COVID-19: Thailand reports again decreasing coronavirus cases and deaths

[dinsdale]

Just now, TooMuchTime said:

Is that the seasonal vaccine that is recommended for the elderly and those at risk or serious harm from the flu?  I think you may be on to something.  We should follow the same protocol for the flu vaccine for the covid one.

 

At risk get the vaccine while everyone else can choose to.  No economic shutdowns, no coercion.

Number one Sars-Cov-2 is not the flu as everyone now realises or should. As for flu vaccines they are a seasonal vaccine which is what they are looking at for Sars-Cov-2. 

 

18 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

6 month effectiveness for a vaccine sounds like a poorly designed vaccine.  All the ones I took last decades or a lifetime.

Flu vaccines therfore are poorly designed? As for the current vaccines it's the T and B memory cells that may provide a longer immunity. 

 

[Walker88]

28 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

6 month effectiveness for a vaccine sounds like a poorly designed vaccine.  All the ones I took last decades or a lifetime.

I still can't get an answer on how much injections are needed to provide immunity.  Usually that information is available before release.

Are you a vaccine designer? Not sure you noticed, but these are newly developed vaccines. AFTER they are put into use, medical authorities then monitor the effect the vaccine has and measure how long immunity (from major symptoms) lasts. They cannot know beforehand, but rather must observe and then come up with the time element.

 

Previous studies of other vaccines/viruses indicated---only after the fact---that the SARS vaccine grants immunity for about 18 months, while the MERS gives 44 months. Those vaccines were more effective, however, because only folks showing symptoms could pass on the virus. That made those viruses easier to ringfence.

 

Covid is unique in that it can be passed by non-symptomatic people. That is what allowed it to spread worldwide when Lunar New Year took Chinese carriers to all corners of the globe.

 

Covid is also a complex molecule, relative to other viruses such as polio or smallpox. (As it turns out, the polio vaccine seems to be effective longer than the lifespan of humans, while the smallpox vaccine seems to have a limit of about 50 years.)

 

Time, and only time, will tell medical folks how long the newly developed vaccines are effective.

Edited September 20, 2021 by Walker88

[Bkk Brian]

1 hour ago, anchadian said:

Phuket health authorities are reporting 228 new local cases , two cases from the Sandbox and four deaths. There are 3,866 patients in care . The #PhuketSandbox has had 98 cases since 1st July #COVID19 #โควิด19 #โควิดวันนี้ #Thailand

 

https://twitter.com/ThaiNewsReports/status/1439737181644333059

More details:

 

Phuket marks 228 new COVID cases, four more deaths

 

PHUKET: The latest Phuket Provincial Public Health Office (PPHO) daily COVID situation report has marked 228 new local infections confirmed across the island yesterday (Sept 19) bringing the total number of people recognised as infected with COVID-19 in Phuket since Apr 3 to 8,767.

https://www.thephuketnews.com/phuket-marks-228-new-covid-cases-four-more-deaths-81454.php

[James105]

1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

Interesting to see the UK having scrapped the traffic light system to a simple red and green still has Thailand on red. One reason is testing or more accurately lack of testing. Yesterday the state of Victoria conducted 50,000 tests. The population of Victoria is about 1/10 (6.7 million) of Thailand. Thailand has now hidden testing numbers behind postive cases as a % but it's probably around the 40k mark. UK is around 1 million tests a day with a similar population to Thailand. Even given the differences in economies Thailand's testing is and always has been dismal. 

Since the UK is on Thailand's red list I do not see why Thailand should expect to be taken off the UK red list.   Maybe once they start allowing vaccinated travellers from the UK into the country without quarantine perhaps then they could ask for reciprocity.

[TooMuchTime]

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

Number one Sars-Cov-2 is not the flu as everyone now realises or should. As for flu vaccines they are a seasonal vaccine which is what they are looking at for Sars-Cov-2. 

 

Flu vaccines therfore are poorly designed? As for the current vaccines it's the T and B memory cells that may provide a longer immunity. 

 

What about the part of only at risk should be recommended for receiving it but others can if they choose to?

This way there is no economic shutdown and life can continue on as normal without any elements or coercion.

Don't forget that the vast majority of deaths/hospitalizations come are from the elderly.

