• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Vivian: Covid will be permanent...equally dangerous for both vaccinated & unvaccinated

so our govt stupid u know better izzit?

you have brain or not?

It's not that I know better the difference is that I am liberty to state the obvious whereas official sources have to be very careful what they say and when they say it as there are political and social consequences if the timing of the message is off.

If Vivian B had made the same statement in May last year he would have been lambasted by one and all for giving up without a fight. The government, in fact most governments around the world therefore had to embark upon a "wayang" display to make it appear that they were on top of things and that the fight against Covid was a battle that could be won.

I am almost 100% certain that most governments knew by the middle of last year that lockdowns were an exercise in futility. However the charade had to continue as part of a political agenda.
 
Eye doctor know nothing about covid-19 but trying to be an "expert" .
 
Eye doctor know nothing about covid-19 but trying to be an "expert" .

His training as a MBBS would have covered some fundamentals, so he does know a thing or two. I just like to hear what Leong HN has to say about this Indian variant, shifting goal posts again?
 
Last edited:
Eye doctor know nothing about covid-19 but trying to be an "expert" .

There is no doctor in the world that knows much about Covid because it is a new disease which has yet to reveal all its secrets.

The epidemiologists are not experts either. All they are doing is plugging numbers into a computer program based upon the sketchy data currently available and then making their predictions or proclamations based on what sort of numbers come out the other end.

Most predictions that have been provided so far have all been way out and will continue to be inaccurate till sufficient knowledge is gained about Covid and enough data has been gathered to make better predictions.
 
SINGAPORE — Covid-19 is "permanent" and subsequent waves of infections will be a normal occurrence in the coming years, Singapore's Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan told CNBC.

"Covid-19 is endemic in humanity, which means it's not ever going to go away completely," Balakrishnan told CNBC's "Squawk Box Asia" on Monday.

"And the reason it's not going to go away completely is because it's been widespread throughout the world, it's sufficient critical mass, the rate of mutations and new variants will keep going, and the level of human immunity will also wax and wane," he said.

The minister, who was a medical doctor before entering politics, also warned that now may be a "more dangerous period" for vaccinated people who may be complacent as well as those who are unvaccinated and lack protection against Covid.

More at https://tinyurI.com/1mffs9je

This is why we are having a hard time getting the virus to spread in Singapore

Too many people being too transparent, telling you the facts. There is no reason for it.

And too many restrictions. Masks, vaccines, quarantine, how can our virus spread?

We have it so easy in India, Brazil, Pakistan, Nepal, Thailand, and Asia in general

Who wants to stop the virus from spreading? Who wants life to go back to normal?

Disgusting
 
You don't need a doctor to tell you the obvious I've been saying from the middle of 2020 that there is no escaping the virus. Sooner or later it is going to get you no matter how long you try to hide.

Wrong. Again. Call it 0 for 207 tries. Fail, fail, fail

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)01018-7/fulltext

COVID-19 vaccine impact in Israel and a way out of the pandemic
Published:May 05, 2021


