1 minute ago, Thomas J said:

 If you recall the "experts" have changed their minds repeatedly.  In the beginning, Fauci said masks were not effective, now suddenly they are.  The latest study from Stamford showed masks not effective and may even be harmful for a persons health because of breathing in bacteria on the soiled mask.  

I am merely pointing out there are over 219 million cases of Malaria in the world each year, despite there being drugs to prevent it and effective treatments for it.  On average 9% of the world catches the flu each and every year, that is upwards of 750 million people.  That is despite vaccines being available.  In 2018 1.7 billion people worldwide contracted TB despite there being a vaccine. 

But somehow there are those who cling to the belief that "This Time It Will Be Different"  and the vaccines will be our savior.  

Please, do some research from credible sites as to why Faucci changed tactics on masks.  It was NOTHING to do with effectiveness. 

 

You'll have to post that Stamford study.  I don't believe it at all.  Don't compare malaria or the flu to Covid.  Doesn't work.

8 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Lots!  They do a pretty good job of contact tracing here.  Not fantastic.  But not bad.

Maybe, however I have not actually read any articles on people being traced.  By contrast I hear cars with loudspeakers blaring to alert people who have visited certain sites to get tested and I do see posts alerting people who have visited certain stores to get tested.  If the tracing was working I would not expect to see either of those since they would know who was visiting those locations at the time and date that the Covid person was present at those stores. 

 

Just now, Thomas J said:

 If you recall the "experts" have changed their minds repeatedly.  In the beginning, Fauci said masks were not effective, now suddenly they are.  The latest study from Stamford showed masks not effective and may even be harmful for a persons health because of breathing in bacteria on the soiled mask.  

 

Firstly regards the fake stamford study:

 

Some on social media are claiming that a “Stanford” or “NIH” study has shown that face masks are ineffective against the Covid-19 coronavirus and even harmful. There’s one problem with that claim though. It’s not really a Stanford study or a National Institutes of Health (NIH) study.

OK, there are two problems with that claim: it’s not a Stanford study, it’s not an NIH study, and, in fact, it’s not even really a study.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2021/04/22/did-so-called-stanford-nih-study-really-show-face-masks-are-ineffective-against-covid-19/?sh=ebccac53fd76

 

Regards Fauci on masks, this was because he wanted to ensure there was enough for frontline workers first, sensible decision.

4 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Please, do some research from credible sites as to why Faucci changed tactics on masks.  It was NOTHING to do with effectiveness. 

I did not say it did.  I am merely pointing out that the Experts change their minds so when you say Follow the Experts it depends on which day you decide to heed their advise. 

 

23 minutes ago, Magenta408 said:

A large number of scientists have stated the the PCR test, if this is what they are using, is inaccurate and leads to many false positives. I'm repeating what many people already know. The inventor of the test himself stated as much. So, what tests are they using and if it's the PCR test, at what cycle?

this is incorrect - you need to check your sources - the PCR tests are nearly 100% accurate.

2 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

We are dealing with politics here, the virus loves politics, it thrives in it. To stop the excess deaths from the virus we now have to follow real world data, places like Israel, the UK, the US doing nicely. Lockdowns in tandem with vaccinations work, with then gradual easing of restrictions.

 

The problem we had here in Thailand was politics, if there had been a short sharp lockdown before Songkran for 4 - 6 weeks it would have contained it enough to carry on as it was before, then maybe just targeted lockdowns in outbreak areas until the vaccination roll out.

 

Instead now we have a full on outbreak that has not had effective measures put in place to deal with it and we can see the effects, hospitals at breaking point right now and deaths increasing. The economic effects are going to be much worse now than they would have been had it been done sooner.

 

The positive rates in the world are now increasing again and also deaths, new highs are forming, the world needs to unite now unless we want this to go on forever.

 

Those at risk of this virus include not only the elderly but the millions of people in the world with asthma, cancer, many underlying diseases that are very common but deadly when exposed to covid. 

 

While I accept your view, I personally take the choice that we have to follow the path of the advice from the experts.

Unedited it makes little difference. 

After having been stuck in the U.K. with my Thai partner and son for over a year I am beginning to panic, we have had our COEs granted to travel the first week in May. 
As the majority of cases are local infections surely locking the borders down will not help the situation  ?

6 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Maybe, however I have not actually read any articles on people being traced.  By contrast I hear cars with loudspeakers blaring to alert people who have visited certain sites to get tested and I do see posts alerting people who have visited certain stores to get tested.  If the tracing was working I would not expect to see either of those since they would know who was visiting those locations at the time and date that the Covid person was present at those stores. 

