Turkey claimed 90%+ but the numbers in their tests were tiny:
> The Turkish trial data for CoronaVac is based on analysis of 1,322 participants which included 29 infected people, and efficacy evaluations were made 14 days after the second dose was administered.
Plus I’m not sure comparing countries at that level is a good base line. There could be major demographic (vitamin D which has been shown to play a role has also been shown to be less prevalent in darker skin) and even the details of the trials (Turkeys itself usinf relatively small samples). Or even the quality of the healthcare system treating these people after they get sick.
From the same article:
> Experts say it’s not unusual for a vaccine to show different efficacy rates in various settings, as trial protocols, data size and population could impact results, but the way CoronaVac data has been released created some confusion.
> The Turkish trial data for CoronaVac is based on analysis of 1,322 participants which included 29 infected people, and efficacy evaluations were made 14 days after the second dose was administered.
Plus I’m not sure comparing countries at that level is a good base line. There could be major demographic (vitamin D which has been shown to play a role has also been shown to be less prevalent in darker skin) and even the details of the trials (Turkeys itself usinf relatively small samples). Or even the quality of the healthcare system treating these people after they get sick.
From the same article:
> Experts say it’s not unusual for a vaccine to show different efficacy rates in various settings, as trial protocols, data size and population could impact results, but the way CoronaVac data has been released created some confusion.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sinova...
This leads to the same conclusion that we need to wait for more and better data. But also recognize all data isn’t equal when we do get it.