Coronavirus (Covid-19)Thailand

Sinovac, AstraZeneca over 97% effective in immune system boost

PHOTO: Both Sinovac and AstraZeneca have boosted immune responses with over 97% effectiveness. (via The Thaiger)

A new study highlights the often maligned effectiveness of the Sinovac and AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine, showing they are both quite effective in boosting the immune system against the Coronavirus. The Center of Excellence in Clinical Virology of the Faculty of Medicine at Chulalongkorn University conducted the study that found that one month after the first shot of AstraZeneca, over 97% of people had developed immune responses. Results were not yet in for the second injection.

Three weeks after the first injection of the Sinovac vaccine, just under 66% of people had developed immune responses, but four weeks after the second injection, that number jumped to an impressive 99.49%.

Without getting too technical, the total number of Covid-19 antibodies in human plasma were measured with Roche Elecsys Electrochemiluminescence Immunoassay in blood samples before and after the vaccination period, along with a control group. The tests were done before and 4 weeks after the first injection for AstraZeneca, and for Sinovac they were conducted before injections, 3 weeks after the first, and 4 weeks after the second injection.

The vaccines were both proven to be more effective than even people with previous Covid-19 infections. After testing 263 Covid-19 infected patients, just over 92% developed the needed antibodies after having the Coronavirus.

Some interesting statistics that arose from the study were those of gender and age. 100% of women that received the AstraZeneca jab successfully developed an immune response and antibodies to fight Covid-19. In men however, the vaccine was only found to be 93% effective. But the outliers in men were outside of the 18 to 59 year old demographic, as everyone in that age range, male and female, were found to have developed the antibodies and immune response.

Vaccine science is complex and the studies and statistics from it can often be confusing. While the effectiveness of Sinovac by other measures have been less than ideal, this study shows that when it comes to fighting new Covid-19 infections, both Sinovac and AstraZeneca are impressively effective when properly administered.

SOURCE: Bangkok Post

Join the conversation and have your say on Thailand news published on The Thaiger.

Thaiger Talk is our new Thaiger Community where you can join the discussion on everything happening in Thailand right now.

Please note that articles are not posted to the forum instantly and can take up to 20 min before being visible. Click for more information and the Thaiger Talk Guidelines.

Neill Fronde

Neill is a journalist from the United States with 10+ years broadcasting experience and national news and magazine publications. He graduated with a degree in journalism and communications from the University of California and has been living in Thailand since 2014.


  1. These are studies of a very small group. It seems unusual that a national university would want to study something that has already been studied at length and with far greater numbers in Britain where millions of people have received Astra Zeneca Vaccine. The only concern with Astra Zeneca is blood clotting in those under 50. To say that, in my country, it was at the ratio of about 15 people to 1.2 million. It is very rare. Still it is enough to suggest that those under 50 should take another vaccine on offer to eliminate the possibility.

  2. So they make a study on the efficiency of the vaccine on the original strain of the virus while now, we have english and indian variant in asia, and other study show that the effectiveness is much more low on those variants, specially sinovac with only 10%, well done thailand, a good use of money !

  3. Sounds like fake news. Sure you immune system is activated against covid, but is the real effectiveness? Studies show 50% for sinovac. But against the Indian mutant? I think only 10%

  4. How can you just copy this crap from BP. Nothing but fucking CCP propaganda. Do you know how to cite and find real fucking sources? How can you call yourself a journalist?

  5. @Dad – What’s crap from BP, and what’s fucking CCP propaganda?
    More information, no don’t bother I can see you a have the intelligence of a monkey.
    First post, and you write like a fucking 12 year old cretin.
    Call yourself a poster.

  6. @Toby Andrews – Look at the bottom of the article. Source: BP and as for the CCP propaganda, the CCP has put massive amounts of effort into making this vaccine look viable. The research conducted does not meet standards for a real study, nor can the researches show scientific objectivity as there are clear connections between interest groups.

  7. So the Thai institutes study is the opposite like world wide studies??!! How is it possible? And there are studies with miilions of people in Brazil who got Sinovac with opposite results!

  8. @alan –
    to believe, what is never to know, worldwide and a life time,
    what WHO or other NGOs says, is as to believe what government says
    or foundations of those NGOs. and of course, you can trust super-rich people,
    because only by hard working you can get billions of usd. nice. 🙂
    “those” billionairs do not support government goals, at all,
    and just let the notes on their homepages beside. sure. 😉
    I really like fantasy worlds. have a good day.

  9. A new study published in The Lancet journal called “Covid-19 Vaccine Efficacy and Effectiveness – the Elephant (not) in the Room” shows that the actual real-world, or what is called the Absolute Risk Reduction effectiveness, of the AstraZeneca vaccine is 1.2%. That’s right – 1.2%!! The Moderna was also 1.2% and the Pfizer was a whopping 0.84% and not the 95 plus percent rates that have been reported. Unfortunately the Sinovac was not covered in this study but we can assume that it would fare the same in the real-world evironment when not based on the Relative Risk Reduction which only pertains to a small study group. Wake up folks and realize that the real science is being hidden and twisted to suit a narrative.

  10. Maybe , if you have a large enough grain of salt ! Their efficacy against the chinese virus , covid some call it , remains at 62 % at best . Don’t be fooled by semantics !

  11. Don’t cry over vaccine that not have scientific data…because Flang Pfizer and Maderna so egg-pensive (pang maak!) in amazing Thailnd you see? …This is Asean…We always make best quality and cheap price…that why we sooo proud…If it good enough for fake communist capitalist country like China (our number 1 best new friend) and if it good enough for number one person who happen to be only one allowed to make vaccine here, that mean it good enough for you two Falang! Why you always have complain about low quality like we buy at 7-11 or Macro? We can copy stuffs better than another, you see cup of noodle for sale here same same Japan…so, no problem, oyy, why you think it so hard for us copy these medicine too?

  12. Fred is correct. The Relative Risk Reduction numbers only pertain to limited trials with small numbers of people. The real efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines is known as the Absolute Risk Reduction which pertains to the population as a whole. According to a new study in the medical journal The Lancet, the Absolute Risk Reduction for the AstraZeneca vaccine is 1.3% with the Moderna at 1.2 % and the Pfizer at 0.84% That’s right, the effectiveness of these vaccines is not 95% and 97% but 0.84% to 1.3%.

Leave a Reply