 

Wow...I'm stunned.  There are reports out almost daily of places that have had infections.  Many have been listed.  Pubs in Thong Lor, bars in Pattaya, etc, etc, etc.  These were found out due to contact tracing.

 

Here's but one report.

https://thepattayanews.com/2021/04/26/timeline-pattaya-and-chonburi-informs-people-who-visited-places-in-relation-to-chonburi-confirmed-c19-cases/

5 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

I did not say it did.  I am merely pointing out that the Experts change their minds so when you say Follow the Experts it depends on which day you decide to heed their advise. 

 

I think you'll find they follow the best advice to be given at the time based on circumstance.

Just now, PGSan said:

Unedited it makes little difference. 

It's against forum rules to edit a post you're quoting.

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

OK, there are two problems with that claim: it’s not a Stanford study, it’s not an NIH study, and, in fact, it’s not even really a study.

Yes I have followed up and see that the it may not be valid. 

However this is from Reuters on a Danish Study.  Again, I am not saying that wearing masks is not prudent, that social distance is not a good practice, or that constantly bathing ones hands in anti-bacterial gel does not do 'SOME GOOD"  However, with that said, neither lockdowns, quarantines, masks, gels, contact tracing or vaccines are going to be the magic bullet that stops this disease.  You could stop HIV if people did not practice unsafe sex, but that is not likely to happen and you could equally stop Covid if you separated people for 14 days but that is not going to happen either.   Covid like the flu and the common cold is a virus, it mutates and it has entered the world population.  The idea that somehow we can do an ostrich, put our heads in the sand while on lockdown and it will just go away is wishful thinking. 
 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-facemasks/danish-study-finds-face-masks-provide-limited-protection-to-wearer-idUSKBN27Y1YW

Just now, PGSan said:

Unedited it makes little difference. 

Makes all the difference, even better if you ask me which part of my post you are referring to, would help me with an appropriate response rather than guesswork

18 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

 If you recall the "experts" have changed their minds repeatedly.  In the beginning, Fauci said masks were not effective, now suddenly they are.  The latest study from Stamford showed masks not effective and may even be harmful for a persons health because of breathing in bacteria on the soiled mask.  

I am merely pointing out there are over 219 million cases of Malaria in the world each year, despite there being drugs to prevent it and effective treatments for it.  On average 9% of the world catches the flu each and every year, that is upwards of 750 million people.  That is despite vaccines being available.  In 2018 1.7 billion people worldwide contracted TB despite there being a vaccine. 

But somehow there are those who cling to the belief that "This Time It Will Be Different"  and the vaccines will be our savior.  

Almost completely inaccurate.

You fail to understand how different diseases are transmitted and treated in different ways.

You fail to understand that skepticality is the basis of all scientific research and nothing is a parmenant "fact". Good science changes its mind all the time - it is quacks who stick to one idea.

..and you fail to understand that the basic concept of masks remains true but it has been shown that as we learn more about transmission in aerosol of Covid that whilst a mask doesn't protect YOU, it protects others from your exhalations. This was not understood at first.

 

BTW - Malaria is a completely different kettle of fish - it isn't a virus, it is a parasite and now after 50 years they might have a vaccine. Drugs for malaria were relatively ineffective bacuse it was a virus.

Covid  19 is a corona virus that science is familiar with and because of this they had a head start on where to start to look for a cure

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I think you'll find they follow the best advice to be given at the time based on circumstance.

Now that reminds me of a joke where an economist was listed as accurately forecasting certain statistics multiple times during the year.  The reporter asked him how could he have so many number of correct predictions.  He said, simple.  I just forecast a lot. 

So according to you, if the circumstances change and the former advise was not accurate that we should just continue following their advice.  

I truly believe that are experts and officials are under tremendous pressure TO DO SOMETHING.  Since no one really knows the answers they are 'JUST DOING SOMETHING, ANYTHING' to demonstrate their concern and to create the illusion that somehow they are addressing the problem. 

4 minutes ago, kwilco said:

BTW - Malaria is a completely different kettle of fish - it isn't a virus, it is a parasite and now after 50 years they might have a vaccine. Drugs for malaria were relatively ineffective bacuse it was a virus.

