2009

I just contacted them. They said Moderna Q1 or Q2, 2022, is all they have now.

For the record, I am not against vaccines. I was vaccinated in the first 10% of Thailand. But to force it in schools seems unnecessary. And schools do nothing when children ride through their gates on motorcycles from the age of 12 or 13 in major cities. In rural areas, could be as young as 9 or 10.

Exactly, we can't compare. Road accidents and swimming deaths account for most child deaths in Thailand. Whereas, covid is virtually no threat to them. But don't you think we should be more concerned about child safety than children getting vaccines to protect others? Ironically, more kids would die on the motorcycle going to the clinic to get the vaccine than the virus itself!

I assume it is. Last week my farang friend got Pfizer for free. She is in her 20s and no underlying health conditions that I am aware of and certainly not pregnant (at least I hope not, haha)

Exactly And top 2 causes of death of under 18s in Thailand: road accident and drowning. How about mandatory helmets and swimming lessons, before covid vaccines?

What proof? My friend got Pfizer and she is young.

I was told by my farang friend last week that she just got a (free) Pfizer vaccine (walk-in) at Medpark. Any truth to this?

It had a farang friend tell me they were allowing walk-ins last week.

Don't be nice and bring the workers drinks, they will just leave bottles everwhere to get buried.

Are these fruit wines?

Vast majority over the age of 60 (and vast vast majority over the age of 80).

Obviously. Instead you have people losing their livelihoods and children losing their education (and socialization) who are not really at risk of dying at all. The world has sacrificed a lot. Perhaps it would have been better for the at risk people to live with restrictions, only.

Looks like someone isn't capable of adult discussion. I suggest you put your big boy pants on and stop being rude to other members.

Exactly. And there are sex acts that don't even transmit HIV.

Yes, women are twice as likely to get it due to being the receiving partner.

No, it doesn't. This is not my formula: it is used by HIV prevention experts (and that is documented in studies; there is no disagreement among the experts about this simple math or logic). Look it up, please. The exposure risk matters because the more you have sex the higher your overall risk becomes, and the type of sex, and circumcision, etc. etc. The exposure risk is about your exposure (which can vary depending on whether you are giving/recieving or if you are circumcised/uncircumcised), not their historical exposure. The prevalence rate (e.g. 1 in 100) is used for people of unknown status. If the person actually has it - and it is known for sure - then the prevalence rate doesn't apply to them (the figure would just be 1 because we know they actually have it). Then, you would simply use the exposure rate, only, because you know you had sex with an infected person. And the exposure rate would differ depending on the kind of sex you had with them (e.g. giving/recieving) and how many times.

In that case the heterosexual male percentage would be less than 10% (and the MSM and IDU groups would be higher). I don't disagree with that; people do tell lies.

That sounds dreadful. Is there more to this story? Quite unusual. I don't mean to make light of it, but it is an unusual anecdote - though I am sure it put the family through hell. I assume the young lad wasn't vaccinated. The way you wrote it I wasn't sure. Is he asthmatic or anything?

It's you who doesn't understand, buddy. Only the (few who are ) at risk should be isolating, instead of planet Earth crippling itself.

Has there been any online learning? If not, they should waive the tuition fee (still doesn't make up for loss of learning). Even with schools doing online study there should be a fair discount.

And in case anyone is interested, some typical statistics on new infection demographics for the average industrialized country (give or take a few percent): 60% -- men who have sex with men 20% -- heterosexual sex (female) 10% -- heterosexual sex (male) 9% -- injectable drug use 1% -- other I think this is revelant to the OP's question. And since the question is specifically about men getting it from women: there were 5400 total new infections in Thailand in 2019, so if about 10% of those were in heterosexual males, then we could say there were 540 new infections in heterosexual males in that year in Thailand.

How have most children not been exposed to the virus? They have been living in the world just like the rest of us and have had the same kind of contact everyone else has had: going to 7eleven, the market, supermarket, going to mom's/dad's workplace, contact with relatives, contact with babysitter,contact with tutor, sometimes visiting friends, visiting malls throughout this whole pandemic (until very recent closures), on public transport, in elevators etc. etc. You think they have been suspended in a bubble in their bedrooms for the last year and a half? And how about all those in elderly care homes in the west that got infected badly? Those residents literally had no contact with the outside world except the nurse who comes to their room, yet care homes were utterly riddled with covid last year (with 80%-100% infection rate typically). And do you have any idea how much physical contact kids have with everyone and everything around them? They are messy little disease spreading powerhouses.

If my child had underlying conditions I'd be very concerned.

Exceedingly low - yet tragic for the families. I wonder if they had pre-existing conditions?

Children are barely affected by this! The tops causes of death in children are still by road accident and by drowning -- as they always have been!