SURVEY: Will Thailand get the virus under control?

[Blumpie]

On 4/20/2021 at 11:13 PM, polpott said:

An anti vaxxer having the vaccine would be like a Trumpette not voting for Trump. he's nailed his colours to the mast, no vaccine for him.

 

Me, I fly out tomorrow night and have my first vaccine appointment on Saturday lunchtime.

It truly doesn't matter if someone wants the vaccine or not.  Just like getting the Yellow Fever Vaccine which is mandatory in south america, I can personally assure you that eventually you will be required to have a COVID vaccine to go anywhere from your country.  Furthermore, Thailand WILL require visa holders to prove it at some point.  

These people can stay home and be happy.  I will be happy maybe travelling in the future.  Things are fine. 

[Blumpie]

On 4/18/2021 at 5:38 AM, Kurtf said:

I beg to differ. Taking vitamin D and Zinc Supplements has proven to boost the effectiveness of a persons immune system. Ask any doctor and don't take the word of the WHO or The American CDC who are both pushing an agenda.

How can you honestly say that this is anything new?  Any male over the age of 55 should be taking vitamin D.  It's a natural thing - your body depletes it over time.  Particularly if you're overweight.  

You are not re-inventing the wheel here.  In fact to boast that this is some kind of treatment against COVID is completely ludicrous.  It has been used proactively by the elderly for decades to promote good health.  

Vitamin D will help, but it won't cure you, no more than eating blueberries cures cancer.  

[WaveHunter]

7 minutes ago, Blumpie said:

How can you honestly say that this is anything new?  Any male over the age of 55 should be taking vitamin D.  It's a natural thing - your body depletes it over time.  Particularly if you're overweight.  

You are not re-inventing the wheel here.  In fact to boast that this is some kind of treatment against COVID is completely ludicrous.  It has been used proactively by the elderly for decades to promote good health.  

Vitamin D will help, but it won't cure you, no more than eating blueberries cures cancer.  

I think the point most are making about the efficacy of Vitamin D and Zinc as it relates to Covid 19 is simply that these supplements are proven to enhance immune response particularly in those people who are deficient in them.

 

Anything that enhances a compromised immune response lessens the likelihood of Covid infection.

 

I don't think any well read people who are talking about Vitamin D and Zinc in relation to Covid 19 are saying it will prevent infection; only lessen the likelihood if you have a deficiency, and such people are certainly not considering it to be a replacement for vaccination.

Edited April 22, 2021 by WaveHunter

[Blumpie]

22 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

I think the point most are making about the efficacy of Vitamin D and Zinc as it relates to Covid 19 is simply that these supplements are proven to enhance immune response particularly in those people who are deficient in them.

 

Anything that enhances a compromised immune response lessens the likelihood of Covid infection.

 

I don't think any well read people who are talking about Vitamin D and Zinc in relation to Covid 19 are saying it will prevent infection; only lessen the likelihood if you have a deficiency, and such people are certainly not considering it to be a replacement for vaccination.

We could talk all day about what to eat and what not to eat.  In the end ones health is ones personal responsibility.  If you sit around eating chips and drinking beer you're going to die much quicker, in all probability, than someone who looks after themselves.  I think that's been proven time and time again.  And, frankly, I really don't care as long as you are happy.

The point is moot - everyone with an ounce of sense who is over 50 and lives in a country north of the equator is deficient in vitamin D.  If you don't know this, you've probably been living in a Qanon closet.  This isn't new.  They supplement vitamin D in things like dairy products, and vitamins are readily available earth wide and very popular - the most popular by far.  

To suggest that this is a treatment against COVID 19, which it was suggested in it's original form, is absolutely ridiculous.  

[WaveHunter]

21 minutes ago, Blumpie said:

We could talk all day about what to eat and what not to eat.  In the end ones health is ones personal responsibility.  If you sit around eating chips and drinking beer you're going to die much quicker, in all probability, than someone who looks after themselves.  I think that's been proven time and time again.  And, frankly, I really don't care as long as you are happy.

The point is moot - everyone with an ounce of sense who is over 50 and lives in a country north of the equator is deficient in vitamin D.  If you don't know this, you've probably been living in a Qanon closet.  This isn't new.  They supplement vitamin D in things like dairy products, and vitamins are readily available earth wide and very popular - the most popular by far.  

