Ministry official hints you'll need to be vaxxed to do things in public in Thailand

[jacko45k]

2 hours ago, James105 said:

The global vaccination rate of 80% is an impossible goal as the "magnificent" vaccines only last about 6 months, which means there is not a snowballs chance in hell that the world will ever reach 80% vaccination rate.    

I see what you are getting at.... the fact that a country cannot vaccinate 80% of it's population in a 6 month time-frame. It is the painting of Sydney Harbour or Tyne Bridges scenario. I expect we will head into an annual booster program, or newer vaccines will be developed that do the job better. In the meantime do not go thinking the vaccines do not and are not working, that is very far from the truth.....

This article discusses this but has no answers.

[James105]

44 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

I see what you are getting at.... the fact that a country cannot vaccinate 80% of it's population in a 6 month time-frame. It is the painting of Sydney Harbour or Tyne Bridges scenario. I expect we will head into an annual booster program, or newer vaccines will be developed that do the job better. In the meantime do not go thinking the vaccines do not and are not working, that is very far from the truth.....

This article discusses this but has no answers.

Indeed.  Which means smarter thinking is required rather than focusing on making sure big pharma is maximising their profits.  If only we knew the profile of the person most likely to get severely ill from covid and could actually target the vaccinations more effectively, then we could aim for the realistic target of vaccinating 100% of those likely to get severe covid in a 6 month window rather than worrying about the impossible task of vaccinating 80% of everyone, including kids as young as 5 who do not even get sick from this.    

 

It's a real shame no-one is tracking the demographics of who gets really ill and dies from this virus so more intelligent decisions about vaccine distribution could be made.   

[ukrules]

2 hours ago, jacko45k said:

or newer vaccines will be developed that do the job better.

This bit - that's the important part ^

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, James105 said:

Right, so you are not talking about covid vaccines on a forum related to covid vaccines?   You are talking about other long ago established vaccines people can be compensated for so something entirely different to the article I linked.    

Well, the person in question claimed that was case for all vaccines way back when.

 

11 hours ago, James105 said:

Right, so you are not talking about covid vaccines on a forum related to covid vaccines?   You are talking about other long ago established vaccines people can be compensated for so something entirely different to the article I linked.    

I was writing about the uselessness of engaging with someone alleging a personal history of  some adverse effects of a vaccination since there is no objective way to confirm such information. I pointed out that rarely someone making such comment slips and there is an objective way to determine that his alleged personal history is a falsehood. But otherwise fruitless.

[onthedarkside]

A post winning the trifecta award for COVID misinformation, conspiracy theory and trolling all rolled into one has been removed, along with a reply.

 

[PadPrikKhing]

On 11/16/2021 at 5:50 PM, Toolong said:

I don't wish to shift too much from the main issue here, which is essentially the possible imposition of restrictive & puntive social sanctions against those unvaccinated, but could someone just explain to me why I might be incorrect in thinking that if vaccinated people can still become infected with C19.....and if vaccinated people can still infect others with C19, why should it be assumed that UNvaccinated people are a particular risk to others? (A risk to themselves, yes.) It's a genuine query and I am happy to be shown up as having faulty logic or as being uninformed if that is the case. 

 

(I am fully vaccinated btw, but only cos I could see exactly this kind of s**t coming down the road.....and lo, here it comes.)

It's an interesting lapse in logic, isn't it? It isn't just happening in Thailand, either. Here in the US, the same social prejudice exists, perpetuated by millions of people who don't get this basic scientific principle. People ask each other "Are you vaccinated?", thinking that anyone unvaccinated is a threat to vaccinated people. As you've pointed out, it doesn't really work that way, but the vast majority of people can't be expected to understand this, I guess. Reptilian brain function (fear, bias, the need to ostracize and tribalize) takes over and that's it.

 

One thing I've learned in life is that by a huge margin, most people have almost no scientific aptitude—normally not a problem, but it becomes a big problem when the world is faced with a major global problem of a scientific nature and everyone reacts based on their understanding of basic scientific (in this case, virological) facts.

[morrobay]

16 hours ago, James105 said:

  If only we knew the profile of the person most likely to get severely ill from covid and could actually target the vaccinations more effectively, then we could aim for the realistic target of vaccinating 100% of those likely to get severe covid in a 6 month window 

 

It's a real shame no-one is tracking the demographics of who gets really ill and dies from this virus so more intelligent decisions about vaccine distribution could be made.   

The profile/comorbidities for severe covid can be found with a search. Demographics ? The poor that are obese from the starch,sugar, fatty food intake.      That's right those people really should be vaccinated. And for the young healthy who get severe covid. Those exceptions to the rule most likely have some kind of rare / unknown genetic immune condition. So should be more research in this area. 

[placeholder]

Actually a not so interesting non lapse in logic.

It seems an insuperable barrier for some people to understand about rates of transmission. Just because vaccines dont absolutely stop transmission, doesn't mean that they don't slow it. Of course, this goes to a broader question of scientific illiteracy. Anyone with even a modest acquaintance with modern science, knows that it's fueled by statistics. So it's not a question of 

 

1 hour ago, PadPrikKhing said:

It's an interesting lapse in logic, isn't it? It isn't just happening in Thailand, either. Here in the US, the same social prejudice exists, perpetuated by millions of people who don't get this basic scientific principle. People ask each other "Are you vaccinated?", thinking that anyone unvaccinated is a threat to vaccinated people. As you've pointed out, it doesn't really work that way, but the vast majority of people can't be expected to understand this, I guess. Reptilian brain function (fear, bias, the need to ostracize and tribalize) takes over and that's it.

