Are we just going to have to live with unvaccinated people across Thailand?

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, Aussie999 said:

I really don't understand this, in my opinion it makes no difference, whether customers are vaccinated. or not, those vaccinated have some protection, those not vaccinated, take the risk, it matters not, even to staff, who also take the risk of not being vaccinated.
oh, and before anyone accuses me, of not being vaccinated... I have had 3 jabs.

Yes, they have some protection but not 100% protection. And they don't need reckless and selfish people to increase their odds of getting infected.

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

That just doesnt make sense .

If people were lying in hospital car parks waiting for a bed because of Covid patients in hospital beds, why didn't they move the Covid patients to field hospitals ? 

Not so easy to set up an ICU in a field hospital. But many countries have set up field hospitals for covid patients.

[heybruce]

10 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Did we not all read about the 'Hero doctor' that died from COVID in the UK.

Fully vaccinated, not old, not previously sick ......... dead.

I guess the Lancet doesn't keep track of the deaths of their own doctors.

I've read stories about people getting rich from buying lottery tickets, but I understand that lotteries are a poor investment.  Unusual anecdotes make the news but do not prove anything.

[Bkk Brian]

11 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Do explain then why Israel has 98 % of its population vaccinated and yesterday had its highest daily death rate from the virus ?

 

https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/countries-and-territories/israel/

The majority unvaccinated or only partially vaccinated thats why. Pity they never took their own scientists advice. By the way 12% of the over 60's in Israel are either not vaccinated or only partially vaccinated.

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, ThLT said:

According to a study published in The Lancet, one of the most respected scientific journals in the world, vaccines are only around 13% more protective against infection/transmission:

 

What is the vaccine effect on reducing transmission in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant? - The Lancet Infectious Diseases

 

So whether you are anti or pro-vaccine, this whole charade/witch hunt is entirely based on emotion, rather than rational thought and scientific fact.

False. On the basis of the study you are actually 52% more protected than if you are unvaccinated.

[Mac Mickmanus]

Just now, placeholder said:

Not so easy to set up an ICU in a field hospital. But many countries have set up field hospitals for covid patients.

And soon after closed them all down again because they were empty .

Lots of news reports and publicity about huge field hospitals the size of football pitches opening for the tens of thousands of expected Covid patients and they all quietly closed down again within a month because no one went there 

[ThLT]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I'm guessing that mathematics is not your best subject.  I used the percentages and study numbers to arrive at the actual number of infected.  As I stated, it just requires simple arithmetic. 

Math is not your best subject. And it's disingenuous on your part to make use of a second proportion to show the effectiveness of vaccines against transmission/infection. 

You say "vaccines are 150% more effective than not being vaccinated." Which is true, but that is entirely meaningless without taking into consideration that: the rate of infection/transmission is 38% for unvaccinated and 25% for vaccinated. An only 13% difference.

 

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

If the Lancet study had shown that only 1% of the vaccinated were infected while 14% of the unvaccinated became infected, would you ignore the fact that 14 times as many unvaccinated were infected and still insist it's only a 13% difference?

If the Lancet study would had said 1% for vaccinated and 14% unvaccinated, I'm sure you would have jumped on a chair and said "vaccines are 1,400%!!!! more effective at preventing transmission/infection!!!" ???? Exactly my point.

 

[heybruce]

17 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Do explain then why Israel has 98 % of its population vaccinated and yesterday had its highest daily death rate from the virus ?

 

https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/countries-and-territories/israel/

Your source does not state that Israel has 98% of its population vaccinated.  It doesn't.  https://ycharts.com/indicators/israel_coronavirus_full_vaccination_rate

 

I suspect the high death rate in Israel, as in other countries, is due to Omicron racing through the unvaccinated part of the population.

[ThLT]

7 minutes ago, placeholder said:

False. On the basis of the study you are actually 52% more protected than if you are unvaccinated.

Did you even read the study? 

 

Again, same as @heybruce above. You take something that is already a proportion/percentage, and misleadingly make a second proportion. 

The difference in protection against transmission/infection is 13%. 

 

Here:

 

Quote

The SARs in household contacts exposed to the delta variant was 25% in vaccinated and 38% in unvaccinated contacts. These results underpin the key message that vaccinated contacts are better protected than the unvaccinated.

