8 hours ago, Martin71 said:

Ride a good few times a day.. if one of the 'black beltchers' is in front I drop back.. if safe to do so of course.. I am also quite rural.. and the local driving habits are erm ... interesting..

I live in the sticks (rural South Isaan), and fortunately in my neck of the woods masks are a rarity and nowhere are they imposed.

13 minutes ago, Liquorice said:

You can't and don't extend a Non Imm 0 visa, and you know better than that.

Of course I know, it was short-speak which everybody understands, and in this case there is no risk of it putting people on the wrong foot.

7 minutes ago, Liquorice said:

No idea why you want to complicate your given position.

New Non O based on Thai spouse for re-entry to Thailand.
1 year permit of stay based on Thai spouse from Immigration.

 

Less hassle, less cost.

You can take out voluntary Health Insurance as desired from any Insurer, as opposed to being restricted to a TGIA Insurer.

Good advice by @Liquorice 

Don't get yourself in the quagmire of the Non Imm OA compliant Health-insurance, which is mandated when applying for and extending a Non Imm OA Visa.

Due to that @#$%^ mandatory Health-Insurance it is only in very specific cases that applying for that Visa might be considered (e.g. if you do not have or definitely do not want to keep +400K on a personal Thai bank-account).

Re the other option you mention:

Applying for and extending a Non Imm O Visa for reason of retirement does indeed involve far less administrative red-tape than the Non Imm O Visa for reason of marriage.  But the latter only requires +400K on your personal Thai bank-account in the period from 2 months pre application till the actual Permission to stay stamped is stamped in your passport, while the Non Imm O Visa for reason of retirement requires you to permanently keep +800K during 5 months of the year and +400K during the intermediate 7 months.

Here a link to a study whether COVID-19 vaccination affects long-COVID symptoms.

> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38324547/

And this small scale study confirms that the vaccinated have a higher chance of getting long-COVID than non-vaccinated people.

Note: As it is a short study, I posted full text below.

29 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Thailand MoPH Weekly COVID report for May 5 - 11, 2024:

 

--1,880 new COVID hospitalizations, averaging 269 per day, up 88 / 4.9% from the prior week

--11 new COVID deaths, down 1 / 8.3% from the prior week

--588 current COVID patients hospitalized in serious condition (pneumonia symptoms), up 87 / 17.4% from the prior week (dark purple)

--237 current COVID patients hospitalized requiring intubation/ventilation to breathe, up 50 / 27% from the prior week (light purple)

 

Cumulative figures since the start of the current year are COVID new hospitalizations (14,937) & COVID deaths (104).

 

Of the 11 new official COVID deaths, the MoPH below is reporting that 4 were male and 7 female. By age, 10 were 70 and above, and one was age 60-69.

 

 

https://ddc.moph.go.th/covid19-dashboard/?dashboard=main

 

Reported weekly COVID new hospitalizations have now risen for the past 9 consecutive weeks since mid-March and more than tripled over that period, as follows for the weeks ending:

 

March 16 -- 501

March 23 -- 630

March 30 -- 728

April 6 -- 774

April 13 -- 849

April 20 -- 1,004

April 27 -- 1,672

May 4 -- 1,792

May 11 -- 1,880

 

The latest weekly new COVID hospitalizations total is Thailand's highest since mid-June 2023, when the total hit 2,158. Thailand's weekly new COVID hospitalizations peaked last spring at 3,085 in early June amid a similar run-up that began in mid-April.

As I wrote several times before, one should look at these figures in context. 

The population of Thailand stood at 71.85 million in January 2024.

And so these cumulative figures since the start of the current year translate into: 

# COVID new hospitalizations (14,937) > stands for 1 COVID hospitalization per 4.810 persons during that 4.5 month period

# COVID deaths (104) > stands for 1 COVID death per 690.865 persons during that 4.5 month period

Pretty scary he?

Oh yes, and of the 11 new official COVID deaths, the MoPH below is reporting that 4 were male and 7 female. By age, 10 were 70 and above, and one was age 60-69. 

I think that pretty much shows that COVID could be a small risk for the ELDERLY, but that it is a Big Nothing-burger for the younger and working-age population. 

And hey, why would the Public Health authorities want EVERYBODY to be up-to-date with their Covid-shots considering that they now finally admit that the shots have 'rare uncommon' adverse effects?  And remember that these adverse effects are all short-term...

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Why are you ignoring the explanation by one of the authors? Don't like his explanation or maybe you know better?

The study mentions" "we observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 as well as pericarditis after the first and fourth dose of mRNA-1273, and third dose of ChAdOx1, in the 0–42 days risk period."

And the cherry on the cake > Quote from the Funding Statement of that study: "The GCoVS project is supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as part of a financial assistance award totalling US$10,108,491 with 100 % per cent funded by CDC/HHS."

Whose bread i eat...

Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X24001270?via%3Dihub

24 minutes ago, stevenl said:

I trust the study authors more than a anti-vax conspiracy loon.

