /voiceforscienceandsolidarity SubStack who replied to a comment and also advised downloading the supplemental pdf:

Efficacy and safety of an inactivated whole-virion SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac): interim results of a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial in Turkey - The Lancet

“..double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Volunteers aged 18–59 years with no history of COVID-19 and with negative PCR and antibody test results for SARS-CoV-2 were enrolled at 24 centres in Turkey.” .. “

So, a low “at risk” segment of the population, but, “..The K1 cohort consisted of health-care workers (randomised in a 1:1 ratio), and individuals other than health-care workers were also recruited into the K2 cohort (randomised in a 2:1 ratio) using an interactive web response system.”

From the body “..the study population consisted of relatively young (median age 45 years [37–51]) and healthy individuals with a low prevalence of chronic diseases, and the overall event rate was very low.”

Lots of high risk health workers. More detail in the body of the document including “..study participants were unmasked starting with K1 in blocks..”

“..per protocol group consisted of 10 029 participants (6559 [65·4%] and 3470 [34·6%]) who received two doses of vaccine or placebo.”

So, roughly two thirds injected.

“During a median follow-up period of 43 days (IQR 36–48), nine cases of PCR-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 were reported in the vaccine group (31·7 cases [14·6–59·3] per 1000 person-years) and 32 cases were reported in the placebo group (192·3 cases [135·7–261·1] per 1000 person-years) 14 das or more after the second dose, yielding a vaccine efficacy of 83·5% (95% CI 65·4–92·1; p<0·0001). “

A 43 day trial? From the body “The follow-up period was defined as the period (days) from the randomisation date to the unmasking date. The data lock date was March 16, 2021.”

There were no deaths or Level 4 events over the period of the study.

“..The primary outcome was the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 cases confirmed by RT-PCR at least 14 days after the second dose of vaccination, assessed in the per protocol population. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 case.”

The standardisation method to 1,000 person years is used to show RELATIVE efficacy.

I wonder who set the end points for each type of clinical trial (American v Chinese)?

Interesting that these end points/outcomes were symptoms of C19 and INFECTION – clearly distinct from the “Reduced Symptoms” end-points of the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials.

I calculate ABSOLUTE efficacy as 32/6,559 minus 192/3,470 for the placebo group = a 5% reduction – far more impressive than anything seen in Pfizer or Moderna phase 3 clinical trials.

I can’t find any follow-ups in the subsequent month of outcomes for trial participants for any Chinese or American clinical trial. Nor can I see the amplification cycles used in the PCR tests in the Chinese trials, or which type of PCR test was used.

Similarly, and as with US clinical trials, recoveries are ignored. If “cases” last an average 15 days then the majority of “cases” would not exist at the end of the clinical trials, either for US or for Chinese trials.