paulbj2

18 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

It's not volts that kill, otherwise 1,000,000 volt tasers could not be used.

It's the ampage that's important.

Well yes and no. Yes, it is the current that kills; anything from 30 milliAmps (0.03 Amps) upwards, being considered potentially lethal. However, it is the voltage that "creates" the current according to Ohm's law: 

The current in Amps = voltage in volts/resistance in Ohms

so for a given resistance the current that passes through that resistance (or through a human body) rises as the voltage rises. So, the current created by a 220 volt supply will be twice that created by a 110 volt supply and yes, 110 volt mains are less likely to kill you that 220 volt mains. The downside of 110 Volt mains supplies is that twice the current is required to do the same amount of work (work is measured in watts and the formula is: Volts x Amps = Watts so as you reduce the voltage, the current required to do the same amount of work increases and it is current that heats up electrical cable so for 110 volts systems, the cables have to be twice the thickness to safely carry the required current compared to 220 volt systems).

Years back when I was working in the building industry, I took a 220 volt "belt" with my right hand whilst holding on to an earthed copper central heating pipe with my left hand. It was a very interesting sensation to put it mildly! The "experience" lasted for several seconds before rolled off the live component. When I realised what I had done, I was very surprised indeed to be alive. I laid flat on my back on the floor for 30 minutes or more, with my heartbeat doing stuff like the drummer on a modern jazz album (beat, beat, long pause, beat, pause, beat, beat beat, pause, beat, very long pause, beat, beat, beat; stuff like that) and I was just waiting for my heart to stop; I really thought I had had it! I was working alone at the time and the thought of my clients arriving home from their holidays to find a decomposing dead builder in their house was not a nice one! I am quite sure that should have killed me but for some reason, I survived.

The reason that Tasers don't (often) kill is because the requisite 30mA of current needed to kill is simply not available within that type of circuit; they are designed to have only a tiny amount of current available within their circuits to make them safe(ish). Likewise with static electricity; a static "belt" is quite often in the 10s of 1000s of volts or even the 100s of 1000s of volts range but other than making you jump, it does no harm, as there is no significant current available.

If you want to enhance your protection from electric shock in a country where there certainly is some rather dubious wiring (my place had a non-water resistant switch for the extractor fan inside the shower cubicle where it could easily get sprayed with water!), then get a Residual Current Circuit Breaker (RCCB or RCBO) fitted. They cost about 3000 Baht but that's cheaper than a funeral. They measure the difference between the current flowing out of the live terminal and returning through the neutral terminal and when the difference exceeds the rated amount, they trip, cutting off the mains very, very fast. In theory, an RCCB rated at 30mA or less will save your life if you get a shock from some faulty appliance. The lower the cut off current the better but below 30mA, nuisance tripping from aircon units starting up can be an issue. Residual Current Circuit Breakers don't rely on an earth for their operation so it doesn't matter if your earth is rubbish or non-existant, they will still save you! This is the one that I have just had fitted to my new place.

7 hours ago, SiSePuede419 said:

When I first stayed in Thailand, the apartment had the ground shorted to the neutral.  I offered to help fix it, but the landlady declined my offer.  

 

Smart Thai Landlord not need help from Stupid renter.  I'm sure it boiled down to just that. ?

That is a recognised way to get a good earth. PME protective multiple earthing, it's called. My house in the UK was wired that way by the local electricity board

1 hour ago, clockman said:

Send it viral around the world. Only money matters to these people..

Over the top completely! A really, REALLY stupid comment! Ridiculous "Thai bashing" nonsense!

Until I retired I used to work in a government owned building in Luxembourg City. Legionnella tests were carried out regularly on the water supplies and air-conditioning units in that building and the detailed results were provided to everyone who worked there. Those tests almost invariably came back positive for Legionella despite the best efforts of the building maintenance team to eliminate the damned bacterium using chlorine gas to disinfect the water systems and God knows how many other disinfectant chemicals. Legionella is not easy to eliminate, permanently.

This bacterium is a big problem throughout the world; it is present in the hot water systems of most hotels, offices and domestic dwellings. Do you ever get the hot water or air-conditioning systems where you live checked for Legionella? 100:1 odds on, you'll find it in the shower heads and in the water system.