To suggest that this is a treatment against COVID 19, which it was suggested in it's original form, is absolutely ridiculous.  

No reason to freak out over this!  You may think that everyone should know about Vitamin D and zinc deficiencies and anyone who doesn't is an idiot but that is a pretty narrow minded view.  A lot of people can be deficient and not show any symptoms.  They can have compromised immune response and not be aware of it.  

 

Promoting the use of Vitamin D and Zinc in relation to Covid may have been falsely promoted as a "cure" by some of the whacky health gurus on YouTube but pointing out the relationship between compromised immune response and the increased likelihood of becoming infected by Covid was made by very well respected scientists, and then further defining the role that Vitamin D and Zinc deficiencies can play in compromising immune response was a responsible and helpful thing to do.

 

Why would it anger you so much that these things are being promoted NOT AS A CURE, NOT AS PROTECTION FROM INFECTION, but simply as a way to correct a proven compromised medical condition?

 

It just seems you are getting all worked up about nothing, and  enjoy playing Devil's Advocate.

Edited April 22, 2021 by WaveHunter

[cdemundo]

18 hours ago, Kurtf said:

You are mistaken. Herd immunity was accomplished with the Spanish Flu in 1919. There was no vaccine.

You are correct in that some people interpret it that way.

I think this will always remain an open question, hard to settle a 100 year old puzzle.

I am not trying to be a little old man who can't be wrong, but that is not a very convincing explanation.

 

Estimates of total number infected would not be a sufficient fraction of the earth's population to reach herd immunity.

https://www.biospace.com/article/compare-1918-spanish-influenza-pandemic-versus-covid-19/

"At its worse, the Spanish flu infected 500 million people worldwide, which at the time was about a third of the Earth’s population. "

 

Because the number of people exposed would not be sufficient to accomplish herd immunity the following understanding exists.

 

https://time.com/5894403/how-the-1918-flu-pandemic-ended/

"The end of the 1918 pandemic wasn’t, however, just the result of so many people catching it that immunity became widespread. Social distancing was also key. Public health advice on curbing the spread of the virus was eerily similar to that of today: citizens were encouraged to stay healthy through campaigns promoting mask-wearing, frequent hand-washing, quarantining and isolating of patients, and the closure of schools, public spaces and non-essential businesses—all steps designed to cut off routes for the virus’ spread."

Edited April 23, 2021 by cdemundo

[Kurtf]

On 4/23/2021 at 11:41 AM, cdemundo said:

You are correct in that some people interpret it that way.

I think this will always remain an open question, hard to settle a 100 year old puzzle.

I am not trying to be a little old man who can't be wrong, but that is not a very convincing explanation.

 

Estimates of total number infected would not be a sufficient fraction of the earth's population to reach herd immunity.

https://www.biospace.com/article/compare-1918-spanish-influenza-pandemic-versus-covid-19/

"At its worse, the Spanish flu infected 500 million people worldwide, which at the time was about a third of the Earth’s population. "

 

Because the number of people exposed would not be sufficient to accomplish herd immunity the following understanding exists.

 

https://time.com/5894403/how-the-1918-flu-pandemic-ended/

"The end of the 1918 pandemic wasn’t, however, just the result of so many people catching it that immunity became widespread. Social distancing was also key. Public health advice on curbing the spread of the virus was eerily similar to that of today: citizens were encouraged to stay healthy through campaigns promoting mask-wearing, frequent hand-washing, quarantining and isolating of patients, and the closure of schools, public spaces and non-essential businesses—all steps designed to cut off routes for the virus’ spread."

AND WHERE WAS THE VACCINE?

[Rimmer]

A couple of misleading posts have been removed, also one reply

[WaveHunter]

1 hour ago, Kurtf said:

AND WHERE WAS THE VACCINE?

There was no vaccine for the Spanish Flu pandemic back in 1918-1920.  As a result, 500 million people became infected (that was 1/3 of the world population back then).

 

Herd immunity was only achieved as a result of anywhere from 17-100 million people loosing their lives!