I did not say Malaria is a virus.  I am pointing out that various diseases have had vaccines and cures for decades and yet still are very common.  The idea that somehow that efforts to coral in Covid will be more effective is just plain foolish.  If you can't stop the flu, can't stop a cold, cant stop TB, can't stop malaria, what would possibly make you of the opinion that you can stop Covid. 

 

8 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Yes I have followed up and see that the it may not be valid. 

However this is from Reuters on a Danish Study.  Again, I am not saying that wearing masks is not prudent, that social distance is not a good practice, or that constantly bathing ones hands in anti-bacterial gel does not do 'SOME GOOD"  However, with that said, neither lockdowns, quarantines, masks, gels, contact tracing or vaccines are going to be the magic bullet that stops this disease.  You could stop HIV if people did not practice unsafe sex, but that is not likely to happen and you could equally stop Covid if you separated people for 14 days but that is not going to happen either.   Covid like the flu and the common cold is a virus, it mutates and it has entered the world population.  The idea that somehow we can do an ostrich, put our heads in the sand while on lockdown and it will just go away is wishful thinking. 
 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-facemasks/danish-study-finds-face-masks-provide-limited-protection-to-wearer-idUSKBN27Y1YW

Nothing new there, confirming what we already know, quote:

 

"The findings are consistent with previous research. Health experts have long said a mask provides only limited protection for the person wearing it, but can dramatically reduce the risk to others if the wearer is infected, even when showing no symptoms. Preventing the spread to others is known as source control."

 

Keep masked up its the safest and shows you care for others

 

 

6 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Now that reminds me of a joke where an economist was listed as accurately forecasting certain statistics multiple times during the year.  The reporter asked him how could he have so many number of correct predictions.  He said, simple.  I just forecast a lot. 

So according to you, if the circumstances change and the former advise was not accurate that we should just continue following their advice.  

I truly believe that are experts and officials are under tremendous pressure TO DO SOMETHING.  Since no one really knows the answers they are 'JUST DOING SOMETHING, ANYTHING' to demonstrate their concern and to create the illusion that somehow they are addressing the problem. 

Its called saving lives in the circumstances at the time, period.

14 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Yes I have followed up and see that the it may not be valid. 

However this is from Reuters on a Danish Study.  Again, I am not saying that wearing masks is not prudent, that social distance is not a good practice, or that constantly bathing ones hands in anti-bacterial gel does not do 'SOME GOOD"  However, with that said, neither lockdowns, quarantines, masks, gels, contact tracing or vaccines are going to be the magic bullet that stops this disease.  You could stop HIV if people did not practice unsafe sex, but that is not likely to happen and you could equally stop Covid if you separated people for 14 days but that is not going to happen either.   Covid like the flu and the common cold is a virus, it mutates and it has entered the world population.  The idea that somehow we can do an ostrich, put our heads in the sand while on lockdown and it will just go away is wishful thinking. 
 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-facemasks/danish-study-finds-face-masks-provide-limited-protection-to-wearer-idUSKBN27Y1YW

Dodgy article.  You seem to gravitate towards these.  From that article.

 

The study’s findings “should not be used to conclude that a recommendation for everyone to wear masks in the community would not be effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infections, because the trial did not test the role of masks in source control of SARS-CoV-2 infection,” the authors wrote.

Just now, Bkk Brian said:

Nothing new there, confirming what we already know, quote:

 

"The findings are consistent with previous research. Health experts have long said a mask provides only limited protection for the person wearing it, but can dramatically reduce the risk to others if the wearer is infected, even when showing no symptoms. Preventing the spread to others is known as source control."

 

Keep masked up its the safest and shows you care for others

 

 

 

"Wah, but they don't protect me!  Why would I wear it and protect other people???!"

8 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Now that reminds me of a joke where an economist was listed as accurately forecasting certain statistics multiple times during the year.  The reporter asked him how could he have so many number of correct predictions.  He said, simple.  I just forecast a lot. 

So according to you, if the circumstances change and the former advise was not accurate that we should just continue following their advice.  

I truly believe that are experts and officials are under tremendous pressure TO DO SOMETHING.  Since no one really knows the answers they are 'JUST DOING SOMETHING, ANYTHING' to demonstrate their concern and to create the illusion that somehow they are addressing the problem. 

Come on man.  The virus was new.  In the beginning, they weren't sure if it was airborne or not.  As they studied the virus, and began to understand it better, the advice changed.

 

Wow...stunning...

