Proposal: stop Covid-19 testing foreign workers in dark red zones

[AdamX]

28 minutes ago, Grumpyoldman said:

.....thats how you get herd immunity.

Not everyone gets C19.

95% of people that get it are not seriously ill. These are statistics in the public domain.

The policy of "nil cases" doesnt work, cannot ever work and is flawed.

BTW, you would get banned for expressing this POV in TVF

[Grumpyoldman]

1 minute ago, AdamX said:

BTW, you would get banned for expressing this POV in TVF

Yes.

I made 1 comment months ago based on statistical evidence and it was deleted.  So I left.

[Stonker]

8 hours ago, M.O. said:

This mass "hospitalization" of all covid patients is un-necessary. What is needed is isolation. Just set up isolation centres. 

That's exactly what's been done, in so-called "field hospitals".

 

That's what makes this desperate scrambling roubd for an excuse no to test people all the more inexcusable.

 

8 hours ago, Tjampman said:

That is what they are doing, the field hospitals that are set up, is only for isolation areas.

 

Dohhh .... you beat me to it .....

[BlueSphinx]

2 hours ago, AdamX said:

BTW, you would get banned for expressing this POV in TVF

 

[Stonker]

8 hours ago, gummy said:

So putting up to 500 people in the same enclosed building is your definition of isolation is it ?

So what's your alternative, @gummy?

To tell them to self-isolate at home, with "home" for many millions of Thais being a small room in Bangkok or the big city shared with a few others,  or for them to get a bus or crowded pick up "home" to Isan to their home village where they can move back in to the multi-generational family "home" with their small children and aging parents and grand parents, with a shared outside toilet?

Or, in the case of these migrant workers, a row of unsanitary, unhygienic corrugated metal / wriggly tin leaking lean to's with three or four crowded into a space half the size of your toilet, with one toilet between twenty on a good day?

It's very easy to criticise, but unless you've got a better solution all that can be done is to choose the lesser of two evils.

There are options, for some - around me they isolate in a rice shed in the fields, and the local hospital has converted a complete block of nurses' accommodation near the hospital, but not everyone's that lucky to have that option.

So, what's your alternative, @gummy?

Edit:  or anyone?

 

 

 

[gummy]

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

So what's your alternative, @gummy?

To tell them to self-isolate at home, with "home" for many millions of Thais being a small room in Bangkok or the big city shared with a few others,  or for them to get a bus or crowded pick up "home" to Isan to their home village where they can move back in to the multi-generational family "home" with their small children and aging parents and grand parents, with a shared outside toilet?

Or, in the case of these migrant workers, a row of unsanitary, unhygienic corrugated metal / wriggly tin leaking lean to's with three or four crowded into a space half the size of your toilet, with one toilet between twenty on a good day?

It's very easy to criticise, but unless you've got a better solution all that can be done is to choose the lesser of two evils.

There are options, for some - around me they isolate in a rice shed in the fields, and the local hospital has converted a complete block of nurses' accommodation near the hospital, but not everyone's that lucky to have that option.

So, what's your alternative, @gummy?

 

[Stonker]

2 hours ago, Grumpyoldman said:

Not everyone gets C19.

95% of people that get it are not seriously ill.

 

So, accepting your stat for the sake of argument, that leaves 5% of people that get it that are seriously ill, that need to be hospitalised  -  or buried.

 

If Thailand's test stats aren't accurate, let's take the UK's as an alternative with a similar sized population.

 

That's well over 5 million known cases, although the real figure is reportedly likely to be three times that, so let's be conservative and call it 10 million known cases despite all the lockdowns, mask wearing and closures without which you'd undoubtedly have been looking at at least four or five times that.

 

But let's ignore that dose of reality.

 

5% of 10 million cases gives us 500,000 serious cases that need to be hospitalised, many of which need the ICU.

 

In Thailand, where?

 

 

[Stonker]

15 minutes ago, gummy said:

Clearly Stonker your concept and reality are at odds to one another so much so you have resorted to now putting questions in bold text, somewhat childish do you not think ?

"childish"?

 

No, not really, since you've ignored it and decided to resort to some good old fashioned flaming instead.