 

Today we DO have a vaccine that can lead us to herd immunity without such losses!  How on earth can anybody debate their use in battling Covid in order to achieve this goal of herd immunity?

 

You know the saying about those who ignore history being doomed to repeat it?  I hope you're not one of those people.

 

Do we just ignore what happened back then and minimize the opportunity that vaccines hold in favor of unproven pseudoscience alternatives that you've alluded to in past posts?  

 

I seriously hope you re-evaluate your stance because your negative view of vaccines not only affects your own well-being but potentially everyone you come in contact with, ya know?  it's not just about the individual, it's about the population as a whole.

 

Edited April 25, 2021 by WaveHunter

[cdemundo]

 

 

 

10 hours ago, Kurtf said:

AND WHERE WAS THE VACCINE?

1918 flu ended without a vaccine but not by "herd immunity" with only 30% of the population infected.

SARS and MERS also ended without vaccines, also without herd immunity.

 

You seem to have an obsession with arguing this point to an absurd extent.

Do you think the 1918 flu is a good example of why we should just let COVID rip and wait for herd immunity?

If not why do you bring it up?

 

[faraday]

5 hours ago, cdemundo said:

Do you think the 1918 flu is a good example of why we should just let COVID rip and wait for herd immunity?

If not why do you bring it up?

Of course not, because we have those humanitarian pharmaceutical companies who are here to help us.

 

They'll make an immense profit - they deserve it though, for their benevolence.

 

*note to the deaf & hard of hearing*

 

This post may contain nuts.

[WaveHunter]

13 hours ago, cdemundo said:

 

 

 

1918 flu ended without a vaccine but not by "herd immunity" with only 30% of the population infected.

SARS and MERS also ended without vaccines, also without herd immunity.

 

You seem to have an obsession with arguing this point to an absurd extent.

Do you think the 1918 flu is a good example of why we should just let COVID rip and wait for herd immunity?

If not why do you bring it up?

 

Yo say I have an obsession with arguing this point to an absurd extent.  My obsession is with challenging absurd viewpoints that are poorly thought out and unfounded by science, and totally disregard the lessons that history teaches.

 

Your assertion that the Spanish Flu Pandemic did not end through herd immunity since only 1/3 of the population was infected is false logic.  

 

Herd immunity does not equate with the total percentage of the population infected since a lot of them will die (dead people can not spread the virus).  Herd immunity equates to the percentage of living people capable of spreading the virus (as expressed in the Reproductive Number of the virus).  As the number of living infected hosts decrease, the spread will also decrease, and with a highly transmissible virus such as the Spanish Flu virus.

 

The Spanish Flu virus had a Reproductive Number far exceeding the COvid-19 virus.  It's estimated that it was in the range of 1.2–3.0 and as high as 7.5 for community-based and confined settings.  That means it was HIGHLY transmissible.  Therefore, as donors decrease (due to death) it means, the number of newly infected people also began to drastically fall until the average number of infected contacts per infected individual reaches a 1:1 ratio, and the end of spread.

 

This is basically what happened.  Ergo, the 100 million people that died is what primarily led to herd immunity.

 

I mean, dead people can not spread a virus, ya know??  Human efforts like social distancing and mask wearing played a role BUT without deaths, the pandemic would not have ended.  In the absence of a vaccine, up to 100 million people had to die.  That's a pretty harsh price to pay compared with how many lives would be saved had there been a vaccine.

 

In the case of the Spanish Flu pandemic, and all past pandemics throughout history for which no virus existed, millions of people had to die in order for the pandemic to end.  It is Natures way of implementing "natural selection", so to speak,

 

History teaches valuable lessons to those who are willing to listen, and in particular the Spanish Flu pandemic teaches us a lot about the current Covid-19 pandemic. 

 

Vaccines were not available to fight the Spanish Flu but they are available to us now.  Without vaccines, Covid-19 would continue to grow, and with the new variants, that growth rate will (and is) escalating beyond what anyone imagined!

 

Take India in recent days for example.  The daily new cases reported the other day was over 354,000 new cases!  Look at the shape of that curve in the graph below!  That is the picture of EXPONENTIAL GROWTH.  A LOT of people are dying and a lot more will die until vaccines reach them there.