 

Edited February 4, 2022 by ThLT

[Bkk Brian]

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

And soon after closed them all down again because they were empty .

Lots of news reports and publicity about huge field hospitals the size of football pitches opening for the tens of thousands of expected Covid patients and they all quietly closed down again within a month because no one went there 

Yea insurance or risk management is useless. Who needs it...........such a waste of money, if there's a sudden influx lets just close the hospital doors and let them die at home instead, better than setting up a field hospital just in case.

[placeholder]

Just now, ThLT said:

Did you even read the study? 

 

Here:

 

 

It's clear you don't know how to construe the results of these studies. You should look up how "effectiveness" is calculated by epidemiologists.

[Mac Mickmanus]

8 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Your source does not state that Israel has 98% of its population vaccinated.  It doesn't.  https://ycharts.com/indicators/israel_coronavirus_full_vaccination_rate

 

I suspect the high death rate in Israel, as in other countries, is due to Omicron racing through the unvaccinated part of the population.

The link states this 

 

Israel has administered at least 17,879,314 doses of COVID vaccines so far. Assuming every person needs 2 doses, that’s enough to have vaccinated about 98.7% of the country’s population.

 

 

[Aussie999]

3 hours ago, jvs said:

I see you are easily confused,if you reread and try to comprehend my post you may start to understand.

Again,just for you.

If un vaccinated people become infected the chances they are getting severely ill and need to be treated in a hospital are much greater then vaccinated people.

Are you with me so far?

Too many severe cases can clog up the medical system,this can effect al of us.

You can lead a horse to water but,

Quote "If un vaccinated people become infected the chances they are getting severely ill and need to be treated in a hospital are much greater then vaccinated people," unquote, the issue here is, Omicron is not as severe as Delta, or any earlier varieties, therefore, it shouldn't put as much strain on the medical system.

Edited February 4, 2022 by Aussie999

[Aussie999]

5 hours ago, jvs said:

Ok i will take a stab at your response,in plain language and looking at it the way you do ,yes i think you are right.A little bit in the trend of wearing a helmet or not.

If you wear a helmet why should you care about some one you do not know who does not wear one?

Again,on the surface you are right.

However it goes much deeper then that,not being vaccinated means your chance of getting infected

and becoming seriously ill are much higher then if you would be vaccinated.

So far no biggy?

Again,(and i can not believe why people keep ignoring this fact) infected people are clogging up the

hospitals and depleting resources.

I really can not understand why people would refuse to be vaccinated against Covid.Of course there are exemptions but only a few.

If you are against being vaccinated just think about this,would you refuse a blood transfusion

if the donor was vaccinated?It could save your life?

Are people really thinking for them selves or just regurgitating what they find on social media?

Just have a look at the percentage of people dying in the USA who are not vaccinated against

those who are.

Do your own research but please  use your brain.

Getting vaccinated against Covid has a lot to do with being a social human being.

If you do not do it for your self ,do it for others.

 

Quote "

However it goes much deeper then that,not being vaccinated means your chance of getting infected

and becoming seriously ill are much higher then if you would be vaccinated.

So far no biggy?

The issue here is, Omicron is not as severe as Delta, or any earlier varieties, therefore, it shouldn't put as much strain on the medical system.

Edited February 4, 2022 by Aussie999

[ThLT]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

It's clear you don't know how to construe the results of these studies. You should look up how "effectiveness" is calculated by epidemiologists.

It's clear you have no idea what you're talking about. I've studied science at college.

 

The Lancet study statistic is already a percentage. You and the other guy who doesn't know what he's talking about.... taking a percentage, and then making another percentage based on that percentage is misleading and disingenuous.

 

Exactly like I said earlier: if the Lancet study would have said 1% for vaccinated and 14% unvaccinated, I'm sure you would  jump on a chair and say "vaccines are 1,400%!!!! more effective at preventing transmission/infection!!!!!!!!" ????

 

Edited February 4, 2022 by ThLT

[placeholder]

32 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Do explain then why Israel has 98 % of its population vaccinated and yesterday had its highest daily death rate from the virus ?

 

https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/countries-and-territories/israel/

Where did you ever come up with the notion that 98% of Israel's population is vaccinated?

 

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/israel

 

[Bkk Brian]

4 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The link states this 

 

Israel has administered at least 17,879,314 doses of COVID vaccines so far. Assuming every person needs 2 doses, that’s enough to have vaccinated about 98.7% of the country’s population.

