Smokers and Covid-19: Regular cigarette and e-cigarette users face 5,000 fine for lighting up in public

[Matzzon]

7 hours ago, Wiggy said:

If it is true (which I doubt as I’ve heard nothing from real experts) then we should also be fined 5,000 baht for breathing as we might spread it that way. Imbecile. 

I your shoes and with that logical way on examining things should be very careful about calling anybody imbecile. First smoking should not be done in public at all, due to it´s harmful nature to others. After that breathing is necessary, and smoking is not. Wonder who owns the title of imbecile now?

[Matzzon]

7 hours ago, Sambotte said:

It's a joke, right ? ????

No, it´s not! ☠️

[timendres]

2 hours ago, JimmyTheMook said:

Good smokers are absolutely disgusting.

And bad smokers are not? 

[shy coconut]

7 hours ago, Sambotte said:

If real, they just lost my 500.000 bahts elite visa. I'm not kidding.

Unless it's scientifically proved (witch i doubt), that's just a non-sense, have nothing else to do or incompetent, and choose a scapegoat (minority).

What next ? Alcool no it's a majority. Cheese ? Fart being vectors... Coffee ? Farang drug this is.

 

No seriously, it's not so much the thing here, than the feeling : scapegoat and less freedom !

Even USA, or China don't go so far i think.

Crazy.

500.000 bahts. Other country with minimum of freedom (both way, i totally respect non-smokers).

 

I just hope enough people will point out the scientific non-sense here.

What are you saying? Do you have an elite visa or were you just thinking about getting

one?

 

If you have an elite visa already, it is you saying good bye to half a million baht as they

are not refundable.

 

 

[Matzzon]

1 minute ago, NB1986 said:

Matzzon you are wrong, than you should not drive car too as it harms other who drive bicycle, why smoking harms you in Public? All i can see in you is ex smoker who hates everybody around himself now because they smoke and you stopped. 

You are actually right, I am an ex-smoker. However, I never smoked inside and always took precautions of stepping away from people when lighting a cigarette. So, any hate you can show up where it fits. 

What we can see in you, though, is a person that haven´t a clue. Again, comparing something that is deemed a necessity for people to go to and back for work as well using in work, to a harmful habit that are totally unnecessary. That says all I need to know.

[Matzzon]

3 hours ago, Monomial said:

There is absolutely ZERO in the entire paper about its genuine effects on viruses

You shouldn´t read such a complicated document if you can´t connect the dots of probability. And, if there is even a microscopic chance, why take it and why potentially risk other peoples wellbeing?

[Matzzon]

6 hours ago, Sambotte said:

I think we both have no idea about that ????

Virus is very light, so gravity will not affect it too much i think ? No idea.

Droplet can be of any size/weight i guess. Air contain water, droplet ? I mean can stay in air for how long, being a support for virus or not ?... No idea.

 

That's why i wait for ANY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE about that theory of smokers spreading more the virus, looks non-sense to me.

 

Refering to the non-scientific article i mentionned : "The new coronavirus can survive for several hours in air particles" anyway, not sure smoke can make a difference ? Looks like air is enough, for hours.

 

And : "The coronavirus can also become airborne, staying suspended in the air for hours, depending on the heat and humidity, they said."

Heat, and humidity. Nothing about smoke.

 

So i did not find evidence about smoke, first.

 

But mainly : smokers are targeted, when diesel (you SEE smoke from truck every day ! and personaly, make me sick !), old motorcycles, even cars, street-cooking food (i hate that smell toxic), trash burning (every day in Phuket), and the top : HUGE BURNING year after year in the north, and other factor, make WAY MORE SMOKE than all the smokers in the world !

 

Almost nothing is done about pollution. But hell, kill the smokers... So weak this is.

Hey, calm down a take a cigarette, before you blow a fuse. Just do it away from people. ????

[richard_smith237]

 

9 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Khajornsak said that when smokers exhale their smoke carries their phlegm and bacteria on particles far and wide

Only smokers exhale ?????  this guy needs to be informed that Covid-19 is not a Bacteria!