In December, 2020, Israel initiated a national campaign to vaccinate its population with Pfizer–BioNTech's mRNA COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 (tozinameran). Israel's Ministry of Health recommended a two-dose schedule with a 21-day interval between doses. Israel delivered more than 10 million doses within 4 months; by April 19, 2021, 54% of the entire population of 9·1 million people, and 88% of people aged 50 years or older, had received two doses.
1
Factors contributing to Israel's rapid roll-out include its small geographical and population sizes; advanced information technology that allowed prioritisation, allocation, and documentation of vaccines for eligible individuals; effective cooperation between government and community-based health funds, which were charged with providing vaccines to those they insured; and experience in rapid large-scale emergency responses.
2
Vaccines were rolled out around the time of Israel's third and largest wave of SARS-CoV-2 infections, with a peak 7-day moving average of 8328 new infections per day, which resulted in a 2-month national lockdown. Thus, Israel's setting provided a robust platform on which to examine vaccine effectiveness and the impact of high vaccine coverage in real-life conditions at a national level. From March, 2021, onwards, Israel reported a rapid decline in COVID-19 cases across all age groups, despite the easing of lockdown restrictions and reopening of education and commerce. By April 19, 2021, the 7-day moving average of new cases dropped to 149 per day, indicating effective control of the pandemic within the country's borders.
1
,
3
The marked reduction in new cases prompted the Israeli Government to ease nationwide restrictions, including the discontinuation of face covering use in open spaces.
View related content for this article
In The Lancet, Eric Haas and colleagues report on a nationwide observational study of the impact and vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 in Israel.
3
Israel's Ministry of Health used aggregated data from the national SARS-CoV-2 surveillance and vaccination programme dataset to compare infection and disease incidence between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. Overall, of 232 268 SARS-CoV-2 infections during the study period (Jan 24 to April 3, 2021), 154 648 (66·6%) occurred in people aged 16 years or older and were included in the analyses (of which 20·4% were in the Arab sector, 15·7% in the ultra-Orthodox sector, and 63·9% in the general Jewish [non-ultra-Orthodox] sector). Adjusted estimates of vaccine effectiveness at 7 days or longer after the second dose were 95·3% (95% CI 94·9–95·7) against SARS-CoV-2 infection, 91·5% (90·7–92·2) against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, 97·0% (96·7–97·2) against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, 97·2% (96·8–97·5) against COVID-19-related hospitalisation, 97·5% (97·1–97·8) against severe or critical COVID-19-related hospitalisation, and 96·7% (96·0–97·3) against COVID-19-related death. Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalisation, and COVID-19-related death exceeded 96% across all age groups, including older adults (aged ≥75 years and ≥85 years). These results closely mirror the efficacy estimates of the BNT162b2 vaccine reported in the phase 3 trial.
4
The strengths of the study include its nationwide design, mandatory routine reporting of new infections and of vaccination status to the national dataset, large sample size, exclusive use of BNT162b2, and occurrence of a highly efficient vaccine roll-out during peak transmission of SARS-CoV-2, which resulted in high vaccination coverage of most of the adult population. However, several limitations should be considered when interpreting the results. First, social desirability bias affecting symptom questionnaire respondents and presymptomatic infections at the time of questioning could have contributed to an overestimation of vaccine effectiveness against asymptomatic infection. Additionally, patients with COVID-19 who reported symptoms were defined as asymptomatic if they did not report fever or respiratory symptoms. This unorthodox case definition might have resulted in a substantial overestimation of vaccine effectiveness against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.
5
Second, during early 2021, the B.1.1.7 variant of SARS-CoV-2 was estimated to account for 95% of cases in Israel, and the results thus indicate that the vaccine was effective against this variant of concern. However, the study did not report on effectiveness against other variants of concern, such as B.1.351 and P.1. Concerns regarding breakthrough infections were recently raised as a case-cohort study from Israel reported a disproportionally high infection rate with the B.1.351 variant in fully vaccinated compared with unvaccinated individuals.
6
Nevertheless, the incidence of B.1.351 infection in Israel to date remains low. Rapid mass vaccination coupled with non-pharmaceutical interventions
7
might have successfully controlled its spread.
Haas and colleagues' findings from Israel suggest that high vaccine coverage rates could offer a way out of the pandemic.
5
,
8
Regrettably, rapid population level coverage cannot be easily replicated in many other countries. The global use of the BNT162b2 vaccine is limited by supply issues, high costs, and ultra-cold chain storage requirements. Global COVID-19 vaccine roll-out has been sluggish, and vaccine distribution is inequitable despite the achievements of COVAX, mainly due to the lack of adequate manufacturing scalability.
9
,
10
Rapid expansion of deployment of other effective vaccines with more achievable cold chain storage requirements remains an urgent global priority.
9
Facing such challenges, alternative approaches must be considered to allow rapid protection of at-risk populations against severe COVID-19. One such approach is deferring the second dose to accelerate and maximise coverage of the first dose in the population. Indeed, the situation in Scotland looks promising: the first dose of BNT162b2 was associated with a vaccine effectiveness of 91% (85–94) for COVID-19-related hospitalisation at 28–34 days post-vaccination.
11
Israel's robust dataset could allow further assessment and corroboration of first-dose short-term effectiveness and lead other countries to considering deferring the second vaccine dose.
3
Post-introduction vaccine effectiveness studies such as those from Israel
3
and the UK
5
,
11
will gain increasing importance in augmenting the current evidence, which has so far been based only on data from phase 3 efficacy trials. WHO has published a best practice guidance document on how to conduct vaccine effectiveness assessments using observational study designs.
12
Israel's experience provides impetus for countries to proactively pursue high vaccine coverage to protect the population;
8
however, rollout would need to follow the WHO prioritisation roadmap to maximise the public health impact, in light of vaccine supply constraints. More post-introduction vaccine effectiveness studies will be required. Timely reporting of vaccine effectiveness against variants of concern, the duration of protection across age groups and geographical settings, and the effectiveness of alternative dosing regimens is crucial to provide data-driven immunisation policies.
12
Figure thumbnail fx1


Copyright © 2021 Amir Levy/Stringer/Getty Images
 
August last year......

View attachment 110620

September last year.....

View attachment 110621

December last year....

View attachment 110622

Wrong. Again. Call it 0 for 208 tries all fail.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...d-19-lockdowns-have-saved-lives-idUSKBN2842WS


Fact check: Studies show COVID-19 lockdowns have saved lives
By Reuters Staff
12 MIN READ

As many states enter a new wave of more stringent measures to limit the spread of COVID-19, users on social media have been sharing posts that question the purpose of so called “lockdowns”. Some posts falsely claim that these measures “don’t save lives”. This article examines some of the reasons why lockdowns have been called, and how effective they have been.