 

 

As of 1st Feb 2022 Israel has 66% fully vaccinated.

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

[ThLT]

Fact is, the Lancet study says 25% infection for vaccinated, 38% for unvaccinated.

 

That's only 13% more protection than being unvaccinated.

 

Saying "yeah, but but but... that' 152% morrrrrreeeeee!!!!" doesn't change the fact that that 152% more is only a 13% difference in protection of infection.

 

Edited February 4, 2022 by ThLT

[placeholder]

16 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

And soon after closed them all down again because they were empty .

Lots of news reports and publicity about huge field hospitals the size of football pitches opening for the tens of thousands of expected Covid patients and they all quietly closed down again within a month because no one went there 

They were all empty? Really? I did a quick search for Thailand and discovered that there was a Bangkok field hospital that treated over 20,000 patients. The story was in the bangkok post but it's easily findable googling. Are you going to claim next that was the only one?

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, pedro01 said:

Breakthrough????

 

What a ludicrous word that is. It makes it sound like a minority.

 

My wife picked it up from a pub  round the corner. Every single person there that night got it. Staff and customers.

 

Vaccine didnt help prevent anyone getting Omicron.

 

What we need is therapy. Vaccines have failed us.

If saving vaccinated people from death and serious illness by an overwhelming percentage compared to the unvaccinated, then you've made a great point. Otherwise, not so much.

[heybruce]

3 minutes ago, ThLT said:

Math is not your best subject. And it's disingenuous on your part to make use of a second proportion to show the effectiveness of vaccines against transmission/infection. 

You say "vaccines are 150% more effective than not being vaccinated." Which is true, but that is entirely meaningless without taking into consideration that: the rate of infection/transmission is 38% for unvaccinated and 25% for vaccinated. An only 13% difference.

 

If the Lancet study would had said 1% for vaccinated and 14% unvaccinated, I'm sure you would have jumped on a chair and said "vaccines are 1,400%!!!! more effective at preventing transmission/infection!!!" ???? Exactly my point.

 

Actually I'm pretty good at mathematics.  I have a degree in mathematics and two in engineering.

 

I'm glad that you are belatedly acknowledging that my original statement that the unvaccinated are one and a half times more likely to be infected than the vaccinated is correct. 

 

Regarding your claim that the difference between 25% and 38% is insignificant, I disagree.  An infected population of 100 increasing by 25% a month would lead to 244 infected in four months and 1454 infected in one year.  An infected population of 100 increasing by 38% a year would lead to 363 infected in four months and 4770 in one year, more than three times as many.  That's how exponential spread works.

 

BTW:  I don't jump on chairs, I prefer direct numerical comparisons to percentages (as my posts demonstrate) and I find it amusing that you hypothesize about how I might react and end with "Exactly my point."  You imagine me getting excited by something so you can (attempt to) make an excited point.

[Mac Mickmanus]

5 hours ago, jvs said:

Ok i will take a stab at your response,in plain language and looking at it the way you do ,yes i think you are right.A little bit in the trend of wearing a helmet or not.

If you wear a helmet why should you care about some one you do not know who does not wear one?

Again,on the surface you are right.

However it goes much deeper then that,not being vaccinated means your chance of getting infected

and becoming seriously ill are much higher then if you would be vaccinated.

So far no biggy?

Again,(and i can not believe why people keep ignoring this fact) infected people are clogging up the

hospitals and depleting resources.

I really can not understand why people would refuse to be vaccinated against Covid.

 

The vaccines only last a few months before you will need a booster shot .

It has been shown that natural protection, recovery naturally is better than being protected by vaccination .

   Vaccinated people will need a booster every six months , naturally protected people wont need any booster shots 

[DavisH]

Couldn't care less about the unvaccinated now. its not like they haven't had a chance to vaccinate. They are the ones at greater risk.

Besides, getting a natural Omicron infection will develop polyclonal antibodies. This will give them greater immunity. That's if it doesn't kill them.

 

More damage is being done by shutting schools and businesses. One or 2 cases is causing some schools to shut which is insane. I'm more worried about that than anyone's vaccination status. Continualy lockdowns is going to extend the pandemic for another 5 years or more, while much of the rest of the world will be back to relative normailty. China will have a crisis. Watch this space. 