[buick]

20 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

I guess to capture any near 100% you would first have to find them. If you think 40,000 tests in a day out of a population of 70,000,000 is a good sample that's up to you. It would seem the UK has a different opinion.

is the UK considered a successful model for fighting this virus ?  certainly not if the measure is deaths per capita.  they are top 25 in the world in that category.  so their testing program didn't exactly win the day (or the year !!) for the country.

[dinsdale]

20 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

It is a good sample size to see the trend.  You learn this in a basic stats class.

0.06% is a good sample size?

Edited September 20, 2021 by dinsdale

[TooMuchTime]

2 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Are you a vaccine designer? Not sure you noticed, but these are newly developed vaccines. AFTER they are put into use, medical authorities then monitor the effect the vaccine has and measure how long immunity (from major symptoms) lasts. They cannot know beforehand, but rather must observe and then come up with the time element.

 

Previous studies of other vaccines/viruses indicated---only after the fact---that the SARS vaccine grants immunity for about 18 months, while the MERS gives 44 months. Those vaccines were more effective, however, because only folks showing symptoms could pass on the virus. That made those viruses easier to ringfence.

 

Covid is unique in that it can be passed by non-symptomatic people. That is what allowed it to spread worldwide when Lunar New Year took Chinese carriers to all corners of the globe.

 

Time, and only time, will tell medical folks how long the newly developed vaccines are effective.

Isn't that what testing and clinical trials are for?  This would be good to know beforehand.  Before the "vaccine passports" and get "get vaccinated before you can work" things that are happening in the world.

COVID is definitely unique in that you can be infected and not even know it.  I've read around 40% of cases are asymptomatic.

[dinsdale]

1 minute ago, buick said:

is the UK considered a successful model for fighting this virus ?  certainly not if the measure is deaths per capita.  they are top 25 in the world in that category.  so their testing program didn't exactly win the day (or the year !!) for the country.

They weren't last year but now is now and now is Delta. Fairly obvious to all that their model has changed from mid last year.

[TooMuchTime]

2 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

0.06% is a good sample size?

Yes.  As I said, look at the trend and compare it to everywhere else in the world.  The same bell curve you see isn't by chance.  Remember I stated TREND and not absolute case count.

[dinsdale]

9 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

What about the part of only at risk should be recommended for receiving it but others can if they choose to?

This way there is no economic shutdown and life can continue on as normal without any elements or coercion.

Don't forget that the vast majority of deaths/hospitalizations come are from the elderly.

It is now being called the pandemic of the unvaccinated. Why do you think this is?

Edited September 20, 2021 by dinsdale

[TooMuchTime]

Just now, dinsdale said:

It is now being called the pandemic of the unvaccinated. Why do you think this is?

To use wordplay and make people who didnt take the vaccine feel bad.

If unvaccinated people chose not to take it, they also accept the risks associated with it.  If you take the vaccine and still get infected... you should question the vaccine.  I guess we'll see if ADE kicks in for the booster folks and how TV man may try to spin it.

They should develop a sterilizing vaccine instead.

[Danderman123]

9 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

What about the part of only at risk should be recommended for receiving it but others can if they choose to?

This way there is no economic shutdown and life can continue on as normal without any elements or coercion.

Don't forget that the vast majority of deaths/hospitalizations come are from the elderly.

Your internet friends are sending you outdated talking points.

 

if there remains a large number of unvaccinated people, the virus will continue to spread and even vaccinated elderly will be at risk. The idea is to vaccinate so many people that the virus has difficulty spreading.

 

For an example, use the “Google” to look up “measles”. This has been done before.

[coolcarer]

57 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

As expected but not good news for the doomers here.

Science doing what it does, restricting spread with Thailand’s covid measures in tandem with the vaccination roll out that is finally underway full steam

[Danderman123]

4 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

To use wordplay and make people who didnt take the vaccine feel bad.

If unvaccinated people chose not to take it, they also accept the risks associated with it.  If you take the vaccine and still get infected... you should question the vaccine.  I guess we'll see if ADE kicks in for the booster folks and how TV man may try to spin it.

They should develop a sterilizing vaccine instead.

“Question the vaccine”.