 

Look at the recent weeks trends in India depicted in these graphs.  Look at the numbers, and look at the shape of these curves which are ALL pictures of exponential growth in the last few weeks.  Do you honestly believe this is not going to start happening all around the world unless vaccines come to the rescue?

 

 

Why is it so hard for you to appreciate how essential the vaccines are?  I really can't understand that.  You call me being obsessed over this...well, I'm sorry to say that I find you obsessed with avoiding reality. 

 

I don't say this in a mean-spirited way but you really just need to do a reality check on yourself because when you make assertions that vaccines are not necessary there is no science-based truths that support such a view, and a whole lot of history that contests it...unless you consider that hundreds of millions of deaths is an acceptable way to fight a pandemic.

 

It does not take a rocket scientist to appreciate the basic logic here, ya know?

 

And BTW, as for SARS and MERS, they were not nearly as transmissible as Covid-19, not even close!  So, they pretty much burned out on  their own accord before they could reach pandemic proportions.  That does not mean they have vanished though.  We could still have another wave of those specific viruses at some point in the future, and COVID-19 is probably not the last NOVEL coronavirus that will raise its' ugly head in the future.

 

Edited April 26, 2021 by WaveHunter

[cdemundo]

9 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Why is it so hard for you to appreciate how essential the vaccines are?  I really can't understand that.  You call me being obsessed over this...well, I'm sorry to say that I find you obsessed with avoiding reality. 

 

I don't say this in a mean-spirited way but you really just need to do a reality check on yourself because when you make assertions that vaccines are not necessary there is no science-based truths that support such a view, and a whole lot of history that contests it...unless you consider that hundreds of millions of deaths is an acceptable way to fight a pandemic.

I'm not sure who you are talking to, but it isn't me.

I was not addressing you when I stated I thought someone was obsessed, you look back and see who that was in response too.

 

My statement that started all this hot air is that no epidemic reached herd immunity without a vaccine.

That is a pro-vaccine statement.

 

The end of the 1918 epidemic? 

If you think that 30% immunity will lead to herd immunity, fine.

 

When you emphasize your belief that 1918 flu reached herd immunity without a vaccine that does not promote the idea that vaccines are necessary, quite the opposite.

 

I have never asserted that vaccines are not necessary.

Again, I stated my understanding that no epidemic reached herd immunity without a vaccine.

Someone, challenged that statement by saying that 1918 reached herd immunity without a vaccine.

 

This sent you off to the races arguing with your shadow.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 26, 2021 by cdemundo
error corrected

[cdemundo]

2 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

I'm not sure who you are talking to, but it isn't me.

 

My statement that started all this hot air is that no epidemic reached herd immunity without a vaccine.

That is a pro-vaccine statement.

 

The end of the 1918 epidemic? 

If you think that 30% immunity will lead to herd immunity, fine.

 

When you emphasize your belief that 1918 flu reached herd immunity without a vaccine that does not promote the idea that vaccines are necessary, quite the opposite.

 

I have never asserted that vaccines are not necessary.

Again, I stated my understanding that no epidemic reached herd immunity without a vaccine.

Someone, challenged that statement by saying that 1918 reached herd immunity without a vaccine.

 

This sent you off to the races arguing with your shadow.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Danderman123]

On 4/20/2021 at 3:19 AM, Kurtf said:

Unless you are one of the many that has an adverse reaction to the vaccine. In which case you could end up DEAD.

Deaths from vaccine: 1 in a million

 

Deaths from Covid: 1600 in a million.

[sotonowl]

The scientists tell us that Covid -19 is here to stay, but whatever happened to the Spanish Flu? Why would that eventually run out of steam and eventually disappear?

[Scott]

9 minutes ago, sotonowl said:

The scientists tell us that Covid -19 is here to stay, but whatever happened to the Spanish Flu? Why would that eventually run out of steam and eventually disappear?

The Spanish Flu did not go away.  It changed and it mutated in antigenic drift.  It became a part of the regular flu season.  How Covid will eventually change is unknown, but it will most likely be around for a very long time.  

 

[WaveHunter]

13 hours ago, cdemundo said:

I'm not sure who you are talking to, but it isn't me.

I was not addressing you when I stated I thought someone was obsessed, you look back and see who that was in response too.