 

Thailand really needs a ‘brain into gear, mouth into neutral’ department which briefs all these officials before they make moronic announcements. 

 

I call this the ’Thai Electrician Syndrome’... a guy is taken off the street to work for an Electrical Company, he’s given no training but told to do electrical work - He’s now an electrician and because he’s an electrician he knows all about electricity !!!.... Its the same as these imbeciles, they believe that because they are in a position where they should know about a subject that when they make statement it must be correct !!! - the stupidity is often dumfounding. 

 

 

Yes, smoking in public should be banned. But not for this idiotic and unfounded reason. 

 

 

[ChipButty]

No smoking, No drinking, No sex, might just join the temple 

[RJRS1301]

9 hours ago, SilentSal said:

First 5,000 baht to smoke near certain areas "OK, understandable..." Now 5,000 if you smoke anywhere. This is ridiculous. (but if it's true about it spreading easier then it's understandable i suppose)

Perfectly acceptable public health move, should have been instituted  a decade ago.

 

 

[ianezy0]

8 hours ago, Yadon Toploy said:

Nope. 

 

Good on ya Cobber ????

[Youlike]

9 hours ago, owl sees all said:

Youlike probably meant a 'medical paper', not any old newspaper.

Solly mate, but you don't need to correct me, i know very well that it's the biggest newspaper of my country.

[richard_smith237]

2 hours ago, Matzzon said:

5 hours ago, Monomial said:

There is absolutely ZERO in the entire paper about its genuine effects on viruses

You shouldn´t read such a complicated document if you can´t connect the dots of probability. And, if there is even a microscopic chance, why take it and why potentially risk other peoples wellbeing?

 

It think Monomials response to the paper was quite reasonable. 

 

I doubt anyone in the Thai government has ran any tests or has information on such a test.

The idea that smoking (exhaled smoke) carries the virus could bear the microscopic chance of validity, but we are living in a time of social distancing so these announcements detract from the realities that we should all be trying to distance from each other. 

 

In Thailand these clowns making a public name for themselves often generate more damage than good. 

The silly a$$hat announcing ‘foreigners are dirty’ to this clown announcing that 'smokers can spread the virus’ is simply giving the rest of society a target and distract from the reality that everyone is a potential carrier, we are all a risk to everyone else. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

3 hours ago, Matzzon said:

10 hours ago, Wiggy said:

If it is true (which I doubt as I’ve heard nothing from real experts) then we should also be fined 5,000 baht for breathing as we might spread it that way. Imbecile. 

I your shoes and with that logical way on examining things should be very careful about calling anybody imbecile. First smoking should not be done in public at all, due to it´s harmful nature to others. After that breathing is necessary, and smoking is not. Wonder who owns the title of imbecile now?

 

Breathing 'right next to someone' is not necessary if we are all following the correct social distancing protocol....  thus your argument has flaws. 

 

That said, ban smoking in public anyway, but do so on genuine grounds. Not based on daft hysteria which misleads the public. 

[richard_smith237]

10 hours ago, Sambotte said:

If real, they just lost my 500.000 bahts elite visa. I'm not kidding.

Unless it's scientifically proved (witch i doubt), that's just a non-sense, have nothing else to do or incompetent, and choose a scapegoat (minority).

What next ? Alcool no it's a majority. Cheese ? Fart being vectors... Coffee ? Farang drug this is.

 

No seriously, it's not so much the thing here, than the feeling : scapegoat and less freedom !

Even USA, or China don't go so far i think.

Crazy.

500.000 bahts. Other country with minimum of freedom (both way, i totally respect non-smokers).

 

I just hope enough people will point out the scientific non-sense here.

 

What we have here is a ‘keyboard dummy spit’...  someone ‘verbally chucking their toys out of the pram’....

 

People shouldn’t be smoking in public anyway, its antisocial - smoke in private. 

There should be designated smoking areas for people in public to go to. If people wish to smoke that’s their choice, but their choice shouldn’t impact non-smokers. 