The thing that worries me more in Thailand is the use of the "misting" systems that are often installed outside bars and restaurants. The supply pipework is usually in direct sunlight so the water inside the pipes, when it is turned off, will attain the ideal temperature range for the development of thriving colonies of Legionella. Then when the system is turned on, it will likely eject an aerosol of concentrated Legionella bacteria all over anyone in the vicinity; that should be a matter of real concern to health officials!

It would be quite helpful if drivers were politely asked to get broken lights fixed and not to obstruct ones that are working all year round!

Human kind are not that good at assessing risk really.

I went to my doctor a few years back, to get the results of some routine blood/urine tests and she sat me down and said:

"Are you aware how grave your risk of a heart attack or stroke is?".

I was a bit taken aback when she produced a chart that showed that, with all the risk factors that I had - Type II diabetes, 30 cigarettes a day, BMI close to 30, family history of heart disease, bad cholesterol levels, gout, lifestyle etc, etc, I had a one in five chance of having a major heart attack or stroke in the following 5 years. I replied that I really wasn't that bothered whether I lived or died as I was coming up to retirement and not looking forward to trying to scrape by on a very meagre pension to which she replied: 

"Yes, I can understand that. You're not by any means the first patient who has said that to me BUT are you prepared to become a cardiac cripple or to be partially paralysed for what is left of your life; does life in a wheelchair appeal to you? Often the first heart attack or stroke doesn't kill, it maims." 

She gave me the address of a website where I could go and work out my own risk, which I did and actually, taking everything into account and being completely honest about my lifestyle on this site, my risk turned out to be significantly greater even than what she had told me initially.

So what is the point of all this? Well, the risks of riding a motor cycle in a country where the accident and death rate amongst riders of two-wheeled transport is as high as it is here, are obvious, but how many people consider the risk that their lifestyle poses for their well being. How many of the keyboard-warriors accusing motor-cycle riders of being irresponsible by riding here, are grossly overweight, smoke cigarettes, drink to excess, take little or no exercise, have an appalling diet, have unprotected paid-for sex or any permutation of one, some or all of these risk factors. Depending on your particular combination of genetic factors and lifestyle, you could be at greater risk of imminent death than any motorcyclist.

Me? I fixed all the things about my lifestyle that were fixable. I stopped smoking, I changed my diet, I lost a huge amount of weight, I started exercising and I cut down my drinking drastically. Do I miss any of it: not really. Do I feel better; yes a million times better.  I did have a cigarette on New Years Eve or rather part of a cigarette, I had two puffs on it, coughed like a trooper, nearly threw up and asked myself why and how I had smoked the damned repulsive things for 50 years!  

4 hours ago, Gonefortea said:

I have lived and been treated in many countries I never implied anything. I said first hand experience.  I have no idea why you posted all this you obviously didn't read my post correctly. I really don't care if your brother/sister/dog worked at hospitals I said Ino my first hand experience it's second to none. My experience ok. As for dentist in wherever and eye care wherever. I just pay to go private easy no waiting lists ect ect ect.

So please leave me out of your obvious attempt to rubbish a health care system that has not only looked after all of my family indeed still does and when the chips were down did me proud. Thankyou

Good, in which countries have you lived and what was your experience of the healthcare systems there?

Bully for you, if you can afford to pay privately for dental and optical services (and can afford prescription charges as well) but let's not forget the majority of ordinary people (in this instance in the UK)  who can't afford to pay privately for such services; they don't matter at all, no?

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

I can't. It's something I listened to in passing.  I remmber it wasn't a politician- it was a former senior administrator. Then a comparative chart was in a newspaper- the Guardian I think.  Then the family were sitting round the table one evening and it seemed that was common knowledge.

 

But look, it's underfunded isn't it?  What other explanations?

I did wonder if you would come up with anything verifiable and I thought probably not!

The underfunding issue isn't as clear cut as you might think. Belgium has a world renowned health care system with outcomes for cancer sufferers that are the envy of the world but they don't spend that much more than the UK on healthcare, maybe they have a system that is much more efficient than the UK?

