May 30, 2021, 7:16 pm
Last edit by: Courmisch
How to get a SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) RT-PCR test certificate for travel from Finland?
This wiki post details the means to obtain a PCR-test test certificate in Finland for travel. It is possible to completely avoid the cartel prices of over 200€ (Terveystalo, 9Lives, etc.) by getting a certified from the public sector.
Where to get the test?
Print-at-home test result certificates are available for public sector tests taken in the following regions:
It is expected that, in the second phase of deployment of the EU green pass in Finland, test results will be available from Kanta.fi regardless of locality. At the moment, Kanta.fi can only provide Finnish national vaccination certificates. In the first phase of deployment, (only) the vaccination certificates will be converted to EU format.
How to apply for the test?
There are several ways to apply for and take a suitable test:
This wiki post details the means to obtain a PCR-test test certificate in Finland for travel. It is possible to completely avoid the cartel prices of over 200€ (Terveystalo, 9Lives, etc.) by getting a certified from the public sector.
Where to get the test?
Print-at-home test result certificates are available for public sector tests taken in the following regions:
- Uusimaa,
- Kymi valley,
- Northern Ostrobothnia,
- South Karelia.
It is expected that, in the second phase of deployment of the EU green pass in Finland, test results will be available from Kanta.fi regardless of locality. At the moment, Kanta.fi can only provide Finnish national vaccination certificates. In the first phase of deployment, (only) the vaccination certificates will be converted to EU format.
How to apply for the test?
There are several ways to apply for and take a suitable test:
- If you have Covid-19 symptoms (based on self-diagnostic), you can get a test via Omaolo: https://www.omaolo.fi/
- If you are returning to (or entering) Finland less than 14 days before the intended test date, you can apply from FinEntry: https://www.finentry.fi/
- Visit the appointment-free test bus in poorer Helsinki districts. The schedule is available here:
https://www.hel.fi/helsinki/coronavirus-en/social-and-health/coronavirus-test/
Good news, is this the beginning of the end for Covid19?
Nov 29, 2020, 7:47 am
#76
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
It should perhaps be pointed out that 90% efficacy (which is what the studies have so far shown) does not mean 90% effectiveness (ie protection in 90 out of 100 people). Those are very different numbers.
Nov 30, 2020, 1:01 am
#77
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: try to stay home
Programs: AY, M&M, BAEC ...and don t care of status anymore
Posts: 2,043
2/3 of all people dying from/with COVID 19 in Germany are living in homes for the elderly or they are in hospitals because of different health problems.. That's at least in Germany the case. And yes if you can shout countries down like we did it, you can go to every single person who is in danger.
I doubt that people who are 80years and older will start running to those centers and wait till they get their treatment.
Nov 30, 2020, 11:14 am
#78
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: HEL
Programs: lots of shiny metal cards
Posts: 14,107
Could you elaborate in layman(ish) terms? I think I already grasp what "90%" means in tests (maybe), how is it in the case of vaccines?
Nov 30, 2020, 12:59 pm
#79
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/h...effective.html
From the headlines, you might well assume that these vaccines — which some people may receive in a matter of weeks — will protect 95 out of 100 people who get them. But that’s not actually what the trials have shown. Exactly how the vaccines perform out in the real world will depend on a lot of factors we just don’t have answers to yet — such as whether vaccinated people can get asymptomatic infections and how many people will get vaccinated.
<snip>
The fundamental logic behind today’s vaccine trials was worked out by statisticians over a century ago. Researchers vaccinate some people and give a placebo to others. They then wait for participants to get sick and look at how many of the illnesses came from each group.
In the case of Pfizer, for example, the company recruited 43,661 volunteers and waited for 170 people to come down with symptoms of Covid-19 and then get a positive test. Out of these 170, 162 had received a placebo shot, and just eight had received the real vaccine.