 

So, if someone is going to make a choice not to visit a country because they feel their ‘freedoms’ have been taken away when they can’t smoke freely in public they have become ignorant of the freedoms and rights others not to have the air around them polluted by a smoker. 

 

That said, in the context of this thread, the idea that vaping and smoking elevate the risks of viral transmission any more than breathing seems daft, especially in comparison to coughing and sneezing. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Don Mega]

10 hours ago, Sambotte said:

I did not pay yet. They will lose my 500.000 and many smokers if they go crazy.

What next ? No boum-boum ? Contagion. "For your safety".

Freedom is something i do not sell.

Iam a smoker and they won't lose me, not sure what your butthurt is about but enjoy spending that 500k back home on ya ciggies !!

[BestB]

Ecigs are illegal with fines far more than 5000. So is this the new law to be fined 5000 for ecigs instead of 40000 then sign me up????

[Matzzon]

25 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Breathing 'right next to someone' is not necessary if we are all following the correct social distancing protocol....  thus your argument has flaws. 

 

That said, ban smoking in public anyway, but do so on genuine grounds. Not based on daft hysteria which misleads the public. 

No your way of thinking has flaws. When did I say that you should breath next to someone, or like you wish to mark, in the face of somebody? Of course we should follow correct social distancing, which makes that impossible. This thread is about smoking and the possible increased danger that can have to accelerate the spread of the virus.

[Matzzon]

31 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

It think Monomials response to the paper was quite reasonable. 

 

I doubt anyone in the Thai government has ran any tests or has information on such a test.

The idea that smoking (exhaled smoke) carries the virus could bear the microscopic chance of validity, but we are living in a time of social distancing so these announcements detract from the realities that we should all be trying to distance from each other. 

 

In Thailand these clowns making a public name for themselves often generate more damage than good. 

The silly a$$hat announcing ‘foreigners are dirty’ to this clown announcing that 'smokers can spread the virus’ is simply giving the rest of society a target and distract from the reality that everyone is a potential carrier, we are all a risk to everyone else. 

 

 

Still, if there is a microscopic chance, like you state might be possible, than it should be eliminated as a risk factor. The social distancing has nothing to do with that. They are talking about an arms length away from each other and that is totally misleading in this case and also very irrelevant. 

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, Matzzon said:

29 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Breathing 'right next to someone' is not necessary if we are all following the correct social distancing protocol....  thus your argument has flaws. 

 

That said, ban smoking in public anyway, but do so on genuine grounds. Not based on daft hysteria which misleads the public. 

No your way of thinking has flaws. When did I say that you should breath next to someone, or like you wish to mark, in the face of somebody? Of course we should follow correct social distancing, which makes that impossible. This thread is about smoking and the possible increased danger that can have to accelerate the spread of the virus.

 

Social Distancing measures involve keeping away from other people (2 meters at least)... 

So, with the correct social distancing you think smoke or vape will carry the virus further than someones who exhales normally?

 

If so, then we simply disagree. I believe the virus can be attached to exhaled aerosol which can travel in the air. Vape or smoke travels the same distance as regular exhaled air, the only difference is we can see it. 

 

 

 

 

[RJRS1301]

3 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

That said, ban smoking in public anyway, but do so on genuine grounds. Not based on daft hysteria which misleads the public. 

This should have been done and enforced a decade ago, smoking compromises lung function, this being a respiratory disease, greater risk of complications, good public health measure.

This current situation will change society has acted for some time with new laws being enacted, which will not be recinded. There will be less feedom of travel into the future I think as well as changes in economic policies

[Matzzon]

10 hours ago, Sambotte said:

I did not pay yet. They will lose my 500.000 and many smokers if they go crazy.

What next ? No boum-boum ? Contagion. "For your safety".

Freedom is something i do not sell.

Useful information: They can´t care less about you and your 500k. (If you are not Chinese. Then ya welcome, ya big spender) Please smoke here, Sir! We will build an extra smoking room with aircon room just for you next year, Sir.

