In a few words: In this year of the COVID-19 pandemic, what misunderstandings are still widespread?

Niu Niu: The domestic epidemic has been on the rise again recently. Remdesivir, which was highly anticipated last year, has failed, right?

Binghai: First of all, let me correct a fact. Remdesivir is the first drug conditionally approved for the treatment of COVID-19 in Europe and the United States.

Niu Niu: It has been approved for marketing, but it cannot be proven to be effective. Americans don’t use it themselves, and the epidemic in Europe is also very serious. Doesn’t this explain everything?

Binghai: Indeed, the best way to prove effectiveness is through a rigorous clinical double-blind test. Based on the currently known experimental results, it is ineffective for severe cases, and there is still considerable controversy about its effectiveness for mild cases. However, there is one fact that needs to be corrected - Americans use it themselves, and former US presidents are using it. The White House announced that Trump received treatment with Gilead's remdesivir, and the list of medications also included zinc, vitamin D, famotidine, melatonin, and daily aspirin. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, the "game-changing" drugs that Trump had previously advocated, did not appear in the treatment medications.

Niu Niu: I don’t agree with this! Even if the Americans use it themselves, they can’t prove that it works.

Binghai: Yes, but please note that what I said is the fact that others are using it. The verification of effectiveness must be double-blind. Now we can only say that in some experiments, some effects have been shown, but it does not mean that it is definitely effective. The only thing that can be confirmed is that it is unrealistic to hope that it can kill the new crown. In addition, it should be noted that as far as I know, the president’s decision on medication is not final, and there are relevant laws.

Niu Niu: So, the King of Understanding’s plan to inject disinfectant failed?

Binghai: Anyway, it would be illegal if he did so while he was in office. I don’t know if he would try it after he leaves office. The single antibody he injected while in office, which costs hundreds of thousands per dose, may be more effective, but it is indeed not affordable for ordinary people.

Niu Niu: The second question is, why are we still advocating herd immunity?

Ice Sea: Because herd immunity is currently the only way to stop the new coronavirus epidemic.

Niu Niu: Didn’t Britain give up?

Binghai: The term "herd immunity" was taken out of context and demonized some time ago. "Herd immunity" is a phenomenon and result. The effect of "herd immunity" can be achieved through vaccination, natural transmission (let it develop), and even active infection.

Niu Niu: Which of these three methods is better?

Binghai: Regarding the current COVID-19 pandemic, I believe that “herd immunity” should be achieved through vaccination. I oppose achieving it through natural transmission or even active infection, because the former will result in the least number of casualties.

Niu Niu: I heard that many Americans are reluctant to get vaccinated, but they claim that their vaccines are highly effective.

Binghai: In any country, there are people who oppose science and support pseudoscience. Don't think that just because the United States is good at some science and technology, all Americans have good scientific literacy. Whether Americans choose to get vaccinated has nothing to do with whether the vaccine is effective. There are also a group of people in China who stubbornly do not want to get vaccinated with domestic vaccines and believe in imported vaccines.

Niu Niu: Didn’t there happen a few years ago about the poisonous vaccine?

Binghai: There were indeed substandard vaccines in the past few years. But they were not "toxic vaccines" and no one was poisoned by them. They could not even be called "fake vaccines" because they were not something else pretending to be vaccines, but substandard vaccines.

Niu Niu: Even if it is not toxic, isn’t it scary enough to fail to meet the standards? Failure to meet the standards means no protection. Real fake drugs are scarier than fake real drugs!

Binghai: Failure to meet the standards should of course be sanctioned by relevant laws and regulations. But please note that "failure" does not mean "ineffective". For example, the protection rate of hepatitis B vaccine in my country was set at about 90% in the past. Later, as technology advanced, the standard was adjusted and the protection rate was set at 95% to be qualified. So the original hepatitis B vaccines are still unqualified today. But it does not mean that they are ineffective, nor does it mean that they are toxic.

Niu Niu: You are making excuses for the unqualified vaccine. Do you think you are justified in saying that the vaccine is unqualified?

Binghai: Well, let's put things in perspective. Let me give you another example. If a supermarket re-labels the expiration date on bread that's been left overnight, extending it by one day, is the supermarket at fault? Should it be heavily fined?

Niu Niu: Of course it is a serious problem and of course it deserves severe punishment.

Binghai: However, if you buy qualified bread home and store it properly, and find out the next day that the shelf life has expired, will there be problems if you eat the bread?

Niu Niu: Oh, not necessarily. Sometimes it’s okay to eat it after a day or two of its expiration date.

Binghai: Yes, we certainly do not advocate eating expired food. But whether there is a problem with eating food does not depend on whether it is legally qualified or not, but on specific inspections.

Niu Niu: So should we get the domestic or imported COVID-19 vaccine?

Binghai: I suggest that as long as the vaccine is qualified and available through formal channels, you should get vaccinated. Of course, some people may have some preferences, and must have domestic or imported vaccines. We can respect personal choices. You should be responsible for yourself, and there is no need to blame each other.

Niu Niu: my country has indeed imported a large number of vaccines to meet different market demands. Our own vaccines are effective, so why import them?

Binghai: Vaccines are effective, but the production is limited. Different vaccines have different environmental requirements from storage to transportation. So the market demand is multi-faceted. This is a market issue, not a scientific issue. If you want to imagine conspiracy theories based on some market strategies, then there is really no need. Here, there is a saying - facts need sources, and opinions need arguments.