Many private hospitals ready to offer quick Covid-19 jabs - expect to pay 2,000 baht a dose

[BritManToo]

Just now, Miami007 said:

They have to pay that much or they will go to the back of the line. Astra Zeneca is not delivering the contracted amounts to the EU.. but for $40, I am sure Thailand could get some.

Surprised it took 3 months for bidding for vaccines to start

I'd put the EU to the back of the queue, make up some paperwork problem like they did for our fish.

[Miami007]

58 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Most of Australia's lockdowns were not too bad. Melbourne blew it with a bungled hotel quarantine and had a nasty long period in lockdown. The cost to many businesses has been significant. 

It's hard to be sure of the right mix, and different countries may not be directly comparable, but the following speaks loudly:

Australia and New Zealand: Policy of tough lockdowns and masks

Australia Covid Cases 29002 deaths 909

New Zealand Covid Cases 2389 deaths 26

United States intermittent or no lockdowns Minimal mask enforcement A belief in freedom and personal choice.

United States Covid Cases 28900000 deaths 522000

I am happy to be in Australia. Thailand has done a good job too. 

In your analysis you are omitting European countries - some had strict and some not so strict Lockdowns. Results similar.. just different times for deaths to occur.

But the biggest omission is the disregard of economic suffering for the country and the impact on citizens not being able to return or even leave the country. We criticized the Soviet Union in the 1980s for these restrictions 

[Megasin1]

You can't compare the selling price with the inoculation price. If for example, AZ are selling at $7.50, then you have to add on all the on-costs, like shipping, storage, administration, nurses, doctors etc. so their prices are reasonable however the big question is their presumptions. Their pricing model is assuming that they as private hospitals will get it cheap, not going to happen. They will also be so far back in the queue that they will need a telescope to even see some coming their way ????

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, Miami007 said:

In your analysis you are omitting European countries - some had strict and some not so strict Lockdowns. Results similar.. just different times for deaths to occur.

But the biggest omission is the disregard of economic suffering for the country and the impact on citizens not being able to return or even leave the country. We criticized the Soviet Union in the 1980s for these restrictions 

But how can you compare 2 different countries with different populations with different manners and different density of population. Unless you have 2 totally the same situations you cant make the statement you make.

 

Anyway the whole idea about lockdown is to slow down the spread of the virus so it wont overwhelm the hospitals. Quite a few countries (i know of the Netherlands and Uk) almost ran out of ICU beds. If they had not locked down death toll would be far higher as the hospitals could not cope.

 

Also people leave out the people that died in non lockdown countries because the hospitals could not do their normal operation (also something that happens when the hospitals are overworked). So its really hard to support your claims.

 

There were places in the US where they had to had mobile morgues a clear sign of a failed lockdown or else deaths would be more spread and less.

[Peter Denis]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

Peter there is no logic in this post.

 

This disease spreads because of contact, lockdowns limit contact. Hence less spread. Its so easy i can't understand why people dont get it. Isolation is standard practice for those with a disease that is infectious. Lockdowns are a form of isolation when you dont know who is carrying so you lock down a larger area.

 

I know you have your ideas and say it has not be proven. That is because you can't prove certain things because the experiments to really prove it would be unethical. There have just been some psuedo studies of non comparable countries and groups that said lockdowns dont work. As someone with a brain you know that this is the lowest form of research and proof. Its like saying cars started to develop and people started to live longer. So its the cars. I mean correlation and causation are not the same. Same goes for that research you shown. You can't use it as the two groups are not identical and the situation is not identical so its a guess at best and goes against logic and what we know. These are things scientists know.

Yes, difficult to argue against the argument that less contact equals less spread.  So any 'contact limitation measures' should have effect...

But unfortunately this is not how it seems to work in the Real World.

Just look at the repeated 'need' for new lock-downs.

And that you would only be able to determine the effectiveness of lock-downs when comparing identical geographies, is absolutely incorrect.  When having access to all the data from different geographies you are able to filter out the factors that have actual impact (Taguchi methods or  'design of experiments' are well-know statistical techniques used in industry to determine the 'optimal' settings for the relevant factors without having to make thousands of tests with only one factor differing).

