Jump to content

Asymptomatic patients in Bangkok can self-isolate at home while waiting for hospital bed


Thaiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

Amid an ongoing shortage of hospital beds, the Medical Services Department has agreed that asymptomatic Covid-19 patients in the Bangkok area can self-isolate at home until a bed becomes available. According to a Thai PBS World report, department chief Somsak Akkasilp says each patient will be provided with a thermometer and oximeter, allowing them to monitor their symptoms. Patients considered high-risk will also be given a supply of the anti-viral medication, Favipiravir, while low to medium-risk patients will be given the Thai traditional herbal medicine, Fah Talai Jone. Patients will also have follow-up consultations with doctors via video calls, as […]

The post Asymptomatic patients in Bangkok can self-isolate at home while waiting for hospital bed appeared first on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

Sure seems like this is going sideways on Thailand. 

In my opinion it's the correct way to handle otherwise healthy patients show only minor symptoms.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Adam said:

My question is if a person is asymptomatic with Covid and self quarantines for 14 days, why would they need to be hospitalized? 

i think there was a decree of some kind to admin everyone who tested positive no matter what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Adam said:

My question is if a person is asymptomatic with Covid and self quarantines for 14 days, why would they need to be hospitalized? 

Yes I agree.

There is a scam in operation.

The hospitals put everyone in beds and are paid by government funds.

The more beds filled the more money made. A bit like brothels.

I do not trust the test. There are similar to taking a car for a UK government MOT test, where the mechanics find all sorts of defects that need repair - by the mechanics.

Asymtomatic persons are not suffering. They should not be in hospital.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, KaptainRob said:

In my opinion it's the correct way to handle otherwise healthy patients show only minor symptoms.


Letting them quarantine at home was not my point. I was commenting on the fact they feel the need to do so because the hospitals are filling. The outbreak is going sideways on Thailand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, and this is a big so, if this happened to a ferang would they be able to charge the government Thai private hospital rates for the time they are convalescing in their own private hospital. Maybe not just ferang but all that are put in this situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, EdwardV said:


Letting them quarantine at home was not my point. I was commenting on the fact they feel the need to do so because the hospitals are filling. The outbreak is going sideways on Thailand. 

Yes I understood your point.  However things only appear to be going sideways with hospitals full of people who are asymptomatic or with minor symptoms.

>

The problem with major outbreaks in Bangkok is the demographic.   The majority of the large clusters live in shared and or substandard accommodation.  Government is now shutting down factories and attempting to isolate those workers most at risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Thaiger said:

Amid an ongoing shortage of hospital beds, the Medical Services Department has agreed that asymptomatic Covid-19 patients in the Bangkok area can self-isolate at home until a bed becomes available

"agreed"

 

Pretty absurd since that's exactly what they've already been telling people to do as there was / is little other option.

 

2 hours ago, Adam said:

My question is if a person is asymptomatic with Covid and self quarantines for 14 days, why would they need to be hospitalized? 

They don't need to be "hospitalized" so much as need to be quarantined as self-quarantine simply doesn't work as most people break the rules.  All countries that have kept case numbers low realised this, including in the West, and impose mandatory state quarantine  - and I do mean "all", whether it's in hospitals, hotels, hostels, or military barracks.

 

Last year, with the numbers low, Thailand had plenty of spare capacity in hospitals; as the numbers rose since April so that changed to field hospitals and 'hospitels'. Now there don't seem to be enough field hospitals.

2 hours ago, KaptainRob said:

In my opinion it's the correct way to handle otherwise healthy patients show only minor symptoms.

All countries that have kept case numbers low have put "otherwise healthy patients" in some form of state quarantine (hospitals, hotels, military barracks, etc).  Some even put their contacts in state quarantine as well, even if they test negative.

 

No countries that have high case numbers have done so, but they've allowed self-quarantine instead.

 

That strongly suggests yours may not be "the correct way" if you want to keep numbers low.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nigel43 said:

Asymptomatic transmission been totally different discredited and does not exist.

"Totally discredited" by who?

 

 

No offence, but this is complete and utter nonsense.  

 

 

According to the CDC up to 75% of transmission, and a minimum of 25%,  is by those who are asymptomatic.  All studies by similar authorities show the same thing.

2 hours ago, Nigel43 said:

Asymptomatic means you are perfectly healthy.

 

Asymptomatic does NOT mean you are perfectly healthy.  It's a medical term and it simply means you are not displaying any symptoms - no more, no less.

 

 

Edited by Stonker
typo
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Asymptomatic does NOT mean you are perfectly healthy.  It's a medical term and it simply means you are not displaying any symptoms - no more, no less.

Correct and NZ has repeatedly allowed such individuals to self-isolate or if without facility to do so, they go into ASQ/MIQ or similar.  Hospital only required when serious symptoms appear.

>

You are correct that a field hospital quarantine is the best scenario for BKK however those facilities also appear over capacity.

>

Perhaps the media and others are failing to differentiate between Hospital and incorrectly termed field hospital.  Should be called field quarantine.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, KaptainRob said:

Perhaps the media and others are failing to differentiate between Hospital and incorrectly termed field hospital.  Should be called field quarantine.

I completely agree with this, perhaps thethaiger could start a trend for that?

But anyway I myself was of the belief that people were hospitalized, but as you say it is more of a field quarantine,  and I assume quicker access to hospital should they develop symptoms.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, KaptainRob said:

... NZ has repeatedly allowed such individuals to self-isolate or if without facility to do so, they go into ASQ/MIQ or similar.  

Sorry, @ KaptainRob, but NZ HASN'T.

