geriatrickid

Medications can help correct a problem that is organic in origin. However, they require experience and patience when selecting the correct dosing. Drug metabolism has many factors including health status, age, body weight, and other medications used. In plain language, I can have 5 24 year old patients with a similar diagnoses, but all 5 can have a different medication or dose. In Thailand, due to the shortage of trained psychiatrists and clinical psychologists, GPs can prescribe treatment and they just do not have the necessary training. Even psychiatrists will caution that dosing is an art that must adapt to the patient's life cycle changes. All this to say is that if the drugs do not seem to work, it may just be a question of adjusting the dose or in changing the medication. Patience and emotional support will get you there. the good news is that the patient is the one seeking assistance. that's quite a step in Thailand where there are taboos. When a patient is that motivated, there is more likely to be a positive outcome, so do not lose hope. We are all different and some drugs work differently on people. It is not unusual for the first dosing to not be as good as it can be. It is unfortunate that you have had personal issues, but your sabotage is unnecessary. There is no "side effect" of prozac related to suicide attempts. On the contrary it is considered uncommon. You are making a false claim that is tied to class action litigation seeking a payout in respect to unsubstantiated allegations of product defect. Prozac was prescribed to patients who were predisposed to suicide because the drug is an anti depressant. Sometimes the drug was not effective when the state of mental illness was too great. It is irresponsible to spread false information as you have. If a patient is prescribed fluoxetine (prozac) it is a matter between the patient and his/her physician, not someone who misunderstands product monographs and patient treatment protocols.

There is no screening at departure airports for patients who may have infectious diseases. There may be a few questions or even a temperature scan, but these are not effective screening measures. Screening requires an antigen or a PCR test. Because you do not understand or are ignorant or are frightened, you call it a hoax. I am tired of the ignorant claims of a hoax and you should be held responsible for spreading a blatant lie.

To critics: This is a prudent practice in regions where health services are limited/lacking and where the community is vulnerable. It has been proven effective in Canada and Australia. The Canadian and Australian outback regions which imposed similar restrictions have remained disease free and were able to reopen commercial activities sooner than other regions. The Navajo nation in the USA tried to do this but due to a lack of support from state and federal governments now faces one of the highest per capita infection rates despite having a low population density.

What is your point? You seem obsessed with posting statements that undermine western countries. never a comment about Russia and its approach to Covid 19. What's your position on Russia?

One troubling aspect about your version of events is that it does not match the historical record. Perhaps this is how you saw events. It's just that your version is your version alone. The SARS outbreak really isn't comparable to the current SARS Cov2 pandemic because the spread, and virus characteristics are quite different. The SARS crisis was contained to just 29 countries, with the three hot zones of Hong Kong, Toronto and Guangzhou. The infection was contained using standard infectious disease measures that included testing, isolating patients and screening international travelers. The strategy then was to identify and to isolate the infected which reduced the spread, allowing the disease to die out. That is what happened. Unless you are saying that there was no imposed quarantine on the infected, and no contact tracing? The developed world waited too long before implementing testing and contact tracing. The public would not accept self isolation requirements. This is why there were lockdowns.

Another attempt to manipulate people. I have observed a common trend in the past few weeks; A targeted posting of exaggerated claims from tabloid sources like the Daily Mail. As the Daily mail admits, all New York residents have been required to wear masks in shops and other areas where social distancing isn't possible since April 17. Nothing wrong in this requirement and despite OP's claim to the contrary it is not harmful to people with "asthma" under these circumstances. On the contrary, it can protect such people. Of course people get upset when selfish folks act as if they don't have to respect others. Wearing a mask doesn't harm anyone else. This is a non story intended to stir up trouble. Don't be a sucker and fall prey to the manipulation. Use common sense.