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, ThLT said:

Fact is, the Lancet study says 25% infection for vaccinated, 38% for unvaccinated.

 

That's only 13% more protection than being unvaccinated.

Vaccine efficacy or vaccine effectiveness is the percentage reduction of disease cases in a vaccinated group of people compared to an unvaccinated group. For example, a vaccine efficacy or effectiveness of 80% indicates an 80% decrease in the number of disease cases among a group of vaccinated people compared to a group in which nobody was vaccinated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_efficacy

[Aussie999]

28 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Yes, they have some protection but not 100% protection. And they don't need reckless and selfish people to increase their odds of getting infected.

NOTHING is 100%, those who do not, vaccinate, just have to live with the consequences... they live, or die, because of their own decision, why should the rest suffer, because of them.

 

[heybruce]

11 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The link states this 

 

Israel has administered at least 17,879,314 doses of COVID vaccines so far. Assuming every person needs 2 doses, that’s enough to have vaccinated about 98.7% of the country’s population.

 

 

Exactly, it says "enough to have vaccinated".  It does not say "has vaccinated".  The majority of Israelis have been double vaccinated, many have had one booster, and now they are applying second boosters shots to some people.

[ThLT]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

Actually I'm pretty good at mathematics.  I have a degree in mathematics and two in engineering.

Good, then you should be able to recognize the disingenuousness of presenting a proportion without taking into consideration what that proportion is based on?

 

You completely ignored that point I'm making.

 

Saying there is a "13% difference in protection against infection"... AND

Saying "vaccines protect more against infection by more than 150%," while correct, statistically disingenuous.

 

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Regarding your claim that the difference between 25% and 38% is insignificant, I disagree.  An infected population of 100 increasing by 25% a month would lead to 244 infected in four months and 1454 infected in one year.  An infected population of 100 increasing by 38% a year would lead to 363 infected in four months and 4770 in one year, more than three times as many.  That's how exponential spread works.

Sure. But I'm refuting the claim that vaccines protect against infection. If 25% of vaccinated get infected, and 38% for unvaccinated... vaccines don't really protect that much against infection.

[placeholder]

9 minutes ago, ThLT said:

It's clear you have no idea what you're talking about. I've studied science at college.

 

The Lancet study statistic is already a percentage. You and the other guy who doesn't know what he's talking about.... taking a percentage, and then making another percentage based on that percentage is misleading and disingenuous.

 

Exactly like I said earlier: if the Lancet study would have said 1% for vaccinated and 14% unvaccinated, I'm sure you would  jump on a chair and say "vaccines are 1,400%!!!! more effective at preventing transmission/infection!!!!!!!!" ????

 

What you clearly don't understand is why epidemiologists don't do computations the way you do. Like other studies, the Lancet study took place over a limited space of time. So just because x number of people got ill over y number of months, doesn't mean that those who didn't get ill for that period won't get ill some time in the future. But those who are vaccinated are 52% less likely to get ill, at least from the same variant, as those who are unvaccinated. 

Next time you declare norms for judging data that the scientific community doesn't follow, you might want to think twice about sharing them with others.

And please spare us the allegations about your academic qualifications. We are all anonymous here. Such declarations are worthless. 

[heybruce]

16 minutes ago, Aussie999 said:

Quote "If un vaccinated people become infected the chances they are getting severely ill and need to be treated in a hospital are much greater then vaccinated people," unquote, the issue here is, Omicron is not as severe as Delta, or any earlier varieties, therefore, it shouldn't put as much strain on the medical system.

Omicron is straining the medical system:

 

"A new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has detailed the impact of the Omicron wave on hospitals in the United States. The data indicates disease caused by Omicron may be less severe than prior SARS-CoV-2 variants, but increased transmissibility means the US is facing the heaviest load on its hospitals seen since the pandemic began two years ago."  https://newatlas.com/health-wellbeing/cdc-report-omicron-strain-hospitals-caseload-severity/

 

It's easy to find similar reports from other countries.

[MrJ2U]

13 hours ago, RandiRona said:

Yes, people have right to decide what is right for them. I am not against vaccination and double vaccinated but I decide what I take and what I wont. Please respect other people decision to not take it for whatever reason. They are still human.

So your unvaccinated?

 

No respect for that.