Senior Player

I should also have added New Zealand to the list of countries (Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, China) that have strict mask mandates but where Covid infections have risen or are still rising faster than maskless countries. New data shows Covid infections and deaths in New Zealand have overtaken Australia in the latest Omicron wave despite ultra-strict mask mandates that were dropped in Australia. Death rates in New Zealand overtook Australia per capita at the start of March, despite the Kiwis being on the highest code red mask mandate restrictions—and have stayed higher ever since. Additionally, Jacinda Ardern is paying the price for her hermit Zero-Covid economy as New Zealand is crashing into a hard recession. Just thought I should add that as a continuation to my previous post.

2 hours ago, notrub said:

BRAVO!!!!  It is clear that masks help contain the exhaled water vapor and snot that the microscopic virus rides on.  Masks also protect those inhaling air too.  Without an undesirable extra dose of virus-laden snot.  

 

Anybody take note of the rise in numbers of covid infections in those countries where the mask mandate ended some time ago?  The newest version of covid is much much more transmissible and only a fool would go into a crowded indoor space without a mask.    (any nationality, gender, race, age, colour etc. etc.)

What about South Korea where face masks are still compulsory indoors and on public transport? They have been experiencing a recent spike in Covid cases with Kim Jong Un blaming its neighbour for their own huge Covid spike. Note: mask wearing is also compulsory in North Korea. Did Singapore ever relax their mask wearing mandate for indoor and on public transport? Not that I'm aware. The only mandate that Singapore did away with was its strict outdoor mask rule in late March. And yet, all this mask wearing isn't preventing Singapore from experiencing a huge spike in Covid cases either.

Also worth noting, Singapore had administered enough booster doses to cover almost 70% of the population – far more than Britain or the United States, but doesn't appear to be stopping another deadly post-vaccination wave.

A mask doesn’t protect your eyes, no matter if you're wearing an N95 or a piece of surgical cloth. This tends to be overlooked when championing compulsory mask-wearing. Personally, I think it's all part of behavioural science and the first hurdle in getting people to comply and obey the stricter rules that will follow. This was probably one of the major reasons why so many preeminent scientists, including Dr. Fauci, changed their stance on mask efficacy by mid 2020, understanding the research carried out by the UK's “Nudge Unit” on how people would react psychologically and respond behaviourally to the new interventions.
 

Why is it important that a mask doesn't protect your eyes, you might ask? Well, if we make a comparison with the common cold, you can still catch the virus through your eyes. When an infected person coughs or sneezes, they release tiny droplets into the air. The virus can travel to the nose and throat through a duct that links the eyes and nasal cavity, where it then starts the process of causing an infection. Even if you happen to sneeze wearing one of these flimsy surgical masks, tiny droplets could still escape and get released into the air, especially if the mask is worn incorrectly or taken off when eating or drinking. Also, if these droplets get on to your hands, you can pass them into your eyes by touching them. So do masks give the wearer a false sense of protection?

That said, should you really be getting worked into a lather about the new variants? We already know that the new Omicron variants (including BA.4 and BA.5) are more transmissible but do NOT appear to lead to more severe illness. That's what all the recent articles have stated and the data appears to back it up. I've had it myself recently and I can say as a 60-year-old living in England I found it rather mild. So why the scaremongering all of a sudden?

I'll leave that for you to ponder, but I will add there's a new Moderna jab coming out in September which is purported to target the BA.5 variant. Considering the rate that these variants mutate, I would've thought we'd have moved onto BA.6 and BA.7 by then (or even Sigma), ready for the next scare campaign about needing the next jab... and so on and so forth.

Quote

“The 300-baht fee will guarantee insurance coverage during foreigners’ stay in Thailand for up to 30 days,” said Mr Mongkon.

Since the government are considering extending the 30 day exemption to 45 days, shouldn't this insurance guarantee fee cover the proposed 45 days rather than just 30 days, or am I being overly perspicacious?

16 hours ago, jacko45k said:

My thoughts too..... and if not a normal tourist, a fee for a Visa and a bit of extra vetting is not a big deal. Wasn't the tourist Visa offered for free during Covid for a while?.... I don't recall it made a big difference. 

That depends on your definition of a "normal tourist". The standard definition for a tourist is a person who is travelling or visiting a place for pleasure. There is no set time limit for this other than the current 30-day exemption rule, which could be extended to 45 days. And what about public sector workers who get much longer holidays than private sector workers? For instance, in the UK there are 5.5 million public sector workers who can stay longer than just 2 weeks if they so wish. Also, are gap year students who are backpacking for a couple of months (or longer) not tourists as well? That said, families on a limited 2-week budget will not be tempted to spend big bucks on a short holiday right now, not with the way things currently stand. They'll choose somewhere much closer to home and easier on their wallet.