There was no mass testing in Taiwan. Canada went through a lockdown. In the provinces and regions where the pandemic is under control and where cases are no longer being recorded, there was a strict lockdown and a travel ban on outsiders. Their testing is not as extensive in the two hardest hit provinces of Ontario and Quebec. The rest of Canada is now opening up. Ontario and Quebec have the highest rates of testing. Quebec province has tested more people per capita than the USA, Germany, France, Italy, and yet it has almost 1/2 of Canada's cases. It also has a mortality rate of 8.5%. So much for your claim of testing dependence.

Another example of taking a statement out of context and manipulating it to fit an agenda. The key word is MEDIAN. Do you know what MEDIAN means? Introductory Stats 121 - The median value is fixed by its position and is not reflected by the individual value. The authors estimated the median incubation period to be 5.1 days (95% confidence interval, 4.5-5.8 days); 97.5% of people who were infected exhibited symptoms by 11.5 days (95% confidence interval, 8.2-15.6 days). There was a range of 4 days to 15.6 days in the study of 186 patients who had traveled to Wuhan. This was self reporting. Isolation / Incubation periods for infectious respiratory diseases, especially those with unknown characteristics, are NOT determined by an incubation period. The presence of asymptomatic individuals must be accounted for. However, most annoying is the fact that you did not read the actual study. Perhaps it is too difficult for you to comprehend, but the study offers the following; - Publicly reported cases may over represent severe cases, the incubation period for which may differ from that of mild cases. - Among those who are infected and will develop symptoms, we expect 101 in 10 000 (99th percentile, 482) will do so after the end of a 14-day monitoring period (Table 2 and Figure 3), and our analyses do not preclude this estimate from being higher The above means that patients may show symptoms after 14 days. Your use of the 5 days period, presents a completely different picture. It is misleading and dishonest.

Did you actually read the JP Morgan report? Yes or No? I have and the report is being taken out of context by idiots who have not read the report. You are interpreting the author's conclusion to support your position. The author used a financial derivatives mathematical model. This is like using a sandwich bag as a replacement for a condom. Do you even know what mathematical modeling entails? The author is a vocal supporter of social distancing. Social distancing requires reduced customer activity. The author's mathematical model made several assumptions; - That the public would have supported and practices social distancing. It did not. - That travelers would have respected self isolation requests. They did not. - That countries had the capacity to test and the ability to trace contacts. They did not. - That countries had the hospital capacity and the equipment (ventilators, PPE etc.) to respond. They did not and there are still ongoing PPE and drug shortages. The lockdowns were needed because none of the aforementioned requirements were satisfied. Had they been, then there would have been no need for a lockdown. The lockdowns were last ditch efforts to keep the hospital systems from collapsing. In case you missed it, the healthcare systems in some regions did collapse.

I hope for the best for his canine companion. He would be much happier if he could be reunited with his loyal pal.

Take the time to read the original report. Do not be manipulated. This is another example of uneducated people taking a mathematical analysis and twisting it out of context. The author of the study used a derivatives hedging model for his review. We do not use financial models to predict public health outcomes because the are not comparable. The model requires that effective social distancing be in place. Know what? The public wasn't social distancing when this mess started and that's why the lockdowns had to be imposed. It took the public a couple months to understand that social distancing was necessary. Putting aside the suitability aspect, the OP has conveniently not stated is that this person is a supporter of the social distancing model. Yes, that's right. The modeler insists that it works and in fact his conclusions depend upon there being effective social distancing. How do we obtain social distancing when people are non compliant? Sometimes there are draconian measures such as police enforcement. Mostly it is through general measures such as....................... wait for it............ a lockdown. As a reminder, social distancing limits the number of people in stores, it imposes reduced capacity in restaurants and limits the number of customers in hair salons etc. Keep this in mind when considering the mathematical model, because again I emphasize that you are being manipulated to believe that there is something written that we did not already know and that was one of the goals of the lockdowns- to allow a return to activity. All that the author has said is that once the more serious measures are lifted, spikes in the infections are not YET observed. He also states that if the infections have dropped and if social distancing is in place, the lockdown measures are not needed. That's it. No one can make a conclusion at this time because the loosening of restrictions is only being implemented now. Common sense tells us that, yes, the lowered infection rates were what the lockdowns were intended to achieve: In plain language, they worked. The risk was contained which will allow a return to activity. Now that the measures were effective, some are taking this to mean that the lockdowns were not needed. That is not what the model results show. Note too that the mathematical model does not take into account the measures that have been implemented such as tracing and testing that were unavailable when the lockdowns were first introduced. Nor are other factors taken into account such as summer weather which encourages people to avoid staying in cramped closed off places with others. Also keep in mind that the author of the report in his activity as a salesman of financial instruments also had some exciting headline grabbing "predictions" before ; April 21, 2021 - JPMorgan’s Kolanovic Sees S&P at a Record in First Half of 2021 March 25, 2020 - JPMorgan Strategist Predicts Markets Will Surge 40% Marko Kolanovic tells clients that social distancing is working and he expects coronavirus to soon be a memory. I offer that the position of Kolanovic isn't saying anything extraordinary because it is based upon the effectiveness of social distancing which he champions. We will have people on this thread making the assumption that none of this was necessary. Well, if you don't social distance then the only way to stop the spread of an infectious respiratory disease is to keep people separated through a lockdown. Also note that JP Morgan has a work at home model even with the restrictions lifted in its key office locations. JP Morgan has introduced workplace distancing measures that are intense.