Luxembourg does spend a lot more than the UK as do several other countries, notably Switzerland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Norway. However, France, a country noted for the excellence of their healthcare system, and that is something I can vouch for as I have lived there, doesn't spend significantly more than the UK but they seem to get a lot more "bang for their buck"!

8 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

BBC Radio 4

Could you be a tad more specific - programme - name of the person speaking. Not everyone interviewed on the BBC tells the truth; see Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson, that foul little creep Gove and others for further details!

3 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

 

Thais are treated for free in the UK.  They shouldn't be, but the rules tend not to be enforced because the NHS has people who want to help people in any way they can, and not all Brits are as the tabloids describe.

 

But one important point that is being missed: Thai Government Hospitals don't charge much, and although the surroundings are less than salubrious, it is routine to receive good treatment up to a standard.  If someone has some money it should be possible to be patched up, and cured of most basic ailments, and I believe there are also cancer specialists, etc.

 

I went to Surat Than Hospital today.  Firstly, the more expensive private hospital did not offer specialist eye treatment- a designer hospital then!

 

I got a quality eye check up and some medicine for 400 baht. The diagnosis corresponded with that offered recently in the UK.  Yes the surroundings were not so good but who cares!  Moreover the doctor was able to diagnoze a dry eye problem I have as 'surfer's eye'; thankfully mild, as is the glaucoma in the left eye that he correctly identified.

 

I am booked in next week for more exhaustive tests.  I doubt it will be more than 2000 baht total, and any medicine more than 500 baht a month.,

 

So it's not as if we paupers are high and dry.  Really, I would say to anyone living in Thailand without 100,000 baht: look it's time to go home because you are living in peril.

"Thais are treated for free in the UK". Who told you that? If I understand the situation correctly, Thais will not be granted a visa to enter the UK unless they have medical insurance to prevent them being a burden on the NHS.

As a matter of interest, I was recently treated in the UK for free when I shouldn't have been. However, I was entitled to treatment as I was subject to CNS insurance in Luxembourg but when I offered them my Social Security card which would, if they had bothered to take down the details, have enabled them to claim back the cost of my treatment from Luxembourg, they waved it away with the words "Oh don't worry, we'll take your word for it". This idiotic as the NHS is desperately short of money but they are turning away free money that they are entitled to claim!

22 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

 

This is true.

 

However, the NHS receives 7% of GDP, which is much lower than comparable countries.

 

It is simply underfunded.

 

This translates as tens of billions, whereas so called health tourism is less than a billion.

How do you know "this is true"? Where are you getting your "data" from? Farage, the Daily Mail, the Express, the Sun, some right wing Tory fascist?

What you are saying is that you agree that it's OK to accuse Poles and Romanians of coming to Britain to exploit the NHS based on nothing; no data , no evidence, nothing. Personally, I don't think that's OK! 

15 hours ago, Thaidream said:

Absolute nonsense- everyone can have insurance at a reasonable cost if the government of any country let's its resident- that means expats buy into it. Your vision is not only heartless and cruel- it shows the selfishness that so many people now exhibit toward their fellow man.

In addition- many insurance companies do cancel policies after a catastrophic illness and if not raise the rates so high that a person can no longer afford to pay it. I know, I have had the experience with a very large American insurance company. Private Insurance is a scam- their goal is to make as much money as possible off the misery of others, That is why Healthcare must be a human right and administered as such by Governments. Private insurance needs to be put out of business.

The facts are plain: as we get older, the demands we place on the healthcare system tend to increase almost exponentially. So, even if the Thai government were to allow retired "farangs" to join the Thai healthcare system, the rate at which they would need to be charged for that privilege would necessarily be very high indeed. To do otherwise would be grossly unfair to the rest of the Thai population who will have been paying in from an early age when their drain on the system will, on average,  have been negligible.

10 minutes ago, Gonefortea said:

Mostly agree but in my eyes the UK health care is second to none. The dedication of the doctors and the nurses is phenomenal, this is based on first hand knowledge by the way.

Interesting! I have experienced "first hand" the health care systems in 7 different countries. The UK and four other countries where I have lived and worked plus of course Thailand and lastly Germany where I was treated but never lived. The best I have experienced is Luxembourg. Presumably, you, yourself, also have wide ranging experience of healthcare systems other than the UK; what countries have you lived in and why do you think their healthcare systems are not up to the standard of the NHS? What makes you insult medical staff in other healthcare systems by implying that, compared to the staff in the NHS, they are less dedicated to their patients?

