w94005m

1 hour ago, alacrity said:

Why more shocked? There's 'good' and not 'so good' landlords and tenants throughout the world. Your landlord  seems to belong in the second category. Although I doubt the sudden mass failure scenario, I'm sure a suitable compromise should have been possible.

 

If your statements are correct; dump the landlord, rental properties are hardly a scarcity these days. If not dump them anyway, as it's unlikely they would have your best interests at heart after your malignment.

I mistakenly thought there would be more familiarity with normal landlord responsibilities.

35 minutes ago, Grumpy one said:

Looks like replacing the hose yourself may have been the smarter option 

In hindsight, but despite doing a lot of fully inspected plumbing and electrical work in the US, I didn't want to be in any way liable should something happen on utility supply. I'd already installed a trap on the kitchen sink as unsurprisingly, I did not want sewer gas in the apartment, but there's no question of any problem with that.

Never guessed that he would make me liable  anyway. Of course I've done that now with a suitable stainless steel coated and interior braided hose.

5 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

What does your lease say ? It can be that the tenant is responsible for repairs in Thailand and there would be a clause in the lease that says as much.

 

Nothing stated

I've been a landlord in UK and US for close to 15 years, but decided to rent here as it seemed to make the most sense, but a recent experience has me questioning that.

One night while I slept, the toilet hose failed and a split developed. It was a cheap, old hose and the landlord should have replaced it some time ago. I always make it a point as a tenant to never change anything related to water or electric supply, as I don't want any liability issues.

However, in this case, despite the hose being an old, cheap substandard plastic hose with no interior or exterior protection, the landlord had me compensate the condo below from the water that seeped below. Thankfully, it was not a large sum. Despite telling the landlord that I thought that was 100% wrong, he kept with charging me.

I know if that happened in the UK or USA, as a landlord, I would be 100% liable for any damage caused and obviously I have insurance to cover such circumstances. I also make darn sure that everything is up to code and as reliable as possible.  I am also responsible for replacing any equipment that fails, such as ovens, microwaves or air conditioning units.

I'm now worried that Thailand operates differently and I could be liable for failings of my landlord to have such fittings not up to code or indeed anything that stops working through normal use. If that is the case, I clearly need to reconsider if renting is the best policy for me.

1 hour ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

There's nothing on that link that says 12.8 days is the absolute maximum. One paper on there says that data from China shows a mean (average) incubation period from 1.8 to 12.8 days. 

 

Also, although the date on that paper itself may be more recent, it's actually a summary of older data, most of which is also from January to March.

 

One of the papers referenced on that link provides exactly the statistic I was talking about, as follows:

 

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32150748/

 

14 days is the gold standard today for a very good reason. Move on. Early facts especially from China are questionable. 

"The incubation period is believed to be a function of the initial infective dose, speed of replication of the pathogen within the host, and the host defense mechanisms.¹⁶ Estimation of the incubation period of a novel pathogen is vital for prevention and control; for example, to determine the appropriate duration of quarantine or observation of an exposed individuals.¹⁶ Different studies have revealed that the incubation period of SARS-CoV-2 varies across different countries; the incubation period ranges from 1.8 to 12.8 days (mean) in China, 4 days (median) in Singapore, 3.6 days (median) in South Korea, and 4.9 days (median) globally.^{17, 18, 19, 20, 21}"

In fact, this report states that 14 days is probably excessive, but it's there to ensure that there is virtually no chance of not picking up someone with the virus. Your quote of 99% at 14 days is not backed up. Here is the conclusion and as you note, this considered all available studies, including this early questionable one you quoted:

This meta-analysis revealed that the pooled mean incubation period of COVID-19 was 5.7 days (95% CI, 5.1–6.4). Hence, the current 14-day quarantine policy and contact-based surveillance protocol should be revised and shortened to 7 days, accompanied with longer passive monitoring to track potential asymptomatic positively skewed and false negative cases. In addition, the close contacts of confirmed case patients should be traced, quarantined, and tested starting 5 days before the onset of symptoms.

1 hour ago, w94005m said:

Thank you for posting, but you should note that came from the middle of March!

 

Testing and knowledge has expanded substantially since then and I stand 100% behind my comment that > 14 days is staggeringly unlikely. 

And here is a more recent and extensive survey with the absolute max at 12.8 days

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7548076/#:~:text=( Table 1 ).-,Pooled average incubation period of SARS-CoV-2,South Korea and China%2C respectively.