The longer this covid-sh!tstorm continues, the more data become available and comparisons between regions (countries often being too large or diverse) that applied different strategies will become increasingly more accurate in determining what works and what doesn't in the Real World. 

Obviously, data on the most relevant factors have to be available (climate, population density, age distribution, excess deaths, etc.) but then comparison becomes possible and will lead to meaningful conclusions.  Comparing regions that applied strict lockdown-measures with those that stopped imposing them (because of inconvincing evidence that they worked) ARE possible and ARE currently being done.  But the conclusions of these analyses - which ARE already available - are not 'politcally correct' because which politician would like to have to spread the political suicide message to his constituency of 'Sorry, we destroyed your business, social life and well-being by imposing what we thought was the right approach but now the data show us that we were wrong.  Sorry...'.

[head bender]

no worries on the price but would only accept astra Zenica

[robblok]

1 minute ago, Peter Denis said:

Yes, difficult to argue against the argument that less contact equals less spread.  So any 'contact limitation measures' should have effect...

But unfortunately this is not how it seems to work in the Real World.

Just look at the repeated 'need' for new lock-downs.

And that you would only be able to determine the effectiveness of lock-downs when comparing identical geographies, is absolutely incorrect.  When having access to all the data from different geographies you are able to filter out the factors that have actual impact (Taguchi methods or  'design of experiments' are well-know statistical techniques used in industry to determine the 'optimal' settings for the relevant factors without having to make thousands of tests with only one factor differing).

The longer this covid-sh!tstorm continues, the more data become available and comparisons between regions (countries often being too large or diverse) that applied different strategies will become increasingly more accurate in determining what works and what doesn't in the Real World. 

Obviously, data on the most relevant factors have to be available (climate, population density, age distribution, excess deaths, etc.) but then comparison becomes possible and will lead to meaningful conclusions.  Comparing regions that applied strict lockdown-measures with those that stopped imposing them (because of inconvincing evidence that they worked) ARE possible and ARE currently being done.  But the conclusions of these analyses - which ARE already available - are not 'politcally correct' because which politician would like to have to spread the political suicide message to his constituency of 'Sorry, we destroyed your business, social life and well-being by imposing what we thought was the right approach but now the data show us that we were wrong.  Sorry...'.

Unfortunately your statements are incorrect. Your corrections are based on assumptions that have not been proven. If they give a correction factor to compare countries. How do you know the correction factor is the same. This is the lowest kind of proof of any comparison. Compare 2 identical products and sure you can do it. But if they are not identical and you are going to apply a correction factor then you have to be sure the correction factor is correct. But how do you prove that. You cant. So quit acting like you can.

 

Its like 2 bodybuilders doing the same program one eats extra protein and the other does not. One builds more muscle then the other. Then how do you correct properly for the different genetic factors. You cant.. its just a guess. Same goes for your corrections. They are just guesses.

Al we know are the proven facts less contact is less virus and it works that way in the real world too. I challenge you to actively search out infected persons and be in contact width hem. Then you w ill know. If you get sick then more contact means more risk if you not it proves that more contact does not mean more spread. I doubt your willing to take risks like that. 

 

I have now known many people (that i have spoken to know for real) that contracted the disease they all got it from contact. (no suprise there). They would not have gotten it had they not contacted those people. So how is not limiting contact not going to help. The question is more how much would we have had without a lockdown and is this lockdown being followed as in the Netherlands people still party on ignoring the rules. So even comparing lockdowns wont work as you have to factor in the compliance to a lockdown... again that is a guestimate. So real world comparisons are almost impossible.

 

Sure we can GUESS based on ASSUMPTIONS when comparing and say it does not work. You cannot PROVE it does not work. Logic says it does science says it does. I think we got a totally different idea of what proving is. 

[JackGats]

21 hours ago, MadMac said:

You never need to wait long to see the greed popping up in this country. 

Partly true, otherwise they would never have shut down the country to tourism. In fact foreigners  like me were disappointed at Thailand not being its assumed greedy self during this crisis. Would have made things easier.