One of the criteria that I would judge it on is availability. For example:

Can I see a GP at any time, day or night, weekday or weekend without an appointment? In the UK for a huge percentage of patients the answer is no. In Luxembourg the answer is yes.

Can I easily find a dentist who offers treatment under the healthcare system. In the UK the answer is often no or there are long waiting lists. In Luxembourg, the answer is yes, of course, all dentists offer treatment under the healthcare system.

Are there long waiting lists for routine surgery and is such surgery regularly cancelled due to a lack of beds for the patient to recover in? 

In the UK, surgeons often spend hours every day twiddling their thumbs because there is no bed available so they can't operate on scheduled patients whose surgery has in many cases already been cancelled on one or more previous occasions. In Luxembourg that virtually never happens as their hospital bed occupancy rate is only just over 70% whereas in the UK many hospitals run at close to 100% occupancy. The same applies to intensive care beds.

Can I easily and quickly get an appointment to see a specialist if I need one. In the UK, no! In Luxembourg, Yes! I needed a non-urgent appointment  to see a cardiologist for an "aged 50+ routine heart check" (something the NHS doesn't do because they can't afford it). I was offered an appointment two days after my doctor referred me; I wasn't able to get time off work at such short notice so I settled for one ten days later. My brother, who is a senior consultant physician in the NHS, said that in his hospital, I would have waited between 6 and 18 months for such an appointment.

I could go on for several pages but let's leave it at that, eh.

Do I know anything about the NHS? Yes, my brother spent his whole career as a hospital doctor ending up as a senior consultant in one of the largest hospitals in the UK, my niece was a nurse in that same hospital, one of my nephews is a manager in the NHS and another is senior manager in the Blood Transfusion service. My father worked for the NHS from its formation in 1947 to the day he died, my mother was a nurse and even I have worked for it! Why, you could almost call the NHS the family business.

http://www.wort.lu/en/lifestyle/legatum-institute-luxembourg-has-best-healthcare-in-the-world-says-study-587ccd88a5e74263e13a9127

21 minutes ago, cheapskatesam said:

Our country (UK) is being robbed blind by foreigners and it's a fact. We'll never get the full facts of health tourism 

 

There are loads and loads of Europeans from the likes of Poland, Romania and Hungary that have cronically serious conditions and they make the decision to come to the UK.. "work" for a few months to become habitually resident then proceed to extract hundreds of thousands of £ worth of operations and drugs from the NHS. This technically is not counted as health tourism because its all "legal" and above board

What utter nonsense! if, as you say: "We'll never get the full facts of health tourism" then where are you getting your facts from, eh? 

If I was a would be health care tourist, I'd choose to go to a country with decent healthcare provision not a creaking heap of sh1t like the NHS!

When I worked in Luxembourg, I was entitled to seek healthcare from any country anywhere in the world that I wished and I did indeed get dental treatment in Germany that was paid for by the Luxembourg Caisse Nationale de Santé (CNS) and medical treatment in Thailand that was also paid for by the CNS. Most EU nationals (except the bloody benighted British) are likewise entitled to seek treatment in any other country that they choose and that treatment will be paid for by their equivalent of the CNS. Anyone who obtains employment in any country in the EU will automatically be covered by the local healthcare services as indeed they absolutely should be; in fact anyone who comes from anywhere into the UK (or any other decent country) will automatically become eligible for healthcare the moment they start work.  

Stop reading adult comics like the Sun, the Express, and the Daily Mail and open your eyes a bit, eh?

4 minutes ago, off road pat said:

It's exactly the same health care system in Belgium !!!!

Yes, I lived in Belgium for a while and I found the healthcare system there OK as well, except if you a self employed in which case it is one of the biggest rip-offs in the western world.

If you are self employed, the vast sum you have to pay for for cover for "petits risques" is unaffordable for any normal person whilst the contributions that employers have to make to the government on behalf or their employees are simply outrageous.

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

Sounds like a great system.  I hope UK learns from this.  I particularly agree with the small fee to see a doctor.  A big problem for the UK is doctor's waiting rooms clogged with people who don't need to be there, and A and E suffers with drunks most weekends.

