January 17, 20215 yr 8 hours ago, Stev Lam said: Wonder why Thailand deliberately attempted NOT to report cases from yesterday afternoon in addition to today's cases "Late Saturday afternoon, the Samut Sakhon provincial health office reported 335 new COVID-19 cases" Total cases today (17 January), shouldn't it be 709??? Why Thailand always play down in reporting numbers? Isn't Samut Sakhon part of Thailand??? Does not matter, if ii is from migrant workers, the total infection cases should be reported accurately, then the breakdown by province can be detailed to make up the grand total. I remember that Singapore always separated migrant workers and local infection, imported. Why?
January 17, 20215 yr 7 hours ago, bangsaenguy said: Must have opened more supermarkets since last year. Tops and Odeila have been open years
January 17, 20215 yr 12 hours ago, UB40 said: All because of that "super PCR test" Developed by a German "Doctor" at beginn of Jan 2020 ---》first data's were available end of January 2020. The PCR test isn't suitable to show an active virus. After 40 exp40 multiplying it only can show antibodies, without stating anything. But its useless writing more. People love to be lied to You need to lay off the Red Red Wine...
January 17, 20215 yr 14 hours ago, G950 said: To be fair 320 out of the 374 were found amongst migrant workers already locked down in Samut Sakhon. The remaining 50 or so from local infections in relatively low. I am not trying to downplay the situation but the numbers outside of Samut Sakhon seem to be stable meaning and relatively low. That is what we were thinking in Europe too ...
January 17, 20215 yr 16 hours ago, morrobay said: From the data for 34 days, 28 new infections on 15 Dec and 7808 additional on Jan 17. Given an infection/transmission period of four days there would be 8.5 periods. So 28(R0)^8.5 = 7808. Then 8.5(logR0)=log(278.8) Therefore logR0=2.445/8.5 = .28764 So the R0 equals 1.94 What's that in English?
January 18, 20215 yr I"m no doctor but notice how everyone is used to triple digit numbers now? I hope that we don't get used to quadruple digit numbers.
January 18, 20215 yr 4 hours ago, Oliver Holzerfilled said: You need to lay off the Red Red Wine... It sounds like a bad case of Thai wine. IT happens after only 2 glasses. Just say no to Thai wine.
January 18, 20215 yr Conspiracy posts spreading false and misleading information have been removed as well as the replies.
January 18, 20215 yr 15 hours ago, Bruce Aussie Chiang Mai said: Creative mathematics. ????❤???????? Without a calculator? impossible.
January 18, 20215 yr 11 hours ago, hotchilli said: What's that in English? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_reproduction_number. Scroll to the blue red diagram for ebola. The R0 is 2 as can be seen where each infected person infects two more in each infect period. After two infection periods there are four new infections. Now start with 10 infected people with R0=2 then the new infections are 40 after two infection periods: 10 (2)^2 =40. Suppose the R0 is not given or obvious by inspection. Then you have to solve: 10(R0)^2=40. And is with a little algebra: (R0)^2 = 4. Then 2(logR0)=log4. The log of 4 is .602 So the logR0 is .602/2 = .301 So if the log of the R0 is .301 then the number,R0, is 10^.301 = 2
January 18, 20215 yr 12 hours ago, morrobay said: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_reproduction_number. Scroll to the blue red diagram for ebola. The R0 is 2 as can be seen where each infected person infects two more in each infect period. After two infection periods there are four new infections. Now start with 10 infected people with R0=2 then the new infections are 40 after two infection periods: 10 (2)^2 =40. Suppose the R0 is not given or obvious by inspection. Then you have to solve: 10(R0)^2=40. And is with a little algebra: (R0)^2 = 4. Then 2(logR0)=log4. The log of 4 is .602 So the logR0 is .602/2 = .301 So if the log of the R0 is .301 then the number,R0, is 10^.301 = 2 ????
Create an account or sign in to comment