Reuters Fact Check. REUTERS
An example of a lockdown-sceptic post circulating on social media ( here ) features the screenshot of an entry in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary on the word “lockdown”, which includes a definition that reads: “the confinement of prisoners to their cells for all or most of the day as a temporary security measure”. The image has an overlaid text that reads: “Never forget where the word LOCKDOWN comes from… A loving government isn’t trying to save you from COVID…it is using COVID to justify MARTIAL LAW”
While this definition is indeed included in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary entry here , the screenshot fails to show two further definitions. According to Merriam Webster, the term also stands for a “temporary condition” imposed by authorities, for example, during the outbreak of an epidemic disease, “in which people are require to stay in their homes and refrain from limit activities outside the home involving public contact (such as dining out or attending large gatherings)”.
An article by The Guardian delves into the evolution of the meaning of the word lockdown here .
In April, Reuters debunked a similar claim that the U.S. coronavirus response was “slowly introducing” martial law and found it to be false ( here ) .
LOCKDOWNS
Reuters has reported on international studies that have determined that lockdowns potentially have saved millions of lives here .
However, it is also true that some lockdown measures may have a direct impact on a person’s income and mental health. Further reading about short, mid and long-term effects of lockdowns are visible here .
The World Health Organization (WHO) explains here that such measures can have “a profound negative impact on individuals, communities and societies by bringing social and economic life to a near stop”, something that according to the organization, disproportionately affect vulnerable groups.

But evidence also suggest that stringent but temporary restrictions, could actually benefit the economic recovery because they reduce the spread of the disease. The International Monetary Fund, for example, determined here that while lockdowns “impose short-term costs” they may lead to “a faster economic recovery. The organization states that “by bringing infections under control, lockdowns may thus pave the way to a faster economic recovery as people feel more comfortable about resuming normal activities” ( bit.Iy/2UXoIUy page 74).
Reuters contacted two experts, Dr. Elizabeth Stuart, Associate Dean for Education at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health ( here ) and Dr. Stuart Ray, infectious disease expert with the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine ( here ) . Both confirmed that lockdowns do reduce transmission of the SARS-Cov-2 and highlighted that a more “targeted” or “proportional” approach of restrictions can mitigate the risk of infection, while balancing other concerns about the economy and mental health.
WHY LOCKDOWNS?
Without a treatment or vaccine available, Stuart said, the world had to rely on “really core behavioral factors”, such as physical distancing, hands washing, wearing masks, that have been used as “effective ways” of preventing transmission of infectious diseases in the past. “They do help”, she said.
Ray pointed to evidence ( here and here ) that has suggested that the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is mitigated by “progressively stringent measures”, such as stay-at-home orders.
A MORE TARGETED APPROACH
“In March we had all had to lockdown because so little was known”, Stuart said. But she added that as experts have learnt more about the disease and how it spreads, it has appeared there are ways to implement a more targeted approach to this measure.
“I wouldn’t even call them lockdowns, but more ‘targeted interventions’, that restrict the higher risk activities but allow lower risk activities to precede”, Stuart said.

Stuart referred to Michigan as an example. On Nov. 15, in response to a surge in COVID-19 cases, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer announced new restrictions for the state and asked people to be cautious, to avoid a stay-at-home order ( youtu.be/WQi001dquQo?t=751 ) . As reported here by CBS Detroit, the new order states that “high schools and colleges must halt-in person classes, restaurants must stop indoor dining” as well as limitation of gathering sizes and a temporary closure of entertainment businesses. See new emergency order bit.Iy/39eb0oS .
Ray dismissed the need for a national stay-at-home order but rather referred to “staged or proportional” measures depending on the risk, in which “things are more restrictive when the prevalence of new infections is higher”. He highlighted the need for “really clear national messaging” and said that not all places needed the same measures at the same time. To limit the impact of this pandemic, he said, “we have to have everyone understand the status where they are and where transmissions are happening nearby”.
SURVIVAL RATE
Some posts that attempt to dismiss the role of stricter measures to reduce the spread of the new coronavirus argue that COVID-19 has a survival rate of over 99% ( here ).
While the exact mortality rate of COVID-19 is still not known, a hypothetical rate of 1% would still result in a massive number of deaths if left to spread unchecked.
When asked about this claim, Stuart told Reuters that one out of a hundred was still a “high mortality”, adding that there was a “ripple effect of consequences” for a lot of people, not just the deceased individual. “If there are reasonable preventive strategies that we can take in order to reduce that even further we should do that”, she said.
While it appears that a high percentage of people recover from the disease, Ray noted that “there are also non- lethal complications of COVID-19 that are important, so it is challenging to relax control measures when the spread is high”. Further reading about the lingering known effects of COVID-19 is visible here , here and here .