I certainly never objected to paying a modest fee for a visit to my family doctor. Oddly enough, getting prescriptions made up generally, worked out much cheaper than the equivalent in the UK. I certainly never paid as much as I would have done in the UK. The UK adage of "free at the point of delivery" is utter nonsense if you consider prescription charges, patient's charges for dental treatment and almost complete absence of any NHS optical services these days. 

My brother was a consultant in "acute medicine" at one of the biggest hospitals in the UK and he said that well in excess of of 80% of the patient admissions to his speciality were directly or indirectly due to excessive alcohol consumption so your remark about drunks clogging up A+E departments can be extended to include clogging up acute medical wards! 

23 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

How can Healthcare  not be a right when every Constitution ever written states each person has a right to life. Right now in the US- this is a very hot issue because of the rising costs associated with 'Obamacare'. It is  incredible to me that of all the Nations on this Earth that America has the highest defense budget in the World and cannot provide universal healthcare to its citizens and residents and the current President Trump does not have a real plan to provide even what Canada, the UK , Japan or even Thailand has.

 

He does have a plan to raise the defense budget even more while US citizens will continue to die from lack of funds for ever rising healthcare and pharmaceutical costs. The insurance companies; Big Pharma; and those associated with the Medical industry will continue to get wealthier while Americans die and the politicians will support the system because the medical industry and its hangers on will continue to 'lobby'  the politicians.

 

The suckers are the American public who actually believe Government cares about them. Is there no one who will step up and stop this madness?  If there is not a change for the better Worldwide where every person on Earth is assured of healthcare, one day we will see Worldwide revolution and anarchy.

It is entirely mysterious to me, as a European, how it can be that the US spends much, much more, per capita, on healthcare than any other nation on earth and yet Americans are regularly forced into bankruptcy because of medical bills; it seems completely insane.

Until recently, I was living in Luxembourg which, according to at least to one respected international researcher, the Legatum Institute, has the best healthcare system in the world. Its citizens also enjoy one of the longest lifespans in the world; maybe the two are related! If you are salaried in Luxembourg, your contribution to the government healthcare budget is deducted directly from your salary and is a straight percentage of your applicable earnings. As a retirée, it is deducted directly from your pension; my contribution was 31€/month after I retired. There are no exclusions for pre-existing conditions, or for accidents when drunk (excluded from most insurance policies to the chagrin of many a holiday-maker here). There are fees that the patient has to pay; for example, a visit to a family doctor is around 39 Euros of which only around 35 Euros is refunded and there is a ceiling, a maximum sum you can be asked to pay for prescriptions and other treatment over the course of a year this is related to your income so that the retired on small pensions and the low paid will be able to recover most of the patients charges. I have never experienced health care as good as I was offered in Luxembourg!

15 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

medical records get removed from the GP after a few years

you need to re-register and request your records from a central store

That appears to be correct. I never told anyone in the UK that I was moving overseas so I assumed that my registration with my old GP would still be alive and that my medical records would still be at his practice. Not so; my registration had be expunged and the records had been sent to a central storage facility. When I was on holiday in my sometime hometown

I had the gross misfortune to come across a "Jobs-worth". The address on my records file had been recorded slightly wrongly (No 40 in the road I lived instead of No 42) and despite the fact that the chances of there being another NHS patient with my combination of Christian names, date of birth and extremely rare surname living next door to where I actually  lived tend towards zero, she refused to associate me with my medical records. The silly bitch even used the famous words "...more than my jobs worth - data protection act!" Apparently, common sense no longer trumps complying with ill thought through legislation even if it could mean putting the patient's life at risk. 

59 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Confusing to me anyone speculating Social Security pays overseas costs? No Medicare or Social Security pays overseas costs. Period.

I am assuming that you are talking ONLY about the USA.There are lots of nationalities on this forum so it's probably best to be specific about which country's services you are citing. 

The Social Security where I was living until recently, Luxembourg, do pay all overseas costs up to the maximum fees applicable in the "home" country. I was twice treated in hospital here in Thailand, whilst on holiday and the Luxembourg Social Security paid the bills in full. I believe the same applies in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands and doubtless many other European countries.