Meanwhile so many people in this world actually think like that

 

And that's why there's no hope in stopping this thing

6 hours ago, bobbin said:

Please, no Facebook links.. Many of us are not using Facebook. (choice)

 

Or add a synopsis. That will do.

Normally I'd agree with that (I don't use FB either), but that particular one was available to all.

2 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Dodgy article.  You seem to gravitate towards these.  From that article.

 

The study’s findings “should not be used to conclude that a recommendation for everyone to wear masks in the community would not be effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infections, because the trial did not test the role of masks in source control of SARS-CoV-2 infection,” the authors wrote.

Imagine fighting so hard AGAINST efforts to help quell the worst medical emergency this generation has ever faced

 

People will search far and wide for anything that can cast the slightest bit of doubt on items that could help prevent people from dying, regardless of the credibility of said information, and then try to amplify it

 

And why?  Because they're so selfish that they can't be bothered to wear a freaking mask on their face when in public. 

 

Let's, for the sake of argument, say that every accredited article in support of masks are wrong and all of these pseudo-scientific articles are correct and the marks aren't very effective.  Even if they're only 5% effective in preventing someone from spreading it, that's still 5% higher than not wearing one.  And yet there are people that will literally march and put guns in people's faces to prevent this 5% from happening

 

It's such lunacy

5 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

 

I didn't know that.  Thanks.  I googled it and I'm genuinely interested in why it is "misinformation".  It's certainly controversial, but makes quite a bit of sense.  Surely all the co-signers believe in what they've signed?

 

https://gbdeclaration.org/

My personal take on the GBD, which I supported when it first appeared:

It appeared to make sense, then, however it would seem that we now know that Covid is spread by mainly asymptomatic people, therefore negating much of what the GBD says.

 

As I say, just my take - I was initially a total lockdown sceptic, but with the benefit of hindsight, now I'm not so sure.

With something as fast-moving as this pandemic has been and continues to be, I believe that we should be flexible and base our opinions on current evidence as it emerges.

 

UPDATE - Just noticed that @Jeffr2pointed out (several pages back!) that the authors of the GBD are themselves backing off

5 minutes ago, VBF said:

My personal take on the GBD, which I supported when it first appeared:

It appeared to make sense, then, however it would seem that we now know that Covid is spread by mainly asymptomatic people, therefore negating much of what the GBD says.

 

As I say, just my take - I was initially a total lockdown sceptic, but with the benefit of hindsight, now I'm not so sure.

With something as fast-moving as this pandemic has been and continues to be, I believe that we should be flexible and base our opinions on current evidence as it emerges.

 

Wow.  A well-reasoned, sensible and logical post on this thread!  Hurrah.

If you don't go out &  mix with others you can't catch it, that is as plain as the nose on your face, unless you deniers who decry masks, rebel against lockdown, and claim it's only a cold know different ??

 

 

6 hours ago, Miami007 said:

Extending the duration of a pandemic gives more time for mutations to occur.

the number of hosts is fixed (total population) - it does not really matter when they are infected.  it just might make a difference when the mutation happens.  If there is no vaccination to protect people during the time we are creating, the pandemic will just drag on longer. 

the concept of flattening the curve was to buy time to get the medical facilities upgraded and maybe come up with an effective vaccine.  The first was in our control, the second a hope and dream.. 

Most countries failed on the first part - we have the vaccine, but distribution is a mess in the majority of the world

It looks like the probability of occurrence of mutations is a function of time, but it does not directly depends on time.

 

It's a statistical function of the number of reproductions, so of the number of people infected.

Let's assume there would have been no lockdown, variants would just have just appeared earlier.

1 hour ago, Jeffr2 said:

They won't refuse to tell you.  Plus, it's clearly labeled on the vial.  Wow...

 

My brother is a pharmacist doing dozens of jabs every day. 

In UK you get a card showing not only the type of vaccine but the actual batch number.

I cannot imagine the US is that different....is it?

1 hour ago, Thomas J said:

<snip>

But somehow there are those who cling to the belief that "This Time It Will Be Different"  and the vaccines will be our savior.  

Well so far, it's proving to be that way in UK.....

8 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Ridiculous.  No testing wouldn't stop the sick from filling up the hospitals.  Jeez. 

 

It might ensure that only the sick who actually require treatment end up in hospital instead of 1000's of people who test positive yet are not ill in any significant way.

 

There are two very different 'classes' of patients here.

Those who don't require any treatment who are held captive (I'm going to call them inmates because they're not patients) and those who actually require some form of treatment, the true patients if you like.