Relax. Thailand will implement rules consistent with the rest of the world: They will facilitate trade and travel entry with its key partner markets. It isn't easy. Have a look at what the UK is going through now as it tries to implement international travel rules. The Canada- USA border is still closed for non essential travel. Thailand is in the same position and what it does will not be any worse than what westerners will experience in their own countries.

Nice on paper, but there needs to be enforcement and follow up. How well does Thailand perform in the best of times when it comes to immigration and visa surveillance? Like western countries, Thailand is not doing well with contact tracing. How about health insurance? How many foreigners have health insurance? Mandatory quarantine. Again nice on paper, but too many people have already found loopholes and violated the intent and purpose. Did you not read of the complaints from people about their isolation accommodations? The food wasn't good enough, the service was bad, etc. Some say, have the foreigners pay for it. How many foreigners will hand over 50,000+ baht without moaning and groaning? The mandatory quarantine facility is expensive and labour intensive. The return of Thai nationals pushed the option to its effective limit. I get it. People are hurting. Many foreigners have jobs and are financially stable. Unfortunately, there are just as many foreigners who want to come back who haven't the means to support themselves or their families and who may be infected. Until Thailand can sort that out, the door is partially closed. (Partial because foreign nationals are still entering the country. There is a dispensation for essential services providers and diplomats.) If a foreigner who is essential to Thailand's Covid19 response needs to enter, that foreigner will enter. This policy is consistent with the rest of the world's. Thailand just needs some more time to be able to handle the influx. Once it clears its Thai nationals backlog and has a handle on the current spread of infection, it will allow the farangs to enter. I expect that this will happen once other countries open their travel portals too. I am not being mean, but the criticism of the Thai position is unfair. The country has the right to protect itself.

Tough but understandable move by the government. The Thais knew what they were dealing with and responded appropriately. Yes, some foreigners would have respected the self isolation requirements and yes some have legitimate reasons to return, Unfortunately, there are alsoforeigners up to no good without the financial means or health insurance to take care of themselves. Some would not have respected the self isolation. Thailand did not have the means or resources to manage that exposure. Because of a few duds, everyone will suffer. And please, no lectures on how this is unfair when we see in the forums the stories of how some farangs play the system and cheat. Sorry to the many people who are suffering, but this is the cost of tolerating scum who are often excused away as poor hard done folk. All it takes is a few selfish gits landing from Italy, Russia, USA. UK to spread death and disease.

Sweden has paid a heavy economic cost and it really isn't in any better shape than its peer group in respect to economic indicators. The argument that the economy was being protected isn't backed up by the data. Norway, Denmark have done better. Canada with a larger population is better placed for economic recovery.