 

I hope there will be no issue about vaccines being genuine. There have been alerts in Europe:

 

https://www.euractiv.com/section/justice-home-affairs/news/eus-anti-fraud-agency-warns-against-fake-covid-vaccines/

 

 

[superal]

19 hours ago, fangless said:

And how will we know we are not getting an injection of some fake cr"p?

TITS!

Exactly , cos which authority  body oversees the hospital inoculation programme ?  re-labelling vaccine vials would never enter their heads for sure ?   plus farangs are easy targets for profiteering . In fact , how could you be confident that you will receive your preferred vaccine ? I cannot import my trust of western hospitals to some Asian countries because of their  lack of regulation especially when there is money involved .

[Miami007]

16 hours ago, robblok said:

Europe and the US have been overrun so please stop posting non sense and irrelevant stuff. Brazil is a good example just not one that you want to know. Thing is i get it nobody likes the travel restrictions and lockdowns. But it makes sure that hospitals can cope. The UK and Netherlands came again close to having problems. Not to mention of all operations that were postponed because of the COVID epidemic. 

 

The problems are far larger then you like to acknowledge. Nobody wants to hurt the economy. For the west to go this far there is surely a threat. We seen in the US what bad managing did and the UK was also bad. Italy is also a good example. The Netherlands came close to a shortage of ICU beds. Many operations postponed ect. Overworked doctors and nurses.

What do you mean by overrun ? 

USA has 330 million residents and 29 million positive cases. Less than 10%. About 20 million recovered, leaving fewer than 9 million cases today, not even 3%.

The USA has 1 million hospital beds, peak covid-utilization was 140,000 or 14%. If there are shortages, they were a combination of covid and other diseases (similar situations in years with strong flu). A lot of talk about shortages that may happen - but they never did in the end. In Miami, hospitals furloughed staff in spring 2020 as there were no patients during lockdown and as elective procedures stopped.

 

You may also want to compare test per million resident and positive cases per million resident. Surprisingly, there are countries which only test symptomatic people (Not the majority of people who are positive, but are not sick in a clinical sense).

Some countries have more fatalities because of the general poor health of the population (obesity, diabetes, cholesterol among others) and the fairly old population. In Austria, 43% of all deaths happened in nursing homes, in the USA that number is 37%. In both countries nursing homes account for 1% of the population (And they are normally of advanced age). 80% or more of deaths are in people 75 or older. Protecting that at-risk group would have had better results than blanket restrictions.

Btw,  you will see environmentalists in Europe call for continued Lockdowns to combat climate change and save the 9 million people who die from air pollution every year.

 

[Heng]

Wonderful news.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

42 minutes ago, Miami007 said:

In your analysis you are omitting European countries - some had strict and some not so strict Lockdowns. Results similar.. just different times for deaths to occur.

But the biggest omission is the disregard of economic suffering for the country and the impact on citizens not being able to return or even leave the country. We criticized the Soviet Union in the 1980s for these restrictions 

I have been separated from my girlfriend in Thailand for a year. I do hope they relax the travel rules as soon as is possible. I am sick of wearing masks. I am working from home and only have to wear them shopping so no big deal. My take on it is that there is a good reason that does make sense so I cop it. What was the reason in the Soviet Union in the 80's - just another dictator who wouldn't let people out I am guessing. 

 

Some individual businesses have been destroyed by this. You could say that from time to time in Australia they have gone a bit far sometimes with the rules and regulations.

By far though the majority of Australian people have been looked after on jobkeeper and jobseeker payments. Businesses have had similar payments. Particular businesses from hardest hit industries have received grants. The economy is now good. It's not a perfect outcome but overall it is a good outcome. 

 

You  might have a point about Europe. The different countries have different strategies and  I am not familiar with their outcomes. I think a comparison between Australia and the United States is fair. Different conditions for sure but the difference in outcome is so significant the strategies taken are likely to be a key factor.

 

Edited March 6, 2021 by Fat is a type of crazy

[bluesea]

Make sure you read the fine print for a Proof Certificate for the Vaccine that would more than likley be 2K also knowing BKK Hospitals..