As for the extra vetting, a nefarious person with a criminal record can still get around the vetting process by simply becoming one of the many overstayers on a 30-day exemption. They don't tend to worry about rules, regulations and getting a proper tourist visa where they'll be scrutinized.

22 hours ago, Canuckluck said:

Does this mean i don't need to apply for an extension beyond 30 days?

Depending when your extension expires, you will still have to apply for an extension as this is just another proposal that hasn't been implemented yet. When it comes into effect, then you won't need to apply for an extension beyond 30 days.

Just found out it pays to click on the link and read the article in full. 

The proposal is for the 1,000 baht visa fee and the 2,000 baht fee for Visa on Arrival to be waived until Dec 31. Not long then.

TAT will also request the period of stay for tourist visas be extended from 30 days to 45 days, and from 15 days to 45 days for Visa on Arrival.

I still think 30-days to 60-days would be better, and it also needs to go well into 2023, not just end on New Year's Day. After all, this is still a proposal and has to be implemented first. By that time, it could well be September or October before this is up and running.

Wasn't there talk of extending the Visa exemption from 30-days to 60-days, or am I just imagining that? Seems to be the best solution to entice long-staying tourists back to the country. Waiving visa fees on arrival won't do much to boost their numbers.

17 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Hotel / GH owners aren't that stupid to follow the govt BS.  They'll do what they want, like they always have.

 

TBH .. I'm hoping there is a mandatory new 'farang tax' added to accommodations.  Something they can't avoid not charging for, and with big letter 'FOREIGNER SURCHARGE / FEE / TAX' ... ????

 

Unfortunately, don't see that happening.

I actually agree with you on the first part, as many hoteliers in Thailand have already slammed the government's plan to create dual-pricing for foreign tourists and locals.

The "foreigner surcharge" will still get the same reaction from wannabe tourists to Thailand as the dual-pricing proposal—which, in effect, is the same thing. If Thailand really wants more tourism, then advertising that they'll pay higher prices compared to the locals for the exact same service is not the smart way to go.

The only reason I can see for making such a proposal is TAT don't believe their own foreign arrival estimates for this year and want to ensure hotels are filled with locals rather than laying half-empty. Either way, it doesn't incentive your average tourist to book an already expensive flight to Thailand knowing full well that they're paying a hotel price that even the government admits to be inflated just because you're a foreigner.

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

 

Yes, I get your "book 1-night if necessary" suggestion, but how will that change the dual-pricing you'll find at the next hotel or the one after that? And unless you're a Thai national who is getting the 50% discount, how will you even know if your hotel is operating such a dual-tariff scheme if it's at their own discretion? It's not as if the Thais will be flaunting their 50% discounts to every farang staying in the same hotel. They'll pay discreetly and most new arrivals will not be even aware of the difference in room rates.

Bottom line, the dual-tariff scheme is a bad proposal by the tourist minister and reflects poorly on the country.

3 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Simple solution, don't use booking site, or any that charge in advance, or only book 1 night if necessary.

 

Y'all got feet, simply use them.  We've only had to do it a couple times, once arrived the rate changed on seeing whitey.  Bye bye.

So after a 12-hour flight or more, feeling hot, sweaty and jetlagged, you're going to take all your luggage and go in search of another hotel that doesn't impose dual-pricing when it's most likely to be established across the entire town or city where you're staying at?

I get your point, but I just don't see how this proposal is perceived as an incentive to boost tourism when they're being so open and blasé about its inequality.

7 hours ago, petermik said:

Room for two persons booked in lead guests name....immaterial who the other guest is........????

Looking at the small print on one of the major booking sites there is an "Additional Charges by Accommodations" clause that allows the hotel to charge mandatory service fees, surcharges, and local taxes. It states: "If we are aware of these service fees and local taxes, we will display them with your reservation price. These service fees and local taxes may be collected directly from you by the Accommodation, in addition to the price you pay for your reservation." 

Depending on the mindset of the hotel or its staff, they could in theory charge you more upon your arrival or checkout claiming you violated their booking policy and put it down as a city tourist tax (farang tax) or surcharge. Of course, I'm talking purely hypothetical here, but should the government decide to push through with this dual pricing, it could tempt some hoteliers to double down and ask for more if they see farangs trying to circumvent their new policy by deceit or evasion. Until it happens, we just don't know.