From these numbers, Pfizer’s researchers calculated the fraction of volunteers in each group who got sick. Both fractions were small, but the fraction of unvaccinated volunteers who got sick was much bigger than the fraction of vaccinated ones. The scientists then determined the relative difference between those two fractions. Scientists express that difference with a value they call efficacy. If there’s no difference between the vaccine and placebo groups, the efficacy is zero. If none of the sick people had been vaccinated, the efficacy is 100 percent.
<snip>
Efficacy and effectiveness are related to each other, but they’re not the same thing. And vaccine experts say it’s crucial not to mix them up. Efficacy is just a measurement made during a clinical trial. “Effectiveness is how well the vaccine works out in the real world,” said Naor Bar-Zeev, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
It’s possible that the effectiveness of coronavirus vaccines will match their impressive efficacy in clinical trials. But if previous vaccines are any guide, effectiveness may prove somewhat lower.
<snip>
The fundamental logic behind today’s vaccine trials was worked out by statisticians over a century ago. Researchers vaccinate some people and give a placebo to others. They then wait for participants to get sick and look at how many of the illnesses came from each group.
In the case of Pfizer, for example, the company recruited 43,661 volunteers and waited for 170 people to come down with symptoms of Covid-19 and then get a positive test. Out of these 170, 162 had received a placebo shot, and just eight had received the real vaccine.
From these numbers, Pfizer’s researchers calculated the fraction of volunteers in each group who got sick. Both fractions were small, but the fraction of unvaccinated volunteers who got sick was much bigger than the fraction of vaccinated ones. The scientists then determined the relative difference between those two fractions. Scientists express that difference with a value they call efficacy. If there’s no difference between the vaccine and placebo groups, the efficacy is zero. If none of the sick people had been vaccinated, the efficacy is 100 percent.
<snip>
Efficacy and effectiveness are related to each other, but they’re not the same thing. And vaccine experts say it’s crucial not to mix them up. Efficacy is just a measurement made during a clinical trial. “Effectiveness is how well the vaccine works out in the real world,” said Naor Bar-Zeev, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
It’s possible that the effectiveness of coronavirus vaccines will match their impressive efficacy in clinical trials. But if previous vaccines are any guide, effectiveness may prove somewhat lower.
Nov 30, 2020, 4:08 pm
#80
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: HEL
Programs: AY, SK, TK
Posts: 7,602
The best layman's explanation I have been able to find is an article in the NY Times from which I will take some quotes:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/h...effective.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/h...effective.html
Nov 30, 2020, 4:23 pm
#81
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: HEL
Programs: AY Platinum, TK Elite, BT VIP, AA, BA, SK, DL, NT, WB + hotels
Posts: 8,757
I understand that this is the more humane way to do it, instead of trying to actively transmit the virus to the people who got the real vaccine. But as the number of infected people is really low, isn't there quite a lot of room for error here? Taking into account that the PCR tests used to detect the virus are very unreliable as well. Could be many more infected, but they just got a negative test result and have no symptoms (but could still transmit the decease).
Dec 5, 2020, 8:56 am
#82
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: C2
Posts: 651
What went wrong?
I'm getting more and more upset with this corona "crisis". Good thing vaccine is coming some day. But what I can't understand is why Western medical authorities isn't testning and using the already available drug that is showing positive data in every trial. That is beyond my understanding why on earth we are not testning and using a safe, cheap and available drug. The drug I'm talking about is Ivermectin. (I have mentioned it here before)
+30 studies of different kinds with results are available. All showing different degrees of positive effects. Something has gone fundamentally wrong in the medical field. This isn't some tin foil/snake oil drug, it is a Nobel prize winner.(2015)
And for fellow flyers. The prophylactic effect in 3-4 different trials has shown 75-100% protection from infection, something that is good to know IF you need to visit heavy infected areas.
End of touting/rant
+30 studies of different kinds with results are available. All showing different degrees of positive effects. Something has gone fundamentally wrong in the medical field. This isn't some tin foil/snake oil drug, it is a Nobel prize winner.(2015)
And for fellow flyers. The prophylactic effect in 3-4 different trials has shown 75-100% protection from infection, something that is good to know IF you need to visit heavy infected areas.