1 hour ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

According to the research, it takes longer than 14 days for the virus to incubate  in around 1 in 100 cases. There was one case in China which documented a 27-day incubation period.

 

Coronavirus incubation period

 

I'm not sure that a 1% chance, although admittedly small, qualifies as staggeringly unlikely.

Thank you for posting, but you should note that came from the middle of March!

Testing and knowledge has expanded substantially since then and I stand 100% behind my comment that > 14 days is staggeringly unlikely. 

11 minutes ago, Seismic said:

When you have been through the 14 day quarantine and tested negative for Covid-19, you probably do not expect the come down with it at a later date. What is more interesting is who she caught it from, or is 14 days quarantine actually enough.

More likely she caught it whilst quarantining. Notable symptoms are on average about 5 days after exposure. Staggeringly unlikely that 14 days is insufficient for a positive PCR test. 

Slightly off track, as a dual national, but I have at different times come in on one or the other and no problem at immigration.

However, bank was a different deal once I'd opened a bank account. A few years later when wanting ID, they insisted on my original passport which I had, but wasn't the one I now had my visa stamp in. Despite giving them both, they wouldn't accept that as acceptable for id'ing me.

7 hours ago, declanny said:

This policy from Luma Health actually sounds pretty good.

 

Has anyone gone with it? Any catches?

That is travel insurance, which typically will cover you for accidents, rather than treatment for conditions which come up. For those I suspect you would be repatriated.

It may also only apply for an upcoming trip and not applicable if you are already in Thailand. 

Typical travel insurances are normally cheaper than this.

3 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Premiums seem to have gone up since covid, that's why deductibles of 50k+ are worthwhile, if you gamble you won't claim. 

 

A friend tells me that with Pacific Cross if your medical costs exceed your cover you then pay 10% of the costs, Pacific Cross the balance, no one has confirmed that but worth getting a quote from them and checking the 10% thing 

Agreed on the deductibles and that was the first thing I said to the broker, but it didn't make as big a difference as I was expecting.

That's good to know regarding the blowing your limits deal with Pacific Cross. That's really attractive if that's true.

On 9/21/2020 at 6:41 AM, scubascuba3 said:

100,000 is very high for your age, circ 50k is more like it.

Try

April International

Pacific Cross

 

For Covid only cover maybe best to try a broker such as AA Insurance Brokers

I suspect that the deductibles that you see at 50,000 baht are notably less than GolfnBeer mentioned. His numbers seem in the ballpark for what I'm seeing.

I'd been similarly interested and my quotes at 58 years old were roughly:

1 - AXA 56,000 Baht premium, but only gave me a max coverage limit for the year of 70,000 Baht for Cancer or Kidney problems. And a total annual limit of 500,000 Baht. Not very near the COVID equivalent for visitors of 30,000,000 Baht! Frankly, this seemed laughable. The prices are ridiculous for the coverage.

2 - A COVID only insurance ($100,000 limit) for 40,000 Baht with a 80,000 Baht deductible. That was with April International.

3 - A general April International My Health Essential plan (basic accidents coverage) for SE Asia excluding Singapore - Max policy limit in brackets, all in Baht:

73,815    (16,375,000)
62,081    (3,275,000)

I'm considering the latter, as I'm guessing that even the lower limit of roughly $10,000 will cover most COVID situations unless I'm in a desperate state. In which case, probably screwed anyway! However, my pre-existing conditions will probably send this notably higher and I'll probably end up winging it.

These were from AA Insure.

11 hours ago, Nout said:

Within the last 24 hours? Why do you hate Thailand?

So just because I've questioned the non-presence of covid-19 in Thailand, I hate the country.

What incredible logic LOL!

11 hours ago, Nout said:

I feel safer here and better protected than the USA, UK or Australia.  If you don't then go home.

Yeah, I feel a lot safer here too. And I would feel even safer if everyone remained cautious, rather than blindly assuming the govt line based on limited and an unrevealed testing virus strategy with zero antibody testing.

When testing of the tiny number of people who leave the country reveals positive, unexplained cases, as a former epidemiologist, it's enough to make me seriously question the govt stats.

Additionally, when a country with the thoroughness of the islands of New Zealand gets a notable subsequent outbreak, it's also hard to believe that Thailand with so many bordered countries, especially Myanmar and maybe not so thorough a quarantine for official visitors, has not had any cases. And that's bearing in mind the unlikely situation that it was at one point covid-19 free.