5 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

Not an insurer but a cooperative, which is more like a club than a business and those paying in would be members not customers.  A non-profit organisation does not mean people would work on a voluntary basis, as administrators and other staff would be paid for their services similar as with most charities.

 

Regarding the funds required; an example, if 2000 members paid in 5000 baht per month, that makes a total of 10 million baht yielded in every month and assuming that not all 2000 members will become seriously ill within the first month of operation then the cooperative has a good chance of succeeding. Also it would have to work on a minimum and maximum basis, meaning not covering medical under 200000 baht so that minor health issues do not place a strain on the funds and then a maximum limit of funds available to a members amounts would be estimated. There would also have to be a period limitations. Example; a long term cancer patient or those affected by long term health problems could not claim off the funds for indefinite periods.

 

I would not describe it as a downside, but yes, it would need experts in the field to setup such a scheme credible enough to convince members to pay in, maybe it could be run by a charity or what we used to call a workers cooperative.  It would be difficult to setup but certainly not impossible.

I was using the term "insurer" in its broadest sense but really I am playing devil's advocate here. I like the idea but I'm trying to think of reasons why it wouldn't work. 

If you are suggesting an excess (co-pay) of 200,000 Baht, I don't think you would get many takers at 5000Baht/month. I am enthusiastic about the idea but I would not subscribe at that cost/excess ratio.

Let me know if you go ahead; I was a database programmer until I retired and you will most likely need one of those.

51 minutes ago, cyberfarang said:

The points you make are very valid. I don`t think too often because it makes my brain hurt but this thread has really got me thinking.

 

I am British and not having returned to the UK for several years nor having any homes there I am no longer eligible for medical treatment under the National Health.  I am also at the medical insurance bygone age, meaning at my age many medical insurance companies won`t even take me on or I`d have to pay a King`s ransom for premiums every month. As a retiree in Thailand I am not entitled to cheap or free medical care under the Thai social security system, so in fact I am in medical limbo and if the crunch came to the crunch I could end up at the tender mercies of the private hospitals where the final medical bills could be anything, the sky`s the limit with them.

 

So here`s some questions for anyone who maybe in the know: Could it be possible to create an expat cooperative in Thailand whereas members pay an amount of money into a fund each month that would cover medical fees for serious health issues as in the tragic case of the OP, with certain conditions imposed?

 

Here`s an example; each member could pay a sum of 5000 baht per month and considering the probably thousands of expats living in Thailand who are in similar situations as me, most would jump at the opportunity and the kitty would draw in millions of bahts each month, more than enough to give all it`s members coverage. So come on you TV experts, give us your opinion?

What you are proposing is presumably a "not for profit" insurer which is what BUPA is, or at least used to be. The advantage of such an organization is that it could potentially negotiate some very good deals with local hospitals. The downside is that you would need actuarial experts to calculate the premiums such that they would be high enough to cover your risk but not so high as to make them unaffordable. The "Mutuelle" (top up insurance to cover the risks that the Social Security only partly cover) in Luxembourg that I subscribed to, massively miscalculated the demand when the introduced dental and optical cover and made a thumping loss that year, necessitating a massive premium hike and a savage cut in benefits the following year! That's the danger.

1 minute ago, Monomial said:

 

Given the way Thai insurance companies work, anyone with a BMI of over 35 and high blood pressure is effectively excluded from health insurance in Thailand. All you can get is personal accident insurance. Sure, you can BUY health insurance (with every imaginable thing excluded),  but you can't actually USE health insurance if you need it (because everything is excluded).

 

It is a scam.

 

Self insure. It is the only fair system.

 

This I find hysterically funny. From BMI = 30 upwards, a person is considered to be clinically obese.  If a patient's BMI is 35 or more and they have high BP (something they are extremely likely to have), they are a walking medical time bomb! It would utterly irresponsible of any medical insurer to take them on. They need to spend the money they would have spent on the insurance premium, on bariatric surgery. OK, there are a few - a very, very few people, body builders, who can reach very high BMIs whilst being muscle-bound rather than burdened down with fat and there are a few people who have medical conditions that cause them to put on weight; however, for the most part, people who are grossly overweight eat too much and/or drink too much and often show a marked preference for extremely calorie dense foods (think: fried breakfast, McDonalds, KFC, pizza).   