 

I gave you what I thought was a perfectly reasonable explanation of the problem, which if you'd ever been to one of these migrant building sites you'd be well aware of, as well as explaining the issues for millions of Thais, then asked you, politely, what you suggested as an alternative.

 

If you don't want to or can't respond with anything more than you have, fine - I have no intention of getting provoked into following your lead.

[HolyCowCm]

Seems like they need to edit the "You must go to Hospital if you test positive" law or policy. It is racist no denying that. sweeping it under the rug like they have been doing is a little odd as we are all human beings. But we as expats might just be in the same boat if we don't have CV-19 insurance or an ample bank account. It in the end would be best to keep track and test all of the foreign workers, and leave it up to isolation if not very serious and for those who are serious try to do their best and give them medical attention needed.

[Grumpyoldman]

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

So, what's your alternative, @gummy?

Edit:  or anyone?

Do nothing. 95% dont get ill enough to hospitalise. Build herd immunity naturally whilst waiting for the injectable medicine (its not a vaccine, which is defined as creating immunity).

Save all hospital resources for the actual ill.

[Grumpyoldman]

15 minutes ago, Stonker said:

So, accepting your stat for the sake of argument, that leaves 5% of people that get it that are seriously ill, that need to be hospitalised  -  or buried.

If Thailand's test stats aren't accurate, let's take the UK's as an alternative with a similar sized population.

That's well over 5 million known cases, although the real figure is reportedly likely to be three times that, so let's be conservative and call it 10 million known cases despite all the lockdowns, mask wearing and closures without which you'd undoubtedly have been looking at at least four or five times that.

But let's ignore that dose of reality.

5% of 10 million cases gives us 500,000 serious cases that need to be hospitalised, many of which need the ICU.

In Thailand, where?

Yes you are ignoring reality by making each figure bigger and bigger.

 

Study the statistics widely available, the same ones governments use for better or worse.

The death rate across the world is 0.05% of population after 18 months of "pandemic". Not very serious in my view.

[Stonker]

3 hours ago, Grumpyoldman said:

....thats how you get herd immunity.

Can you give any examples of how that's achieved herd immunity in the past, with any other virus?

 

Polio,  dengue fever, ebola, swine flu, Hep A, Hep B, Hep E, flu, encephalitis, measles, mumps, rabies, rubella, shingles, chicken pox, smallpox, yellow fever?

 

Anthrax, whooping cough, brucellosis, tetanus, diptheria, TB, meningitis, typhoid, cholera?

 

I can't think of any where infected people have just been left to infect others and that's led to herd immunity, while they've all been addressed with varying degrees of effectiveness by isolation and vaccines.

 

I won't put it in bold, but do you have any examples where your solution's worked?

[gummy]

30 minutes ago, Stonker said:

"childish"?

No, not really, since you've ignored it and decided to resort to some good old fashioned flaming instead.

I gave you what I thought was a perfectly reasonable explanation of the problem, which if you'd ever been to one of these migrant building sites you'd be well aware of, as well as explaining the issues for millions of Thais, then asked you, politely, what you suggested as an alternative.

If you don't want to or can't respond with anything more than you have, fine - I have no intention of getting provoked into following your lead.

As they say here, up to you. But there again I always let others be my judge, not my own prejudiced idealistic stigma. that others believe in

Edited July 15, 2021 by gummy

[Objectivance]

6 hours ago, gummy said:

So the moral of that story is ; Become a fisherman and save money.

But seriously common sense is not a well proven commodity here sometimes.

"Sometimes." 

[Stonker]

13 minutes ago, Grumpyoldman said:

Do nothing. 95% dont get ill enough to hospitalise. 

But you've just said that "95% of people that get it are not seriously ill" so doesn't that leave 5% that are?

17 minutes ago, Grumpyoldman said:

Build herd immunity naturally whilst waiting for the injectable medicine (its not a vaccine, which is defined as creating immunity)

Well, the medical definition is that it is a vaccine as it gives what's been approved as an acceptable level of immunity - not necessarily sterile or full immunity, as the former's unusual and the latter's rare.

 

You may not agree, but it's difficult to discuss if you're talking a different language where words have a different rather than a recognised meaning.

