News Forum - Thailand averages a 20% Covid-19 infection rate over 40 days

[Thaiger]

Following trends over the last 40 days, Thailand has seen an average of about a 20% infection rate for those tested for Covid-19. Looking at data from 288 authorised testing labs around Thailand (of 375 total) on just September 4, a total of 40,007 people were tested and 8,804 were confirmed to be infected with Covid-19. That equates to a 22% infection rate. The Thai Medical Sciences Department shared figures that over the previous week, from August 29 to September 4, officials administered an average of about 48,000 Covid-19 tests per day. Of those tests, an average of 9,500 people […]

The post Thailand averages a 20% Covid-19 infection rate over 40 days appeared first on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[Bob20]

Tests were performed in mainly high risk locations and on people that request the test because they worry that they carry the virus. That's not a sample representative of the general population.

Also, the numbers were constantly reported to be around 20.000 each day (except for the last few days), so the 87 laboratories that were not included in the results had more positives than the 288 laboratories that were included. Gives the impression of massaging the numbers. But in any case, you can not draw any conclusions from these figures.

[AdamX]

48 minutes ago, Thaiger said:

Following trends over the last 40 days, Thailand has seen an average of about a 20% infection rate for those tested for Covid-19. Looking at data from 288 authorised testing labs around Thailand (of 375 total) on just September 4, a total of 40,007 people were tested and 8,804 were confirmed to be infected with Covid-19. That equates to a 22% infection rate. The Thai Medical Sciences Department shared figures that over the previous week, from August 29 to September 4, officials administered an average of about 48,000 Covid-19 tests per day. Of those tests, an average of 9,500 people […]

The post Thailand averages a 20% Covid-19 infection rate over 40 days appeared first on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

This implies that 20% of the population already have natural immunity.

The question now arises—given that a study showed that natural immunity is 13 times more effective than the vaccine—should these people be advised to take a vaccine?

This question should not be asked of the vaccine makers or anyone with vested interests in promoting vaccines, but of independent scientists and doctors.

Given that science says natural immunity is superior, it would seem to suggest that administering a vaccine that does not prevent reinfection or transmission could potentially compromise your better immunity.

 

[DiggR]

34 minutes ago, AdamX said:

This implies that 20% of the population already have natural immunity.

The question now arises—given that a study showed that natural immunity is 13 times more effective than the vaccine—should these people be advised to take a vaccine?

This question should not be asked of the vaccine makers or anyone with vested interests in promoting vaccines, but of independent scientists and doctors.

Given that science says natural immunity is superior, it would seem to suggest that administering a vaccine that does not prevent reinfection or transmission could potentially compromise your better immunity.

 

 

 

 

[DiggR]

Just now, DiggR said:

45 minutes ago, AdamX said:

This implies that 20% of the population already have natural immunity.

The question now arises—given that a study showed that natural immunity is 13 times more effective than the vaccine—should these people be advised to take a vaccine?

This question should not be asked of the vaccine makers or anyone with vested interests in promoting vaccines, but of independent scientists and doctors.

Given that science says natural immunity is superior, it would seem to suggest that administering a vaccine that does not prevent reinfection or transmission could potentially compromise your better immunity.

Expand  

While studies are indicating that recovery from covid seems to provide a good base for immunity, there are those amongst the medical community that would disagree with your final hypothesis regarding post covid vaccines.

There is also the fact that you have to survive the severity of the illness in order to acquire the "natural" immunity  and that vaccines greatly reduce that severity.

While it is true that any long term effects of any of the vaccines is yet unknown, it is also true that the long term effects from contracting the virus are also unknown.

The learning curve regarding covid remains steep and we all need to remain reactive and adaptable.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/vaccines-versus-covid-19-the-great-immunity-debate/2021/09/07/b55f2aca-0fe4-11ec-baca-86b144fc8a2d_story.html

But now, perhaps the sensible approach is the one taken in France, Germany, Italy and other countries — to offer people who’ve been infected a single dose of a two-shot vaccine. Data from some previous studies as well as conclusions drawn from the Israeli data show that a single shot can boost post-infection immunity to even higher levels. Other studies suggest that a previous infection combined with a single-dose vaccine will be better than vaccines alone at protecting against new variants.

[think-and-ask]

gets boring, to hear, have many studies /facts about,
vaccine-s are, very good, and also,
get sick, will give a better immunity /safety than vaccine-s.
-
same about virus, you will find studies to,
corona-virus is very dangerous, to, is weak as flu-"virus", or not even isolated.
-
to believe is never to know, but with all kinds of studies, and
back and forth of experts from institutions of governments in world,
is worse, because it confuse and divide people.
-
then we have, ( few ? ) millions of protests, world-wide seen,
and have more and more people, who are older and not have a mask, there.
of course, you can be, old in age and healthy.
but a killer-virus /dangerous pandemic-virus, looks /works different.

Edited September 9, 2021 by think-and-ask