At that level of obesity, the patient is at massive risk of Type II diabetes with all the enhanced health risks that implies. They are at grave risk of fatty liver disease and other hepatic disorders, of heart attack and of cardi-vascular accidents. Moreover the hip, knee and ankle joints will be under the most extreme stress leading, most likely, eventually, to the joint failure. High BP also puts a person at significantly enhanced risk of kidney failure. There's plenty more, but I'll stop there as I'm sure most people will have the message.

In some countries, being clinically obese (BMI => 30 < 35),  severely obese (BMI =>35 ) or morbidly obese (BMI > 40) is so common it is considered normal; according to WHO figures, in the USA 35% of men and 40% of women are clinically obese. In Japan the corresponding figures are: 3.8% of men and 3.4% of women. In Thailand the figures are 4.7% of men and 9.1% of women. However, medically, being obese, is emphatically NOT normal nor is it in any way healthy.

6 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I don't quite follow that. By the time you finally see he and his bike at the far left edge of the video, the bike already scraping along the edge of the overpass wall and then he's going over the side. What caused his bike to go into the side wall isn't shown on the video, as far as I can see.

 

The side area certain appears wide enough to accommodate a motorcycle, and it didn't look like the car with the dashcam was crowding to the left and edging the guy into the overpass retaining wall. So to me, the video tells me how he died (going over the side) -- but not why.

 

What we can't see is whether the car with the dash-cam or another vehicle behind it started indicating left and that caused our unfortunate rider to instinctively swerve left.

Not sure about this theatrical Hippocratic oath business. I have had this discussion with doctors from the UK and they all said they never took any such oath; "what are you talking about" is their usual reaction. Maybe this is something some countries do, others not.

5 minutes ago, Sumarianson said:

7 hours ago, Suradit69 said:

But it isn't regardless ...
 
When there was discussion about requiring tourists and foreign residents to pay for or have proof of medical insurance there were howls of protest on TV.
 
If you're traveling you should have insurance coverage and if you decide to settle in Thailand you should face the fact that medical needs have to be planned for. Waiting until you get sick or have an accident and then carrying on about poor me and someone should give me care for free,  is just irresponsible. 
 
It's tragic that this man died, although it apparently had nothing to do with his infected leg (which had been treated). If he had survived the accident he would have been treated for his injuries in hospital, but whether or not he could pay for it, someone would have to.
 
One of the things that affects the prices we all have to pay for medical treatment is the provision that hospitals have to make to cover the cost of treating people who can't pay. If you want to pay for those without funds or insurance, then please step forward with cash in hand the next time some foreigner is reported in hospital with hundreds of thousands in unpaid bills.
 
Even in western nanny states medical treatment for non-residents/citizens is limited or non-existent.
 
 
 
 RIP Christian.

 In the first instance you are completely wrong with regard to the UK.
It may be the policy of the Government not to treat aliens. However in practice no one is refused.
Secondly your approach in this very sad affair is cold and callous. Not everything is about money. The Governments of the Country where the individual had paid tax and insurance all his life should be held responsible for his bill if he has a right to SS in his own Country if he were resident there. Just because you move country should not absolve a scheme that you have funded and paid for all your life of their responsibility under that scheme.
It may be that you might be oblidged to cover any costs that exceed what would normally be paid in that country, other than that you paid for insurance! You should have a right to be treated.
This would mean free care in Thailand as the majority of hospitals and procedures here are cheaper than most western countries.
I dare say that if an individual took say the UK NHS to court, I think they would have a case!



Sent from my SM-G935F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app
 

The act of parliament that set up the NHS says that cover is only provided within the UK. Unfair as it may be, I don't think anyone taking the government to court would have a leg to stand on.

3 minutes ago, redwinecheese said:

At least her passport won't be confiscated like here in Thailand till she pay her dues! at least that is what I know before Brexit...

Yes, that would hardly be rational, would it. So the NHS spends hundreds of thousands to save her life and that of her babies then leaves her to fend for herself in the UK where she would have no right to work and would therefore be dependent on Social Security thus costing the taxpayer even more money!