[Tuvoc]

I'm totally happy to pay 4,000 baht for the vaccine, most importantly because it protects those around me. I'd be surprised it if it just 4,000 baht though. I wonder if prices may vary regionally.

 

I'd want a certificate though that stands a chance of being accepted internationally, which given the western attitude to China these days would mean not that one. 

 

[Miami007]

21 minutes ago, robblok said:

But how can you compare 2 different countries with different populations with different manners and different density of population. Unless you have 2 totally the same situations you cant make the statement you make.

 

Anyway the whole idea about lockdown is to slow down the spread of the virus so it wont overwhelm the hospitals. Quite a few countries (i know of the Netherlands and Uk) almost ran out of ICU beds. If they had not locked down death toll would be far higher as the hospitals could not cope.

 

Also people leave out the people that died in non lockdown countries because the hospitals could not do their normal operation (also something that happens when the hospitals are overworked). So its really hard to support your claims.

 

There were places in the US where they had to had mobile morgues a clear sign of a failed lockdown or else deaths would be more spread and less.

I thought that you had compared cases and deaths between Australia and the USA. I would agree that these comparisons are misleading 

My brother in law is head of a department in a large hospital.. they were empty in Spring, very manageable during second wave in November / December. 

Field hospitals in New York City had no patients during the April 2020 surge.

Mobile morgue made for captivating TV.. overall, numbers do not support the hype. Even in USA covid is 10% of all deaths,  in Europe excess mortality is minimal in many countries

[Peter Denis]

7 minutes ago, robblok said:

Unfortunately your statements are incorrect. Your corrections are based on assumptions that have not been proven. If they give a correction factor to compare countries. How do you know the correction factor is the same. This is the lowest kind of proof of any comparison. Compare 2 identical products and sure you can do it. But if they are not identical and you are going to apply a correction factor then you have to be sure the correction factor is correct. But how do you prove that. You cant. So quit acting like you can.

 

Its like 2 bodybuilders doing the same program one eats extra protein and the other does not. One builds more muscle then the other. Then how do you correct properly for the different genetic factors. You cant.. its just a guess. Same goes for your corrections. They are just guesses.

Al we know are the proven facts less contact is less virus and it works that way in the real world too. I challenge you to actively search out infected persons and be in contact width hem. Then you w ill know. If you get sick then more contact means more risk if you not it proves that more contact does not mean more spread. I doubt your willing to take risks like that. 

 

I have now known many people (that i have spoken to know for real) that contracted the disease they all got it from contact. (no suprise there). They would not have gotten it had they not contacted those people. So how is not limiting contact not going to help. The question is more how much would we have had without a lockdown and is this lockdown being followed as in the Netherlands people still party on ignoring the rules. So even comparing lockdowns wont work as you have to factor in the compliance to a lockdown... again that is a guestimate. So real world comparisons are almost impossible.

 

Sure we can GUESS based on ASSUMPTIONS when comparing and say it does not work. You cannot PROVE it does not work. Logic says it does science says it does. I think we got a totally different idea of what proving is. 

 

It is extremely simplistic and INCORRECT to state like you do:

> But how can you compare 2 different countries with different populations with different manners and different density of population. Unless you have 2 totally the same situations you cant make the statement you make.

Not going to argue with you anymore when you deny that multi-factor analysis is unable to determine the relevance of different factors across different geographies.

Those methods ARE currently being used and it is not your or my opinion but the DATA that will show which measures were effective and which were not. 

Of course if you insist on the - impossible - condition that only identical regions can be compared to determine the impact of specific measures imposed/not imposed, then no amount of studies and data will be able to convince you.

 

[Tuvoc]

5 minutes ago, MuayThaiGuy said:

They have already said that you can still catch and transmit the alleged virus even if you're vaccinated.

 

There is a lot of debate about that, the last thing I saw was that being vaccinated does in fact make your chances of passing it on very much lower. I'd get household members vaccinated, and then anything above that, masks, handwashing etc helps tremendously.

 

 

Edited March 6, 2021 by Tuvoc

[Polaky]

Won't be long before you will be able to buy it online, self administer the doses, express post so it doesn't get too warm, ebay will be flooded with sellers, where does it end. ????????