11 hours ago, asiacurious said:

What is the source of this information?

https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/thailand-influenza-pneumonia#:~:text=Thailand%3A Influenza and Pneumonia&text=According to the latest WHO,Thailand %2370 in the world.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6804544_The_incidence_of_pneumonia_in_rural_Thailand

The estimated annual incidence of 580/100,000 with a population of about 70 million, suggests something in the order of 400,000 per year.

2 hours ago, dabhand said:

Maybe false positives as with a previous case back in August. Japan appear to use a saliva based test for the initial check on arrival before using the more thorough RT-PCR test as a follow up. 

https://www.pattayamail.com/thailandnews/japanese-man-found-with-covid-19-after-departing-thailand-tested-negative-311417

 

 

And if they were doing as many tests as claimed here, there should be a notable number of false positives reported, but none for many months, which is not credible.

All I know is that I would trust Japan for testing and retesting far more than Thailand. And doubtless they have retested them in the last 6 days, as they did with the earlier case you refer to with a PCR test for sure. Although it is reported that the initial test is a PCR test as well.

https://www.ana.co.jp/en/jp/topics/notice200501/

Complete waste of money. This work needs incredible experience, knowledge and resources. Even in advanced countries and huge medical companies, this is major work with no guarantee of success.

Save the money to buy the vaccines once available or a license to produce, like India. Though as Thailand has almost no capacity for the latter, that's questionable.

18 minutes ago, Blumpie said:

Thailand just claimed to do 600 tests and found not one positive case.  I find that hard to believe - the amount of false positives on these tests is fairly high.  

It seems like they are covering up their numbers.  I'm just speculating, but this recent case is making me think that all these numbers are utter nonsense.  

Especially when you look at the 3 recent positive cases in Japan from Thai travellers. A remarkably high percentage for the relatively small number flying to Japan.

It does indeed seem highly likely that the virus is a lot more widespread than hoped, but maybe the viral exposures here are low due to masks and generally not in a/c environments and that's keeping most people as asymptomatic. There's never been a good explanation for why Thailand has 'escaped', even with the rubbish testing results.

Cases do tend to circulate for a while before the spread is actually picked up. Let's hope we're not in for some bad news further down the line.

I don't know if this is available outside of the UK, but I have used the following online site which is run by an awesomely qualified consultant, who I've been very impressed with. If you're looking for an easy first opinion, you just need to get some quality high resolution pictures to them. He will be able to give you a quick opinion on whether it is cancerous and should be checked out locally or just needs monitoring.

www.dermatologist.co.uk

I have had 2 skin cancers mole removals, thankfully at an early stage and one which does not appear to be. The latter they are simply monitoring with digital photos to see if it changes.

I would just note that I did have a similar experience with DHL, but mine was with Medical Equipment rather than Medication which was also unavailable in Thailand, but in common use elsewhere in the developed world. Mine was for Diabetic Continuous Glucose Monitoring Dexcom G6. The topic title is "Diabetic CGM".

That also noted the need to have Doctor certification and emphasis that the supplies are purely for personal use, but unlike with you, DHL Thailand were in my case utterly inept. Both whilst trying to progress my sent supplies, where they were useless and then after illegally signing for its destruction, trying to wipe the issue away.

The only reason for adding onto your excellent points, which mirrored my own, was that I had to resort to DHL UK to resolve the issue. So if you're having no luck with DHL Thailand, then work with the sending DHL organisation. They were able to have DHL Thailand and customs resolve the issue.

As well as allowing me to successfully send another identical package, they also compensated me for the initial loss, which they admitted was their responsibility.

On 8/10/2020 at 4:54 PM, Sheryl said:

This is the only one I know of that has a websitr

 

http://www.bangkokdrugstore.com/

 

In addition, Medconsult Asia does med refills with delivery by courier. They can get pretty much anything that is nto a controlled substance and is available in Thailand.   https://www.medconsultasia.com/

 

Some individual pharmacies will accept faxed or telephoned orders and ship but do not have websites and you'd need a Thai speaker to help.

I use bangkokdrugstore.com and they've been great with me, but a lot of the time you will need to google for the Thai generic name first.

For example, omeprazole will return nothing, but the Thai generic name of Miracid works.

If you have no luck finding a 'common' drug, email them. I've always found them to be pretty quick and helpful.

Also. the order has to be prepaid with a bank transfer. No credit cards or COD