 

who has claimed that vaccines offer 100% protection?

 

But the unvaccinated have 0% protection - you don’t care about them. 
 

and no, the unvaccinated don’t accept the risk, many of them are simply misinformed. By people like you. So, they die unnecessarily from Covid, victims of lies.

[buick]

13 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

They weren't last year but now is now and now is Delta. Fairly obvious to all that their model has changed from mid last year.

they got vaccinated so things got under control.  nothing to do with their testing program.

[Walker88]

21 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

What about the part of only at risk should be recommended for receiving it but others can if they choose to?

This way there is no economic shutdown and life can continue on as normal without any elements or coercion.

Don't forget that the vast majority of deaths/hospitalizations come are from the elderly.

"Vast majority" is a deceptive term at worst, or incomplete at best. Even if the 'vast majority' at risk are elderly, there is a minority that is not elderly and at risk.  The more people who are vaccinated, the greater the likelihood the virus will peter out over time, as its hosts (vaccinated people) will neutralize it (vaccinated folks, besides exhibiting on average lesser symptoms, do not carry the virus forever; their immune system neutralizes it). The longer it exists, the more chances the molecule will have to mutate into a more virulent form. Eventually it will be un-vaccinated people who will be the major hosts of the virus and the petri dishes for mutation.

 

Just as the SInovac model is pretty ineffective against Delta, it is possible some future mutation will obviate the other existing vaccines. That means those who will be the major carriers of the virus (un-vaxxed) may well put everyone at risk, vaccinated or not. That seems pretty selfish.

 

Plenty of vaccines are mandated and not open to choice. Polio and smallpox are the main ones, but some countries mandate all students must also be vaccinated against measles, chicken pox, diphtheria and some others.

Edited September 20, 2021 by Walker88

[TooMuchTime]

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

“Question the vaccine”.

 

who has claimed that vaccines offer 100% protection?

 

But the unvaccinated have 0% protection - you don’t care about them. 
 

and no, the unvaccinated don’t accept the risk, many of them are simply misinformed. By people like you. So, they die unnecessarily from Covid, victims of lies.

They do accept the risk because they chose to get it.

Death rates are very low for people under 50.  Majority of deaths are skewed to elderly and those with multiple diseases.  You can find this data on CDC stats.

People at Johns Hopkins even made a simple calculator to determine your risk factor.

https://covid19risktools.com:8443/

Mine is 1.1 in 1 million chance of death from COVID.

[TooMuchTime]

2 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

"Vast majority" is a deceptive term at worst, or incomplete at best. Even if the 'vast majority' at risk are elderly, there is a minority that is not elderly and at risk.  The more people who are vaccinated, the greater the likelihood the virus will peter out over time, as its hosts (vaccinated people) will neutralize it (vaccinated folks, besides exhibiting on average lesser symptoms, do not carry the virus forever; their immune system neutralizes it). The longer it exists, the more chances the molecule will have to mutate into a more virulent form. Eventually it will be un-vaccinated people who will be the major hosts of the virus and the petri dishes for mutation.

 

Plenty of vaccines are mandated and not open to choice. Polio and smallpox are the main ones, but some countries mandate all students must also be vaccinated against measles, chicken pox, diphtheria and some others.

Economic shutdown to prevent a minority of people?

COVID is here for ever and will not go away.  You will never vaccinate the world all at once to prevent any mutations.  Think of the logistics.  Protect those at risk and move on.  A more virulent form does not equate to more deadly.  Think of the cold (another coronavirus) or flu.

The other vaccines you mention are STERILIZING vaccines and offer decades/lifetime of IMMUNITY.  We know how much doses is needed and how long it lasts.

[coolcarer]

48 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

It is a good sample size to see the trend.  You learn this in a basic stats class.

Better you enroll for more than a basic stats class. There are variables involved, most tests here are from hospital walking and known PUI cases not of the population as a whole

[Danderman123]

5 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

They do accept the risk because they chose to get it.

Death rates are very low for people under 50.  Majority of deaths are skewed to elderly and those with multiple diseases.  You can find this data on CDC stats.

People at Johns Hopkins even made a simple calculator to determine your risk factor.

https://covid19risktools.com:8443/

Mine is 1.1 in 1 million chance of death from COVID.