End of touting/rant
Dec 5, 2020, 9:37 am
#83
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Rhineland-Palatinate
Programs: *A Gold (A3), HHonor Gold
Posts: 5,701
In real life:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....06.20208066v3
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...l.pone.0242184
https://www.isglobal.org/en/healthis...ries/2877257/0
Conclusions Our study reported no beneficial effects of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, azithromycin. The HCQ+AZIT treatment seems to increase risk for all-cause death.
Ivermectin has recently shown efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 in-vitro. We retrospectively reviewed severe COVID-19 patients receiving standard doses of ivermectin and we compared clinical and microbiological outcomes with a similar group of patients not receiving ivermectin. No differences were found between groups. We recommend the evaluation of high-doses of ivermectin in randomized trials against SARS-CoV-2.
Ivermectin and COVID-19: How a Flawed Database Shaped the Pandemic Response of Several Latin-American Countries
Dec 5, 2020, 9:52 am
#84
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: C2
Posts: 651
1st one flawed study from Peru. Proven to be bs.
2nd 22nd July? Never seen. And 13 severe patients.
3rd some old article of The "nowadays silent sceptic" Chaccour.
Look at available real life data now available.
Want links?
Last edited by seldomrfly; Dec 5, 2020 at 10:03 am
Dec 5, 2020, 9:57 am
#85
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: C2
Posts: 651
Dec 5, 2020, 9:59 am
#86
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: HEL
Programs: AY, SK, TK
Posts: 7,602
Well, when medical industry went from ethical to greedy, it all began, and gets only worse till the end of the world. Where we are in the logarithm curve remains the only (useless) debate.
Take a vaccine or dont take, choose a medi-bubble life or a all-natural life, you are busted anyhow.
I am sick and tired tol already and it counts.
Take a vaccine or dont take, choose a medi-bubble life or a all-natural life, you are busted anyhow.
I am sick and tired tol already and it counts.
Dec 5, 2020, 10:48 am
#87
Join Date: May 2014
Location: HEL
Programs: AY+Plat, ALL Plat, Scandic L2
Posts: 3,620
I can't understand (...) why Western medical authorities isn't testning and using the already available drug that is showing positive data in every trial. That is beyond my understanding why on earth we are not testning and using a safe, cheap and available drug. The drug I'm talking about is Ivermectin. (I have mentioned it here before)
The hope is that an efficient and effective vaccine would actually address those issues much better than any treatment. Also from a legal standpoint, most European governments are actually responsible for keeping the people's health. But if the government provides a vaccine for the people, then it's done its part. Many people will refuse to take it, and some of them will die (and even a few who did take the vaccine), but the government will not be liable any longer.
And to answer your specific question, the fact that people are publishing on that exact topic sounds like there are,or have been, tests, and Ivermectin is evidently controversial at best. The people in government are not superscient. If a majority of experts say Ivermectin does not work, then that's that.
Dec 5, 2020, 11:03 am
#88
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: C2
Posts: 651
As Dr. Paul Mariks said yesterday on his press conference; Please review the data, please. If you reject it fine, but stop ignoring it.
As you say, the vaccine is the solution. But until that, use whats available.
Dec 6, 2020, 12:02 am
#89
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: HEL
Programs: AY Plat Lumo, SK Gold
Posts: 954
Also from a legal standpoint, most European governments are actually responsible for keeping the people's health. But if the government provides a vaccine for the people, then it's done its part. Many people will refuse to take it, and some of them will die (and even a few who did take the vaccine), but the government will not be liable any longer.
Dec 6, 2020, 12:24 am
#90
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: try to stay home
Programs: AY, M&M, BAEC ...and don t care of status anymore
Posts: 2,043
If this is tolerable - fine, but then the arguments about the measurements to protect all of us from COVID 19 are a little wrong. At least in Germany, here is the keypoint to justify everything "We must fight for every single life".