[Rimmer]

A couple of misleading posts have been removed

[Dustdevil]

20 hours ago, AlexRich said:

I would pay to get the vaccine of my choice. I believe the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is only one shot? But I’d probably go for Pfizer as it’s been around longer and appears to be very effective with few if any side effects. 
 

I wouldn’t want the Chinese or Russian vaccines, I just trust western medicines more ... both appear to be safe and work well.

Moderna offers the same efficacy. Got my first one already; #2 coming up Mar 18th in Idaho.

[Dirk Z]

21 hours ago, AlexRich said:

I would pay to get the vaccine of my choice. I believe the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is only one shot? But I’d probably go for Pfizer as it’s been around longer and appears to be very effective with few if any side effects. 
 

I wouldn’t want the Chinese or Russian vaccines, I just trust western medicines more ... both appear to be safe and work well.

The Chinese are not stupid, I assume Sinovac will work, as the principle of how it is made is the same as for other effective vaccines. But they don't show data and that is the reason why I would prefer one of the others, including the Russian which has been shown by objective sources to be effective.

[abrahamzvi]

21 hours ago, keith101 said:

Instead of giving the hospitals 200% + profit i will wait to get mine thanks , already got an email from a hospital in Bangkok last month asking how many family i wanted to book for and immediately deleted it .

I can't agree. I am prepared to let private hospitals to make a profit, as long as I can get the most reliable and suitable vaccine. My and my family's health is worth it. I also allow good restaurants to make a profit if they offer me the dishes I like, so what's the difference?

[spiekerjozef]

More then happy to pay 2,000 for a vaccine of my choice rather then that chinese soda-water with paracetamol mixture for free.

 

 

Edited March 6, 2021 by spiekerjozef

[Smilermike]

Money grabbing <deleted>.everyone knows it costs £7 or US$ 10 a shot and that's for the good one!

Welcome to Thailand

[Smilermike]

Money grabbing *****.everyone knows it costs £7 or US$ 10 a shot and that's for the good one!

Welcome to Thailand.

There's a world wide pandemic happening  and yet they can't get over  trying to cash in on it. They should be offering it at cost so they can make the country safer. I pay health ins , I would expect them to foot the bill or at least come some of the way. Shame on these private hospitals.

[Thorgal]

5 minutes ago, abrahamzvi said:

I can't agree. I am prepared to let private hospitals to make a profit, as long as I can get the most reliable and suitable vaccine. My and my family's health is worth it. I also allow good restaurants to make a profit if they offer me the dishes I like, so what's the difference?

 

You should make first a medical exam to evaluate your comorbidity factor. They use (mostly) the Charlson index of comorbidity.

The higher your Charlson index, the higher chance you will need intensive care or even risk fatality.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comorbidity

 

The higher your Charlson index, the higher the need for vaccination. Whatever the price, honestly.

 

Even with a low Charlson index you can strengthen your immunity with vitamins B, C and with Zinc.

Having previous been vaccinated with BCG (tuberculosis) booster is beneficial for high inflammatory viral infections.

[BritManToo]

12 minutes ago, abrahamzvi said:

I can't agree. I am prepared to let private hospitals to make a profit, as long as I can get the most reliable and suitable vaccine. My and my family's health is worth it. I also allow good restaurants to make a profit if they offer me the dishes I like, so what's the difference?

I'm perfectly happy that me and my family are safe without any vaccine.

Paying 16,000bht for something we don't need is pointless IMHO.

But I'm OK with you paying for your family to have vaccinations.

[John Drake]

22 hours ago, webfact said:

Having the recommended two doses would therefore cost 4,000 baht or a little under 100 UK pounds or about $US 133.

 

Only 1 dose needed for the J&J.

[John Drake]

21 hours ago, dcnx said:

Considering it’s free everywhere else, it’s not the best deal out there.

 

In Thailand, it appears to be the only deal out there.

[chilli42]

Think I will wait for the BOGO clear-out (buy one, get one free).  Hard to see the need to rush into this.