> Researchers found HIGHER than expected cases that they deemed met the threshold to be potential safety signals for multiple AESIs, including for Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), myocarditis, and pericarditis.

Try the free https://www.chess.com/play/online

It allows to play short (10 min each) or regular games with opponents of similar strength (ranging from absolute beginner to seasoned professional).

The site features also puzzles, learning (e.g. opening theory) and much much more.

12 minutes ago, proton said:

 

Just had a look the 'controversial' Thai music thread on TT, er because it was in Thai is still locked! so much for free speech. Not worth supporting.

 

Smithydog

• 

Posted October 14, 2021

Topic has been permanently locked from further postings. 

One member has chosen not to respect the Moderators' requests and has gone on to abuse a Moderator. Yinn, the Moderation Panel will address you further directly regarding your comments and actions that forced us to close this thread.

Moderators also identified multiple videos that fail to meet Forum Guidelines and they have been deleted for breaches of the following:

Rule 1 - Use English Language only when posting.

The current TT Head Moderator is still regularly confronted with the 'heritage' from the previous moderators, and in such cases he removes the blocks,  A simple request suffices...

6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Some seem to find humour in that.  I suspect they'll toss the invitation.  No problem.  As I said, there's now a forum to suit everyone.

And it is not an either/or choice.  The current AN Forum has its merits and strong points, reason that I am a contributing member to both Fora.  But open and honest debate on controversial subjects, allowing all points of view is not one of them. 

2 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

 

I have heard THAT one, before....

> Only this time, it is genuine as the consequence of a Free Speech policy is that it also applies to viewpoints that are controversial. 

8 minutes ago, ChaiyaTH said:

To be honest, it would be less than a day work, to setup a forum using the same software, to have the same forums and subforums, but then with free speech. Or could just use like https://mybb.com/

AseanNow and ThaigerTalk can peacefully co-exist besides each other (I am a member of both). 

It goes without saying that due to its much larger member-size some AseanNow sub-fora on non-controversial subjects are quite interesting (e.g. the Visa-forum) and these are my mean reason to visit and post on AN.

16 hours ago, proton said:

You have not missed anything, keep away from it!

On the contrary: you are missing a lot...

8 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

No it doesn't.. And yes, the age of COVID deaths in the UK and elsewhere has been periodically reported, including in posts here on this  forum.

 

But none of that changes the fact that older people who die from COVID, on average, would have otherwise had years left to live, because those who actually survive into their 70s and 80s (absent COVID) have longer life expectancies on average than the overall population averages at large.

 

But, it is a common claim that COVID deniers make it order to falsely minimize the impact of the pandemic.

If the common claim you are talking about is that

"The average age of Covid-19 deaths is higher than the average life expectancy, which means that people who get Covid live longer." 

that 'deduction' is indeed nonsense. 

And nobody on this Forum has claimed that.

What we DO claim is that the average age of Covid-19 deaths is very high (+80 years in UK).  

And that begs the question why the push to jab EVERYBODY irrespective of age and risk, considering the then unknown adverse effects of these jabs.

Cui bono (who profits) is the question that almost always leads to the motive behind seemingly unlogical or nonsensical actions. 

9 minutes ago, Robert Paulson said:

The average age of covid death is the real key. And of course it’s never reported

In UK the average age of covid death it is 80,3 years of age.

Source: https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/averageageofthosewhohaddiedwithcovid19

And this tells you all you need to know about the necessity of pushing the covid-jabs on the entire population...

10 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Sorry, but that's simply not the way it works in the U.S., where most people have to voluntarily decide if they want to get vaccinated or not.

 

If it were, the above chart would not be showing what it did, which was 70% of U.S. adult COVID hospitalizations in the subject study were not up-to-date with the recommended COVID vaccinations.

Yep, huge market-potential for a Covid-vaccination subscription service to keep you 'updated' with your shots.  The wet dream of Pfizer and Moderna would be to make that mandatory...

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

"It is well established that COVID itself caused a significantly increased risk of these related blood clots and also thrombocytopenia (low platelet count). An August 2021, analysis of 30 million vaccinated people in the UK showed that the risks of thrombocytopenic events were much higher following a COVID infection, compared with any COVID-related vaccine."

Say no more, say nor more...

13 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Average Covid-19 victim dies years before they otherwise would

The idea that people who die of Covid have lived longer than average fails to appreciate these are the very people who would have been expected to live much longer. As we have written before, people dying of Covid lose about a decade of life, on average.

...

An 82-year-old man can expect to live for another 7.4 years on average, while an 85-year-old woman can expect to live another 6.87 years on average. 

 

https://fullfact.org/news/boris-johnson-whatsapp-covid-life-expectancy-cummings/

Pure nonsense!  The average age of a person dying with/from COVID was 82.3 years of age.  How could you then lose about about 10 years of your life?  That implies they would have lived on average till 92.3 yeas of age if they hadn't caught COVID.  

As I wrote before > That average of 82.3 years of age for persons dying with/from COVID shows that the large majority of those that died were already very senior, and for every tragedy of a young person dying from COVID there must have been dozens of +82 year old seniors that died from/with COVID.