15 minutes ago, Grumpyoldman said:

Yes you are ignoring reality by making each figure bigger and bigger.

Well, that's what happens when you have an 'R' number bigger than 1 and you don't test everyone every fortnight, which would be rather difficult.

 

17 minutes ago, Grumpyoldman said:

Study the statistics widely available, the same ones governments use for better or worse.

I did.  That's what they are, although I opted for the lower figures.

 

18 minutes ago, Grumpyoldman said:

he death rate across the world is 0.05% of population after 18 months of "pandemic". Not very serious in my view.

Well, maybe if nobody had  done anything they'd be higher and you'd have a different view.

 

Maybe when you've got some rabid dogs in a cage it's not a good idea to say "well nobody's hurt so we may as well let them loose as that means it's not very serious", but it's better to isolate and control them and develop a vaccine.

 

I think we'll just have to disagree on our interpretations of stats, so how about we leave this and you just detail those examples of where herd immunity's worked doing it your way, as that should be pretty definitive - either it worked your way, or it didn't.

[gummy]

4 minutes ago, Objectivance said:

"Sometimes." 

Yes sometimes as even us who where fortunate enough to have been borne on a higher intellectual plateau, gifted with all the knowledge available still make silly mistakes - if you get my drift ?

[Stardust]

https://laotiantimes.com/2021/07/13/more-than-15-percent-of-lao-returnees-infected-with-covid-19/

I think they already do it, thats why the neighbours got the surprise.

[Objectivance]

3 hours ago, Grumpyoldman said:

.....thats how you get herd immunity.

Not everyone gets C19.

95% of people that get it are not seriously ill. These are statistics in the public domain.

The policy of "nil cases" doesnt work, cannot ever work and is flawed.

It's closer to 98%. Nonetheless, the people who seem to have latched onto this as some sort of bizarre sense of purpose, are conducting themselves as religious zealots. 

I don't believe for a second that the actual majority are legitimately scared of falling gravely ill, if they were, they wouldn't feel comfortable sitting down in a restaurant and dining with their masks off. As if the illness is willing to curtail it's spread until patrons are finished dining and headed out the door. If people really are so dimwitted, that they are legitimately terrified of a respiratory illness but are also willing to remove their impenetrable paper mask to dine with others, then I think widespread respiratory illness is the least of humanity's concerns. 

[Objectivance]

6 minutes ago, gummy said:

Yes sometimes as even us who where fortunate enough to have been borne on a higher intellectual plateau, gifted with all the knowledge available still make silly mistakes - if you get my drift ?

It's part of the charm, quite honestly. 

[Stonker]

4 hours ago, gummy said:

It matters a lot. Children are separated from their parents, now tell me does that not matter ?

Of  course it "matters", but again what's the option when parents take children on holiday with them when there's a possibility that the children will be quarantined and they're warned of that in advance  as Stefanie said she was, in writing?

 

... and sandboxers are apparently the only ones affected by this, as no similar incidents have been reported despite nearly 400,000 cases in Thailand.

 

That as well as the mandatory health insurance, those coming in on the sandbox wiith children have to have even more insurance so they can spend their holiday quarantined as well, with their kids?

 

Or just ban everyone under 18, so that it's not a possibility?

 

Or leave it up to the parents to take some responsibility for their actions?

 

Just asking ..... anyone?

[gummy]

1 minute ago, Stonker said:

Of  course it "matters", but again what's the option when parents take children on holiday with them when there's a possibility that the children will be quarantined and they're warned of that in advance  as Stefanie said she was, in writing?

... and sandboxers are apparently the only ones affected by this, as no similar incidents have been reported despite nearly 400,000 cases in Thailand.

That as well as the mandatory health insurance, those coming in on the sandbox wiith children have to have even more insurance so they can spend their holiday quarantined as well, with their kids?

Or just ban everyone under 18, so that it's not a possibility?

Or leave it up to the parents to take some responsibility for their actions?

Just asking ..... anyone?