 

It's not automatic, although it has been done repeatedly", and in order to be allowed to self-isolate in NZ it has to be agreed by your local health board, subject to certain minimum conditions, otherwise you have to stay in an MIQF, as do your "Close Plus Contacts".

 

In NZ the numbers are so low that they can do that, checking individuals and their accommodation on an individual, case-by-case basis, and the standard and type of housing in NZ means that most people have been allowed to self-isolate . 

 

In Thailand not only do the numbers make that impossible but the accommodation for the vast majorority of people make it a complete non-starter - not just for the migrant workers in their camps or Thais in city rooms,  but for Thais up-country living in multi-generational households. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Sorry, @ KaptainRob, but NZ HASN'T.

It's not automatic, although it has been done repeatedly", and in order to be allowed to self-isolate in NZ it has to be agreed by your local health board, subject to certain minimum conditions, otherwise you have to stay in an MIQF, as do your "Close Plus Contacts".

In NZ the numbers are so low that they can do that, checking individuals and their accommodation on an individual, case-by-case basis, and the standard and type of housing in NZ means that most people have been allowed to self-isolate . 

In Thailand not only do the numbers make that impossible but the accommodation for the vast majorority of people make it a complete non-starter - not just for the migrant workers in their camps or Thais in city rooms,  but for Thais up-country living in multi-generational households. 

HASN'T ? 

I think you just confirmed what I put in fewer words.  But let's not split hairs, life's too short mate. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, KaptainRob said:

Perhaps the media and others are failing to differentiate between Hospital and incorrectly termed field hospital.  Should be called field quarantine

The Thai language media and others generally do  - it's the foreign language media, and "others" that don't.

 

Draw your own conclusions!

 

Thais generally don't have this aversion to state quarantine that Westerners do, and most (all I know) are very strongly in favour of it and can't understand why  Western countries don't quarantine people who are infected / infectious - even the wealthier ones who can afford to quarantine at private hospitals or in government hospital 'VIP' rooms (750 baht a night if available) see it as not just an obligation but a right.

 

The only ones objecting I know of were the Thong-Lor hi-so-wannabee crowd, who wanted private rooms away from the peasantry but didn't want to pay for it.

 

If you go on Thai social media it paints a very different picture to the farang view here, and views are not only strongly in favour, with it being the government's responsibility to provide it and a social responsibility for all, but they're generally pretty positive about it too.

  • Haha 1
  • Cool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever, too many experts.. I think I have covid!!!

My wife insists we wear ? during sex.. I can't taste or smell anything :(

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Asymptomatic means you are perfectly healthy or recovered from a virus

You have to have a large viral load to pass it on and you would have to feel quite ill.

The CDC have stated less than 0.1% possibly zero cases have been transmitted outdoors.

Government's are rewriting basic science for whatever reason and the general public are regurgitating the nonsense as fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Nigel43 said:

Asymptomatic means you are perfectly healthy or recovered from a virus

You have to have a large viral load to pass it on and you would have to feel quite ill.

The CDC have stated less than 0.1% possibly zero cases have been transmitted outdoors.

Government's are rewriting basic science for whatever reason and the general public are regurgitating the nonsense as fact.

Normally I'd try to show a bit of forbearance and tolerance for other opinions, but given your pevious comments here and elsewhere I'll be blunt.

 

 

This is absolute rubbish, wrong and simply untrue. 

 

 

We are all entitled to our own opinions but not to our own facts and certainly not to lie about what recognised authorities such as the CDC have said.

 

 

Asymptomatic DOES NOT mean you are perfectly healthy or recovered from a virus.

 

 

It's a medical term, not open to interpretation, and means  you are not showing any symptoms.  Nothing else.  It has nothing to do with health and nothing to do with having "recovered from a virus".

 

 

You DO NOT have to have a large viral load to pass it on and you would have to feel quite ill.

 

 

This is just complete, unmitigated rubbish.

 

 

The CDC HAVE NOT stated  less than 0.1% possibly zero have been transmitted outdoors.

 

 

This is completely untrue. While the figure is hotly debated, with some putting the figure as low as 1%, the CDC have stated that "less than 10%" has been transmitted outdoors - one hundred times your figure.

 

 

That was detailed at length in an article entitled Outdoor Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and Other Respiratory Viruses: A Systematic Review published in The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Volume 223, Issue 4, on15 February 2021 and it was confirmed by the Director of the CDC to the US Senate last month.

 

 

The only nonsense being regurgitated here is yours

 

 

Edited by Stonker
typo
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A question or two for "Stonker" as he wishes to appear as some sort of "authority" on asymptomatic transmission. 

Considering that after 18 months of this farcical plandemic, not a single, viable, isolated and purified sample of this "virus" has ever been produced, how precisely, are these "medical experts" and other purveyors of doom able to accurately identify and be able to state unequivocally that this "virus" actually exists?

What tests are being used to determine if a person does or does not actually have this as yet unidentified "virus"?

It would appear that this whole scamdemic is relying on a worthless RT-PCR test, that was categorically stated by the inventor that SHOULD NOT be used to detect a vius, and which incidentally has ethylene oxide, a known carcinogen, on the swab that these medical minions insist of forcing up your noses.

Why are you insisting on using rubbish that you have cherry picked from dubious sources including the incompetent CDC in a vain attempt to appear "learned" on this issue in your attempt to belittle another commenter. Your "forbearance and tolerance for other opinions" is obviously reserved for "other opinions" that corroborate own!

The bovine excrement being spewed here is actually yours!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By posting on Thaiger Talk you agree to the Terms of Use