MENTAL HEALTH
Other posts also argue that these restrictions “don’t save lives”, citing an alleged increase in suicides here.
instagram-image-CH3zY-Zg8t4

Earlier this year, experts warned here that COVID-19 might increase suicide rates, citing adverse effects on people with mental illness and the population in general “might be exacerbated by fear, self-isolation, and physical distancing” and “well-recognised risk factors for suicide” like loss of employment and financial stressors.
Richard Dunn, associate Professor of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of Connecticut ( here ), who has studied the relation between mental health and the economy, told Reuters by email that arguments for why lockdowns may increase suicide risk present valid arguments, but that “they are selective” and that some of these arguments “ignore important countervailing effects”.
According to Dunn, such countervailing effects include technology that facilitates social contact ( here ), and a “locus of control” ( here ) through which individuals can take proactive steps to help prevent the spread of COVID-19. “Suicide risk increases as individuals feel they lack control over their life and what control they do have is without worth,” said Dunn.
In addition, Dunn said, is the concept of “social connectedness”, which tends to increase in the face of a communal threat, such as a pandemic. “During wars and natural disasters, despite their great economic upheaval, suicide rates tend to drop because people rally to a common cause,” he said. To exemplify this, Dunn referred to the numerous scenes from around the world of people cheering health workers from their balconies ( here , here ).

VERDICT
Some posts on the issue of lockdowns are missing context, and some present information that is contradicted by international studies. While it is true that more restrictive measures that aim to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 can have an impact in income and mental health, multiple studies suggest that stay-at-home orders and other nonpharmaceutical interventions have a determining role in reducing the transmission of the virus. Experts highlight that a more “targeted” approach rather than a “nationwide” lockdown, can limit the impact of the pandemic while balancing other economic, mental health and social concerns.
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
 
so our govt stupid u know better izzit?

you have brain or not?

good point this person Leong is very stupid , and the results are clear.

Indians outnumber Singaporeans here, its got no value, and the old relics rant and rave

no wonder this forum failed
 
So we have been lied to. They lie that vaxxing nation will protect us. Ring fence will stop spread. Can any thing the PAP say be trusted? :mad:
 
There is no doctor in the world that knows much about Covid because it is a new disease which has yet to reveal all its secrets.

The epidemiologists are not experts either. All they are doing is plugging numbers into a computer program based upon the sketchy data currently available and then making their predictions or proclamations based on what sort of numbers come out the other end.

Most predictions that have been provided so far have all been way out and will continue to be inaccurate till sufficient knowledge is gained about Covid and enough data has been gathered to make better predictions.

So now an epidemiologist, an expert on diseases is now not an expert, and went through medical college for no reason.

Your level of stupidity is simply amazing.
 
So we have been lied to. They lie that vaxxing nation will protect us. Ring fence will stop spread. Can any thing the PAP say be trusted? :mad:

As long as the pappies listen to their Davos globalist masters and the Tedros-led WHO, expect only wilful deceit. :cool:
 
vaccine don't use waste money of coz will force you to take!

They also have their quotas to hit e.g. 70-80% vaccinated population, because that's what the WHO and their 'experts' recommend for herd immunity. :wink:

They also want to stockpile the vaccines, use that as diplomatic leverage. I remember the 160th media mentioning about the possibility of Sinkieland becoming a Covid vaccine distribution hub earlier this year. That is only feasible if the pandemic persists, no?

At the end of the day, Pfizer is the big winner, it making a fortune selling its mRNA vaccines. :cool:
 
LOL! So funny! specialist is not longer.....a specialist LOL! :biggrin:

Too bad the vaccines are working so well in SOME countries, LOL! :roflmao:

ya how come so slow in singapore? i thought we world best now israel is leader
 
It's not that I know better the difference is that I am liberty to state the obvious whereas official sources have to be very careful what they say and when they say it as there are political and social consequences if the timing of the message is off.

If Vivian B had made the same statement in May last year he would have been lambasted by one and all for giving up without a fight. The government, in fact most governments around the world therefore had to embark upon a "wayang" display to make it appear that they were on top of things and that the fight against Covid was a battle that could be won.

I am almost 100% certain that most governments knew by the middle of last year that lockdowns were an exercise in futility. However the charade had to continue as part of a political agenda.

your certain is not realistic, go do some reading
 
good point this person Leong is very stupid , and the results are clear.

Indians outnumber Singaporeans here, its got no value, and the old relics rant and rave

no wonder this forum failed

yalor make no sense, all talk nonsense

liddat then we have no system in place

so all collapse

i dun think so
 
Back
Top