placeholder

As has been pointed out repeatedly, and apparently to no avail, the elderly are far ore likely to succumb to covid than younger cohorts as are the immunocompromized. For every ten years the risk of dying from covid doubles. The fact that the vaccin Yes, my statement was incorrect because at this point an overwhelming majority of aduts have been vaccinated. But the more important figure is how how much more of a risk is run by those who are not vaccinated. And apparently it is to no avail that the evidence I cited from UK sources that coorected for age, the risk for contracting serious illness and the risk for dyinig is far greater for the unvaccinated is far greater than that for the vaccinated.

There isn't one official analyses. All the CDC's statistics about those rare cases where a clinical problem is detected with the vaccine, start with the VAERS. And, by the way, do you understand now that the VAERS isn't about "bad reactions" but only about "adverse events"?

But I think in the case of the person I was replying to, it's not at all clear whether the insurance he already had explicitly stipulates that it covers covid 19 expenses for up to 3,500.000 baht. That's necessary to re-enter Thailand. f not, maybe his insurer will offer a revised contract the fulfills that requirement.

About insurance...as things stand now the policy has to explicitly stipulate that it will pay for all costs incurred due to covid up to 3,500,000 baht

One thing isn't noted in these statistics is the average age of each group. Also, those who were not senior citizens but judged to be more vulnerable.The UK's senior citizens and ohters more vulnerable were vaccinated first. So not only are they inherently more vulnerable, but the vaccines' effectiveness gets lower over time. Most COVID deaths in England now are in the vaccinated – here’s why that shouldn’t alarm you "The risk of dying from COVID doubles roughly every seven years older a patient is. The 35-year difference between a 35-year-old and a 70-year-old means the risk of death between the two patients has doubled five times – equivalently it has increased by a factor of 32. An unvaccinated 70-year-old might be 32 times more likely to die of COVID than an unvaccinated 35-year-old. This dramatic variation of the risk profile with age means that even excellent vaccines don’t reduce the risk of death for older people to below the risk for some younger demographics." https://theconversation.com/most-covid-deaths-in-england-now-are-in-the-vaccinated-heres-why-that-shouldnt-alarm-you-163671 Fact Check-England’s COVID-19 death statistics do not suggest vaccines aren’t working “It is important to understand the whole context to avoid misunderstanding data,” said Dr Shamaila Anwar, science communicator at Team Halo (teamhalo.org/). Speaking to Reuters, she noted the importance of accounting for the demographics of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, especially as Britain’s inoculation programme has prioritised those who are older or clinically vulnerable. Anwar added that data currently shows the number of infections is “much less” in the vaccinated population, which indicates that “vaccination is working”. https://www.reuters.com/article/fact-check-covid-england/fact-check-englands-covid-19-death-statistics-do-not-suggest-vaccines-arent-working-idUSL2N2OJ1ET

Few practices as low on this forum as taking a quote out of context to use it to mean the opposite of the point that was being made. Do you understand the function of a question mark at the end of the sentence. It's about asking a question, not making an assertion. Here once again is the entire paragraph from which that sentence was lifted: "It's an open data source. It's function is to provide raw data. The CDC, for one, takes the raw data and has its medical statisticians analyze it. Probably the FDA does that, too. It's open to everyone. Even to me and you. Why is it so important to you that you get statistics from VAERS? Even if they did do statistics, what would make that special? Because their statisticians would be closer to the source? They would be using different raw data?"

Who is using different raw data? Please be forthcoming with us and share links to the frightening studies of these "private analysts". And if it's official statistics you want, that's what the CDC is for. They command a small army of medical statisticians whose job it is to parse raw data. And who is keeping what secret?

No. It's mostly misused by anti-vaxxers.

Thank you for your report from the distinguished medical journal I Have A Friend Who...

It's an open data source. It's function is to provide raw data. The CDC, for one, takes the raw data and has its medical statisticians analyze it. Probably the FDA does that, too. It's open to everyone. Even to me and you. Why is it so important to you that you get statistics from VAERS? Even if they did do statistics, what would make that special? Because their statisticians would be closer to the source? They would be using different raw data?

Well, even if the insurance companies will cover the 3,500,000 minimum for covid treatment, unless their policy explicitly stipulates that covid-19 is covered, it won't satisfy Thai immigration authorities.

Most likely. But vaccine effectiveness fades most rapidly for the elderly.

And hospital ICU's aren't being overwhelmed because of the refusal of so many not to vaccinate? Care isn't being rationed because of them? What is so difficult to understand that the overwhelming majority those with life-threatening symptoms or deaths from Covid are among the unvaccinated?

Thanks for the information. Could you please provide a link to that IATA webpage? If they're correct, then it looks like the hours don't matter As for hotels requiring testing, it's now the case that you are required to take 3 PCR tests while in Phuket. The first one is done on arrival at the airport.

VAERS is a raw data storage system. They don't do statistical analyses. Not in their remit. Their function is to provide an open and transparent database.

A comment from someone who betrays no understanding of even basic statistical principles. If the lone boy were the only child to get vaccinated you might have a point. But it's not really about one lone child getting vaccinated, is it? And no epidemiologist is claiming that a single vaccinated child will protect all of us. But his vaccination can help protect his older relatives from becoming seriously il and even dying.

Not always a great idea to base a comment on a headline.

I wrote too soon. I did find some reports that note the time the test was administered as well as the date.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/datasets.html

And did that research ever proceed to ivermectin being used as a treatment for pseudorabies? Most pharmaceutiicals that do well in vitro don't succeed in actual trials. So this is proof of nothing. It's the same kind of nonsense that claims that because ivermectin worked in vitro against the covid virus, albeit at much much higher concentrations that are normally administered to humans and other mammals, that is proof that it will work clinically. As for your not soliciting my comments...do you understand that this is an open forum? Do you understand what the means?

Actually, your comment gave me the idea to go look at a few sample test reports. None of them mentioned time. Only the date the test was taken So if that's the case, it shouldn't be a problem. Anyway, thanks. Possibly you were wrong about the time issue, but without your line of thinking, I wouldn't have thought even to look for a sample. In my case I'm leaving 3 days after the test but more than 72 hours. So I think it will be fine.

Thanks.

As I understand it, Thailand specifies 72 hours between PCR test and boarding. Are they strict about that. It can take 3 days and possibly a bit over 72 hours to get test results.( I know the CDC rule is 3 days with the express reason for that to allow more than 72 hours.} Anybody know if 3 days is okay even if it runs over 72 hours?

Ringworm treated with Ivermectin? Really? Despite its name, ringworm is not medically considered to be a parasite. It's a fungal infection.The "worm" in the name is from an obsolete use of "worm" to mean disease. And it's transmitted by contact not through wounds. What viral diseases is ivermectin indicated for?

I went on the Thaivisa visa etc forum and that's what Ubonjoe said. Ubonoe may be the world's leading expert on Thailand's visa rules. Sheryl confirmed it. And then a very knowledgeable person who is not a member of the forum confirmed it as well. I hope they're wrong. But i would double check it. You might want to go to that forum or contact Ubonjoe. True or false, I'm sure he would appreciate the update.