 

One thing I've learned in life is that by a huge margin, most people have almost no scientific aptitude—normally not a problem, but it becomes a big problem when the world is faced with a major global problem of a scientific nature and everyone reacts based on their understanding of basic scientific (in this case, virological) facts.

Actually a not so interesting non lapse in logic.

 Anyone with even a modest acquaintance with modern science, knows that it's fueled by statistics to establish significance. This is the case in all fields of science.. So it's not a question of yes or no, black or white, 100% or 0%m or stopping or non-stopping but, in this case by what degree, if any vaccines inhibit transmission.

A collaborative effort by the International Vaccine Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and WHO provided an exhaustive list of studies that addresses the question of vaccine effectiveness against various aspects of the Covid-19 Virus. One of those aspects addressed on page 12 of this study is vaccine effectiveness against reducing the transmission of infection.  Here's a link to the study:

https://view-hub.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/COVID19 VE Studies_Forest Plots.pdf

It clearly demonstrates that covid-19 vaccines are effective in reducing transmission.

 

 

[Toolong]

On 11/23/2021 at 4:27 AM, PadPrikKhing said:

It's an interesting lapse in logic, isn't it? It isn't just happening in Thailand, either. Here in the US, the same social prejudice exists, perpetuated by millions of people who don't get this basic scientific principle. People ask each other "Are you vaccinated?", thinking that anyone unvaccinated is a threat to vaccinated people. As you've pointed out, it doesn't really work that way, but the vast majority of people can't be expected to understand this, I guess. Reptilian brain function (fear, bias, the need to ostracize and tribalize) takes over and that's it.

 

One thing I've learned in life is that by a huge margin, most people have almost no scientific aptitude—normally not a problem, but it becomes a big problem when the world is faced with a major global problem of a scientific nature and everyone reacts based on their understanding of basic scientific (in this case, virological) facts.

Well said. ????

(For the most part......not sure it's fair to accuse reptiles of 'fear, bias, the need to ostracize and tribalize'! ????)

 

PS: sorry for late response.

[Pierre Hanot]

On 11/17/2021 at 8:50 AM, Toolong said:

I don't wish to shift too much from the main issue here, which is essentially the possible imposition of restrictive & puntive social sanctions against those unvaccinated, but could someone just explain to me why I might be incorrect in thinking that if vaccinated people can still become infected with C19.....and if vaccinated people can still infect others with C19, why should it be assumed that UNvaccinated people are a particular risk to others? (A risk to themselves, yes.) It's a genuine query and I am happy to be shown up as having faulty logic or as being uninformed if that is the case. 

 

(I am fully vaccinated btw, but only cos I could see exactly this kind of s**t coming down the road.....and lo, here it comes.)

Beautiful logic  !!!!

[sanuk711]

Udon Thai---We have a once yearly market/side show's games rides etc.....rolls into town for 2 weeks . the whole thing was fenced off this year Army at the entrance and you had to prove you had been Vaxed before you could wander in amongst the crowd. 

 

I guess I can see this happening in large shopping malls -Cinema's etc

Edited December 9, 2021 by sanuk711

[KhunLA]

1 hour ago, sanuk711 said:

Udon Thai---We have a once yearly market/side show's games rides etc.....rolls into town for 2 weeks . the whole thing was fenced off this year Army at the entrance and you had to prove you had been Vaxed before you could wander in amongst the crowd. 

 

I guess I can see this happening in large shopping malls -Cinema's etc

So how was the turn out ?  

Used to be packed, to the point of having to walk at a snail's pace through the vendors.  Warranting a daytime, weekday visit only.  Nights & weekend ... no thanks

[blackprince]

On 11/17/2021 at 8:50 AM, Toolong said:

why should it be assumed that UNvaccinated people are a particular risk to others? (A risk to themselves, yes.) It's a genuine query and I am happy to be shown up as having faulty logic or as being uninformed if that is the case.

The vaccines reduce viral load, therefore a dose you pick up from a vaxxed person would be lower in viral load than a dose you pick up from an unvaxxed person (assuming everything else is the same). Consequently the risk of serious illness, hospitalisation and death is reduced.

 

There is also the public policy issue of keeping the health services from collapse due to the larger number of serious cases that would exist in an unvaxxed population.

[Toolong]

3 hours ago, blackprince said:

The vaccines reduce viral load, therefore a dose you pick up from a vaxxed person would be lower in viral load than a dose you pick up from an unvaxxed person (assuming everything else is the same). Consequently the risk of serious illness, hospitalisation and death is reduced.

 

There is also the public policy issue of keeping the health services from collapse due to the larger number of serious cases that would exist in an unvaxxed population.

Thank you for that explanation, said very clearly. ????

[kimamey]

On 11/17/2021 at 1:24 AM, BadSpottedDog said:

Not a choice for us. 2 of our family cannot have any vaccine for medical reasons. Of course the Thai govt isn't even considering people like us. This sucks.

They certainly need to be taken into account if they genuinely can't have the the vaccine for medical reasons. It's also why the rest of us who can have the vaccine should do so as to protect those who can't.

[kimamey]

5 hours ago, blackprince said:

The vaccines reduce viral load, therefore a dose you pick up from a vaxxed person would be lower in viral load than a dose you pick up from an unvaxxed person (assuming everything else is the same). Consequently the risk of serious illness, hospitalisation and death is reduced.

 

There is also the public policy issue of keeping the health services from collapse due to the larger number of serious cases that would exist in an unvaxxed population.

There's also the need to protect those who are unable to have the vaccine for medical reasons.

[steven100]

I see they are making it mandatory to get vaccinated worldwide in many jobs and shops,  and rightly so .... I don't wanna be within cooee of any self righteous knucklehead who thinks he's the almighty and doesn't need it.