[RJRS1301]

4 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

The idea that smoking (exhaled smoke) carries the virus could bear the microscopic chance of validity, but we are living in a time of social distancing so these announcements detract from the realities that we should all be trying to distance from each other.

Depending on the exhaled droplet size, it can travel up to 1 metre, with normal expiration, coughing of course could increase that distance

Smokers often cough even without infection, and often do not cover mouth when coughing

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

Still, if there is a microscopic chance, like you state might be possible, than it should be eliminated as a risk factor. The social distancing has nothing to do with that. They are talking about an arms length away from each other and that is totally misleading in this case and also very irrelevant. 

 

Social distancing has everything to do with this... It is what should be concentrated on. The smoking issue is just a distraction from other factors which are far more effective. 

 

The ‘Microscopic chance’ (which you initially mentioned) is irrelevant, as the spread of the virus is inevitable. It cannot be stopped, it can only be slowed such that when it does spread medical facilities are not overwhelmed. 

 

There are far greater issues involved in slowing down the rate of spread such as limiting the movement of people, isolation, social distancing, quarantine, cleaning our hands, cleaning deliveries etc... this smoking issue (even if correct and carries a microscopic chance) is a distraction from the genuine, serious and effective measures which require primary attention. 

 

Making an announcement such as this is extremely clumsy when a unified effort should be applied by those in positions to make media announcements and impact the actions of the populace to follow the more readily accepted ‘spread prevention methods'. 

 

 

[Matzzon]

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Social Distancing measures involve keeping away from other people (2 meters at least)... 

So, with the correct social distancing you think smoke or vape will carry the virus further than someones who exhales normally?

 

If so, then we simply disagree. I believe the virus can be attached to exhaled aerosol which can travel in the air. Vape or smoke travels the same distance as regular exhaled air, the only difference is we can see it. 

 

 

 

 

There is a possibility that some particles in exhaled smoke, that ain´t included in exhaled air, might carry the virus longer and quicker. 

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

12 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

That said, ban smoking in public anyway, but do so on genuine grounds. Not based on daft hysteria which misleads the public. 

This should have been done and enforced a decade ago, smoking compromises lung function, this being a respiratory disease, greater risk of complications, good public health measure.

This current situation will change society has acted for some time with new laws being enacted, which will not be recinded. There will be less feedom of travel into the future I think as well as changes in economic policies

 

I think so too.

One of these changes which persist may be the requirement to show insurance before travelling to Thailand. 

Smoking bans in public, if passed, may (should) become permanent anyway. 

 

 

 

 

[Don Mega]

6 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Depending on the exhaled droplet size, it can travel up to 1 metre, with normal expiration, coughing of course could increase that distance

Smokers often cough even without infection, and often do not cover mouth when coughing

I smoke and do cough occasionally, I coughed in Foodland yesterday (I covered my mouth) and the reaction from other shoppers was akin to me dropping strides and laying cable there and then on the floor !!

 

I chuckled heartily.

[richard_smith237]

Just now, Matzzon said:

There is a possibility that some particles in exhaled smoke, that ain´t included in exhaled air, might carry the virus longer and quicker. 

I agree... there’s also possibility that it doesn’t. There is also a possibility that eating spicy food causes us to exhale more strongly and thus there is elevated risk on an extremely microscopic level. 

 

As mentioned earlier, there are far greater factors which are far more effective which can be concentrated on rather than spending effort, time and resources on something which the potential for benefit in viral transmission prevention is debatable at best.

[JASON THAI]

I am waiting for the fines for beathing as you can spread the virus 555

[AussieBob18]

11 hours ago, DrTuner said:

What?!?! Smoke carrying SARS-CoV-2, well that's a new one. Sure it can aerosolize but this is the very first time I've seen anybody suggest it'd adhere to the smoke particles. 

 

If they continue on this brainfart reasoning, they'll notice the air is full of PM2.5 and PM10 particles. Oooops.

Maybe does adhere and maybe not - no research either way that I could find.

 

But we can only hope they finally see smoke as a serious health hazard and do something - other than media statements.