You hit the nail on the head given the current restrictions namely "no similar incidents have been reported"

[Shuddup]

Closing the testing stations … maybe not…but has anyone seen the testing stations where all waiting  potential virus carriers are sitting on chairs in a cluster.  Albeit maybe 1.5 metres apart “maybe”. Then the next batch lining up as chairs become vacant. On the same chairs as potential positive cases. So might just work in reducing positive cases . Just my opinion, you are welcome to tear my post apart if you wish.

[Stonker]

29 minutes ago, Objectivance said:

It's closer to 98%. Nonetheless, the people who seem to have latched onto this as some sort of bizarre sense of purpose, are conducting themselves as religious zealots. 

I don't believe for a second that the actual majority are legitimately scared of falling gravely ill, if they were, they wouldn't feel comfortable sitting down in a restaurant and dining with their masks off. As if the illness is willing to curtail it's spread until patrons are finished dining and headed out the door. If people really are so dimwitted, that they are legitimately terrified of a respiratory illness but are also willing to remove their impenetrable paper mask to dine with others, then I think widespread respiratory illness is the least of humanity's concerns. 

I tend to agree with your figure, @Objectivance, but I didn't see the point in arguing about it.

 

I'd suggest that those who are "legitimately scared" are the ones who are unlikely to sit down in a restaurant, etc, but the question really has to be how much inconvenience is acceptable to save the 5% (or 2%) from being hospitalised?

 

Not just for their sakes, but for the sake of those who have cancer, have been in a car crash, need a hip replacement, have had a stroke, need a cesarean, or an appendectomy, but who can't have one because too many beds have been taken up by the 5% (or 2%) of the population who've got a serious dose of Covid?

 

In the UK, there's a record backlog of over 5 million waiting for a hospital bed, and they're not putting asymptomatic Covid cases in hospital.

 

A third of NHS patients have had to wait a minimum of 18 weeks for treatment.

 

350,000 have had to wait more than a year.

 

A quarter of those at major A & E have to wait more than 4 hours.

 

35,000 are waiting to start cancer treatment, and maybe ten times that are waiting to be screened. 

 

The idea that the only people affected if things are just allowed to run their course are those who die from Covid or those who fall ill seems blinkered, at best.

[Soidog]

2 hours ago, Grumpyoldman said:

Do nothing. 95% dont get ill enough to hospitalise. Build herd immunity naturally whilst waiting for the injectable medicine (its not a vaccine, which is defined as creating immunity).

Save all hospital resources for the actual ill.

Trouble with that approach is that if only 1% have severe problems and need hospitalisation, that’s around 700,000 in hospital (Thai healthcare couldn’t handle that) and if 0.1% die, that’s 70,000 deaths. A lot of people who have to pay the price with their life when there is an alternative way out.  

[Objectivance]

58 minutes ago, Stonker said:

I tend to agree with your figure, @Objectivance, but I didn't see the point in arguing about it.

I'd suggest that those who are "legitimately scared" are the ones who are unlikely to sit down in a restaurant, etc, but the question really has to be how much inconvenience is acceptable to save the 5% (or 2%) from being hospitalised?

Not just for their sakes, but for the sake of those who have cancer, have been in a car crash, need a hip replacement, have had a stroke, need a cesarean, or an appendectomy, but who can't have one because too many beds have been taken up by the 5% (or 2%) of the population who've got a serious dose of Covid?

In the UK, there's a record backlog of over 5 million waiting for a hospital bed, and they're not putting asymptomatic Covid cases in hospital.

A third of NHS patients have had to wait a minimum of 18 weeks for treatment.

350,000 have had to wait more than a year.

A quarter of those at major A & E have to wait more than 4 hours.

35,000 are waiting to start cancer treatment, and maybe ten times that are waiting to be screened. 

The idea that the only people affected if things are just allowed to run their course are those who die from Covid or those who fall ill seems blinkered, at best.

Everyone in a high risk category, have always been in a high risk category. They'd just as easily succumb to a new influenza strain, a slip and fall down the stairs, etc. That's the catch with life, an ending is the only guarantee in it, unfortunately. 

At some point, everyone's gonna have to put their big kid pants on and just carry on like adults. This facade will come to an end, one way or another. 

 

Edited July 15, 2021 by Objectivance