Your chances of being hit by lightning are likewise. I’ll bet you don’t walk around holding golf clubs during lightning storms.

 

Also, since you seem misinformed on Covid, I should bring up Long Covid, which affects even people with no immediate symptoms. There are other outcomes from Covid infections other than death or survival.

 

More to the point, if you are infected, you can pass it on to your loved ones, and they may suffer due to your being misinformed about the pandemic.

[TooMuchTime]

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

Your chances of being hit by lightning are likewise. I’ll bet you don’t walk around holding golf clubs during lightning storms.

 

Also, since you seem misinformed on Covid, I should bring up Long Covid, which affects even people with no immediate symptoms. There are other outcomes from Covid infections other than death or survival.

 

More to the point, if you are infected, you can pass it on to your loved ones, and they may suffer due to your being misinformed about the pandemic.

They can choose the vaccine for additional protection.

[Danderman123]

5 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

Economic shutdown to prevent a minority of people?

COVID is here for ever and will not go away.  You will never vaccinate the world all at once to prevent any mutations.  Think of the logistics.  Protect those at risk and move on.  A more virulent form does not equate to more deadly.  Think of the cold (another coronavirus) or flu.

The other vaccines you mention are STERILIZING vaccines and offer decades/lifetime of IMMUNITY.  We know how much doses is needed and how long it lasts.

If you are correct, then it’s only a matter of time before a mutation occurs that targets you and your demographic group.

 

To delay that event, best get everyone vaccinated to slow down the mutation rate. Thanks for the heads up!

[Bkk Brian]

12 minutes ago, buick said:

they got vaccinated so things got under control.  nothing to do with their testing program.

No they had very strict lockdowns, stopped allowing international arrivals without strict controls, finally got into gear and put together one of the best testing regimes in the world combined with one of the best vaccination plans in the world

[Danderman123]

3 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

Useless without knowing breakdown of age and health status of everyone. 

At risk get the vaccine if they choose, others carry on.

You don’t get it.

 

If a large number of people choose not to get vaccinated, then the at risk individuals will be constantly infected by unvaccinated morons.

[TooMuchTime]

Just now, Danderman123 said:

If you are correct, then it’s only a matter of time before a mutation occurs that targets you and your demographic group.

 

To delay that event, best get everyone vaccinated to slow down the mutation rate. Thanks for the heads up!

But it is not eliminated.  It will probably mutate to be more virulent but less deadly like the common cold did.  Pretty common thing to happen for viruses.  A virus stirves to live in its host for as long as possible, not kill their host.

If the virus targets me, I have a minimal risk of dying.  OG Covid didnt kill me either.

[Danderman123]

2 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

They can choose the vaccine for additional protection.

 

2 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

They can choose the vaccine for additional protection.

Nope. As long as there are large numbers of misinformed unvaccinated people, then those people who are vaccinated will continue to be infected, as they only have 80% or so protection.

[dinsdale]

13 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

Useless without knowing breakdown of age and health status of everyone. 

At risk get the vaccine if they choose, others carry on.

Carry on going to hospital, dying and spreading the virus. Good advice. Goes against every health professional's advice globally but if that's the way you think that's up to you.

Edited September 20, 2021 by dinsdale

[Olmate]

52 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

It is a good sample size to see the trend.  You learn this in a basic stats class.

Basic  stats factors don.t apply to the vocal 'Xperts' on here tho! Dont believe death numbers seems to be the current fallacy! 

[Danderman123]

2 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

But it is not eliminated.  It will probably mutate to be more virulent but less deadly like the common cold did.  Pretty common thing to happen for viruses.  A virus stirves to live in its host for as long as possible, not kill their host.

If the virus targets me, I have a minimal risk of dying.  OG Covid didnt kill me either.

It’s pretty clear you have no understanding of infectious diseases. I will try to make this simple:

 

The more unvaccinated people, the more people die.

 

Maybe you don’t mind if people you don’t know die from Covid, but even if your loved ones were vaccinated, if you get infected you can pass the infection to your loved ones.  Since your reason for not being vaccinated is that you feel you would personally survive, your loved ones would die from your arrogance.