On 7/8/2022 at 7:45 PM, Eleftheros said:

UK excess deaths at the moment are consistently up about 10% over the long-term average, of which very few are Covid-related. Deaths at home are up by 30%, described by one Prof. Levinson as "horrific numbers".

 

An investigation is expected to focus on a narrow set of possible reasons:

• pandemic response (lockdowns, masks etc, leading to downturns in physical and mental health)
• lack of access to healthcare and delayed referrals
• cost of living crisis, deprivation, stress
• heart problems caused by the Covid virus

 

So there must be some other reason why people - mostly of working age - are falling off the twig with such regularity.

You're absolutely right. There were 1,540 more deaths than usual in England and Wales registered in the week ending June 24th, the most recent week for which data are available, according to the latest update from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), released on Tuesday. This is 16.6% above the five-year average. This also brings the total number of non-Covid deaths above the five-year average since April 29th, the start of the recent spike, to 7,840. Of these, a large proportion are occurring in the home, leading to calls for an urgent investigation into why thousands more people are dying than would be expected, despite Covid death numbers staying low.

12 hours ago, joecoolfrog said:

That was my initial thought , there is no way the booking sites will play along with dual pricing. 

Without knowing the full details of how this proposal will work, is it not possible to offer Thais with a Thai National ID card the 50% discount upon arrival at the hotel and keep things as they are on the booking sites? Also, some of these sites operate a "Book Now Pay Later" business model at the hotel, so it wouldn't be too difficult to implement. Just a thought.

I've just read that the Government plans to charge foreigners more than Thais for hotel rooms. According to reports, the Ministry of Tourism and Sports plans to ask hotel operators to implement a dual tariff framework, under which foreign visitors can be charged the same rates as in pre-pandemic days, while locals will be charged discounted rates.

Well, that should make us feel more welcome and get us booking our already expensive flights to Bangkok then.

7 hours ago, George Aylesham said:

If 'face nappies' were in common use in the UK maybe they could reduce the horrendous infection figures there - 21,000 new infections a day and 87 new deaths a day. (source: Worldometer)

Again, you make the common mistake of saying the UK, when the Covid response is down to each of the four nations and their regional assemblies. For instance, Wales is now looking to reintroduce mask-wearing in their NHS hospitals, whereas the other three nations do not. Besides, the 87 new deaths a day you quote doesn't mean they all died of Covid, only with it. In addition, the number of daily death figures have remained pretty constant throughout the last couple of months with no excess deaths from Covid since Omicron arrived. For instance, on April 13, 2022, there were 651 deaths recorded in the UK (source: Worldometer). Did you get all worked up over that figure on April 13th, too? You'd have to go back to March this year to see a bigger increase in that number, and still that was nowhere near the peak levels of January 2021.

The real story is there have been nearly 6,500 more deaths than usual in England and Wales from causes other than COVID-19 in the eight weeks since April 23rd, the latest data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show.

Call me a cynic but this new scaremongering seems to coincide with a new 'super booster' Covid vaccine from Moderna which could be approved for use in UK within days and rolled out in September. 

19 hours ago, Sametboy2019 said:

I know 8 people that have had it in the last two weeks.

Missus was pretty rough. I'm one day in. Chills, weakness...worst part is the blinding headache.

I had it about 2 weeks ago after visiting friends in London. I had the same symptoms as you except for the blinding headache. In addition, I had a slight runny nose (not constant or anything), but mostly a hacking cough and spewing up phlegm combined with chills and fatigue. It wasn't that bad; mild would be my own definition of the experience. It only lasted 5 days max, but I could still get about with ease when I had it. Just for the record, I'm aged sixty and not particularly fit.

As I pointed out a week ago, it's too risky to book an expensive flight to LOS right now as the Thai government have form in slamming on the breaks and going into reverse gear. The plan to downgrade the Covid-19 status from a pandemic to an endemic disease faces a deferral for another week, as health authorities are keeping a close watch on new subvariants and the consequences of lifting restrictions. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it faces yet another deferral after that, then another, and so on. 

From a UK's perspective, the latest Office for National Statistics survey show that infections are rising, but we are not seeing nearly the same levels of hospitalisations or deaths as we did before the vaccine roll-out. Figures published just last week show that an estimated 99.3% of the population have antibodies – whether through infection or vaccination. So as a result, although infections are rising, we are not being swamped by yet another Covid wave. If you want to use the UK, or Europe for that matter, as an example for more Thai restrictions, then you need to be aware that hospitalisations are still low, despite the usual scare stories from the legacy media.