 

My statement that started all this hot air is that no epidemic reached herd immunity without a vaccine.

That is a pro-vaccine statement.

 

The end of the 1918 epidemic? 

If you think that 30% immunity will lead to herd immunity, fine.

 

When you emphasize your belief that 1918 flu reached herd immunity without a vaccine that does not promote the idea that vaccines are necessary, quite the opposite.

 

I have never asserted that vaccines are not necessary.

Again, I stated my understanding that no epidemic reached herd immunity without a vaccine.

Someone, challenged that statement by saying that 1918 reached herd immunity without a vaccine.

 

This sent you off to the races arguing with your shadow.

 

 

 

 

 

Firstly, I sincerely apologize.  Apparently I mistakenly thought the ridiculous statement in the header from another poster (@kurtf) that you were replying to was actually your post.  Glad to realize I was wrong and your sentiment is  in fact are pro-vaccine.

 

However, I strongly disagree with your assertion that the Spanish Flu ended without herd immunity taking place, your only reason being that only 30% of the population was infected.  

 

Without a vaccine, herd immunity is still responsible for the end of the Spanish Flu pandemic (or any of the past pandemics for which there was no vaccine, BUT there is a huge price that must be paid, and in the case of the Spanish flu pandemic it was 100 million lives.

 

What we disagree on is the definition of "herd immunity".  Really we're on the same page; that vaccines are preferable to deaths as a way to end a pandemic.  We are simply disagreeing on semantics.

 

My contention is that herd immunity has nothing to do with the percentage of the population infected, but rather on the number of living people who are infected.  There is a difference between these two things.

 

Herd immunity is only  associated with the number of living people who are infected but have a strong enough immune response to recover from infection.  As more and more infected people die which  lowers the Reproductive Number (transmissibility of the virus) by reducing the pool of donors, and those who are only mildly infected and recover will develop natural immunity.   BOTH of these events contribute to herd immunity.

 

Therefore, when I say that the 1918 flu reached herd immunity without a vaccine, I am NOT promoting the idea that vaccines are not necessary. 

 

So to sum it up, I think all we really disagree on is just a matter of semantics; what is the definition of herd immunity.  My definition does not diminish the importance of vaccines.  It merely says that there are ONLY two ways that pandemics have ever been ended; by a tremendous loss of life OR through a vaccine...but both are the result of herd immunity.

 

Edited April 27, 2021 by WaveHunter

[WaveHunter]

Sorry but last sentence of my post above should have read:

 

"...My definition does not diminish the importance of vaccines.  It merely says that there are ONLY two ways that pandemics have ever been ended; by a tremendous loss of life OR through a vaccine...but both result in herd immunity. ..."

 

Also, another way to look at this is that herd immunity is nothing more than Nature's law of Natural Selection.  The fittest survive, regardless of whether the death of less fit is the reason, or a vaccine is the reason.

Edited April 27, 2021 by WaveHunter

[WaveHunter]

11 hours ago, sotonowl said:

The scientists tell us that Covid -19 is here to stay, but whatever happened to the Spanish Flu? Why would that eventually run out of steam and eventually disappear?

The reasons humanity survived the Spanish Flu pandemic are:

 

1) Because 50-100 million people died (while isolated) thus lowering the donor pool and ability to infect others which means the Reproductive Number (transmissibility of the virus) was lowered. 

 

2) Because those who were infected but survived developed enhanced immune response naturally which further reduced the Reproductive Number of the virus. 

 

Both of these factors contributed to eventual herd immunity, or I guess you could say that in the absence of a vaccine, Nature's rule of Natural Selection is at play (survival of the fittest).

 

Many experts also believe that the virus became less lethal as successive waves of the the pandemic progressed.

 

Historically, all pandemics for which there is no vaccine have ended this way...at least so far.  The only options to end a pandemic are a huge number of deaths, or a vaccine.  Obviously, most people would consider the latter to be the preferred way to go.

 

For those who think that a vaccine is not necessary to contain Covid, they should consider the price that was paid to contain the Spanish Flu pandemic; 50-100 million people who died, and the economic devastation that came afterwards to tens of million people, and how long it took to recover from that.

Edited April 27, 2021 by WaveHunter