2 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

AFAIK, contrary to your claim above, COVID vaccines were never "mandated" "for EVERYBODY irrespective of their age," not in the UK, not in the US,  not in Thailand, etc.

 

The loud proclamations here of various posters boasting that they were never vaccinated and never will be attest to that -- not to mention the global statistics showing that only about two-thirds of the global population ever received the basic original two-dose COVID vaccinations.  And rates for youngsters are far less than that. So clearly there was no "EVERYBODY" mandate.

 

 

https://data.who.int/dashboards/covid19/vaccines?n=c

 

What there were, in various places to varying extents hardly involving "EVERBODY", were selective requirements by some employers that their employees needed to be vaccinated if they wanted to continue in their jobs, especially in the health care sectors, and mandates by some countries to show proof of vaccination if one wanted to travel internationally.

Nice try to change the subject.  

The risk of dying of Covid-19 always has been in the senior part of the population (average age of dying from/with covid-19 being 80,3 years of age). 

A poll in UK showed that people thought the average age of a covid-19 death was 65 years.

And there are millions of young people in their 20s, 30s and 40s that were indeed not mandated to take the jab, but the consequence of not complying would have been loss of their job.  I personally know several young people that reluctantly gave in to the pressure, as they had a family to support.

59 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

A good, and not unexpected, example of misrepresenting what statistics really mean:

Average Covid-19 victim dies years before they otherwise would

What was Claimed: The average age of Covid-19 deaths is higher than the average life expectancy, which means that people who get Covid live longer.

 

Our Verdict: This isn’t how life expectancy works. Life expectancy is an average, pulled down by people who die young. As you age, your life expectancy increases. People dying from Covid-19 lose about a decade of life on average.

 

A set of data called the National Life Tables, produced by the ONS, shows how life expectancy adjusts as a person ages. 

An 82-year-old man can expect to live for another 7.4 years on average, while an 85-year-old woman can expect to live another 6.87 years on average. 

 

https://fullfact.org/news/boris-johnson-whatsapp-covid-life-expectancy-cummings/

 

Of course you have to do die from something (accident, cancer, covid-19, old age).  

And whatever the reason for the death, it will wipe away the 'remaining life expectancy' for your age at moment of death. 

Below the median and mean age in years for the UK population end 2021 (couldn't find any more recent data).

Source: https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/averageageofthosewhohaddiedwithcovid19

> It shows that the average age of dying from/with Covid-19 was 80,3 years of age. 

All those that died at that age FROM THAT CAUSE had their remaining life-expectancy thus wiped out. 

But the crux of the matter is> > Did these figures justify mandating Covid-19 jabs for EVERYBODY irrespective of their age? 

A simple example will illustrate what these figures mean.  

> When somebody died with/from Covid-19 at age 60 (20 years before the average age of dying from Covid-19), that means there would have been 4 people dying at 85 years old to 'make up' for that average, or 2 of 90 years, or 20 of 81 years of age.

> When somebody died with/from Covid-19 at age 40 (40 years before the average age of dying from Covid-19), that means there would have been 8 people dying at 85 years old to 'make up' for that average, or 4 of 90 years, or 40 of 81 years of age.

So, however your slice it or represent it, Covid-19 deaths were abundant among the OLDEST people in the country (average 80,3 years of age).  And there is no denying that it must have been relatively low for the younger and middle-age people, because every death of somebody under 80,3 years of age, has to be 'compensated' by people dying above 80,3 years of age.  

Mandating covid-jabs for teenagers and people in their twenties/thirties amounts to 'pure gaslighting' in the light of the actual age-mortality figures.  

18 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Remember this?

 

Earlier lockdown could have saved lives of 30,000, Hancock tells Covid inquiry

Tens of thousands of lives could have been saved if the UK had locked down three weeks earlier, Matt Hancock has told the Covid inquiry, as he described the operation of Boris Johnson’s Downing Street as undermined by a “culture of fear”.

 

The former health secretary said his staff were abused by Dominic Cummings and that Johnson’s then chief adviser attempted to exclude ministers and even Johnson himself from key decisions at the start of the pandemic, hampering the government’s response.

...

Hancock argued that in retrospect the ideal date for a first lockdown would have been three weeks earlier than the eventual date of 23 March 2020, saying this could have prevented about 90% of the death toll in the first Covid wave, or more than 30,000 lives.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/30/hancock-tells-covid-inquiry-of-toxic-culture-in-johnson-government

 

 

Ha Ha Hancock, are you for real taking that disgraced serial liar serious?

2 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   All those heat testing when entering shops , putting an electronic thermometer to your head .

Did they ever catch even one person with a high temperature ?

I was getting tested numerous times every day , as was everyone else 

Parts of the population, scared stiff by the incessant fear-mongering for the 'deadly virus', demanded assurance that Something Was Done resulting a.o. in the testing craziness. Perception is everything, no matter whether it is sound or effective.