News Forum - New eased rules for travellers entering Thailand enacted

[JamesR]

15 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

I agree. But we're going to have more people refusing especially in the US where Merck already had a deal with the government (I wrote about it last month) and is now applying for an temporary emergency license for Molnupiravir at $700 a course. I hope the ones refusing the vaccine will be paying the additional costs for this experimental medicine. BTW, would be funny if now they don't object to this being experimental.

 I thought Molnupiravir was only used in the treatment of people with the virus?

I read a study using real people in the test group done by the university of Oxford and it concluded if the drug is administered within five days of first symptoms then the person has 50% more chance of surviving if serious symptoms occur.

Re you comment above where people in the US are refusing to take drugs, the two main areas are Florida and Texas, the death rate in both states due to the virus is higher than other states. 

[Bob20]

2 minutes ago, JamesR said:

 I thought Molnupiravir was only used in the treatment of people with the virus?

I read a study using real people in the test group done by the university of Oxford and it concluded if the drug is administered within five days of first symptoms then the person has 50% more chance of surviving if serious symptoms occur.

Re you comment above where people in the US are refusing to take drugs, the two main areas are Florida and Texas, the death rate in both states due to the virus is higher than other states. 

Yes, you are correct. It is a treatment. That is why I said I hope the ones that refuse prevention will offer to pay as it costs $700 for a 5 days course. 

I don't think the research was done in Oxford, as it was carried out by Merck USA, not MSD. And together with Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, also American. Phase 3 was done in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Egypt, France, Germany, Guatemala, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and the United States.

[JamesR]

24 minutes ago, JamesE said:

COE - two days, one error (on my part) correction and one rule change (in my favor). If the COE process is "difficult and time consuming" I would suggest travel to Disneyland might be easier.

100K insurance - 10 minutes on HeyMondo (was) US$156 for a full year of general health, COVID and travel coverage. It's needed to make sure you can pay for your hospital stay.

Tests, I agree, a bit excessive but they've cut the number down and compared to travel testing in the US at $100 - $300 they're pretty reasonably priced.

Over-priced??? The hotels in the Sandbox are stupid-cheap right now. Villas for $50/night, pool villas for $100. Where do people come up with this "over-priced" narrative?

The only thing limiting you on where you can eat or drink is whether or not you've got wheels. Sure, many places are closed but many are not. People I know that have been through the Sandbox have told me they had a great time with the only restriction (now lifted) of not being able to have a drink in restaurants. (Bars, of course, remain closed for now.)

Thanks for mentioning the insurance company HeyMondo, I checked their website and sent them a question as on the insurance websites in the UK cover can not be issued for countries on the red-list and so I asked HeyMondo their policy for British visitors to Thailand.

Yes hotels are cheap at the moment in Phuket and I have a car there and so should easily find places open.

So thanks to your suggestion of the insurance company, it could mean my trip to Phuket is on again if it all pans out. 

I saw I could get 3,500,000 Euro insurance cover for 279 Euro, it is not just for virus cover but all illnesses and accidents. 

[Bob20]

1 minute ago, JamesR said:

Thanks for mentioning the insurance company HeyMondo, I checked their website and sent them a question as on the insurance websites in the UK cover can not be issued for countries on the red-list and so I asked HeyMondo their policy for British visitors to Thailand.

Yes hotels are cheap at the moment in Phuket and I have a car there and so should easily find places open.

So thanks to your suggestion of the insurance company, it could mean my trip to Phuket is on again if it all pans out. 

I saw I could get 3,500,000 Euro insurance cover for 279 Euro, it is not just for virus cover but all illnesses and accidents. 

I had a look too, but saw that price for 3 months, so I wonder how JamesE got $156 for a full year...?

[JamesR]

18 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Yes, you are correct. It is a treatment. That is why I said I hope the ones that refuse prevention will offer to pay as it costs $700 for a 5 days course. 

I don't think the research was done in Oxford, as it was carried out by Merck USA, not MSD. And together with Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, also American. Phase 3 was done in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Egypt, France, Germany, Guatemala, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Oh yes, I see what you mean now re paying for treatment. 

Yes the tests were done as you said, my mistake, it was a professor from the University Of Oxford who just said the results look promising. 

I feels sorry for the family of the eight people who died in the trial as they had been given placeboes, all the others who had the real drug survived. 

[JamesR]

5 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

I had a look too, but saw that price for 3 months, so I wonder how JamesE got $156 for a full year...?

Maybe if you are travelling from the USA it is cheaper?

[Bob20]

14 minutes ago, JamesR said:

Oh yes, I see what you mean now re paying for treatment. 

Yes the tests were done as you said, my mistake, it was a professor from the University Of Oxford who just said the results look promising. 

I feels sorry for the family of the eight people who died in the trial as they had been given placeboes, all the others who had the real drug survived. 

I'm looking forward to more detail, as 50% reduction in hospitalisation or death should be more specified. It seems to mean purely hospitalisation (14.1% vs 7.3%). In the trial no deaths were reported in the group that received Molnupiravir within 29 days. Deaths were reported only in the placebo group, so for deaths it sounds more like a 100% reduction. 

[Bob20]

14 minutes ago, JamesR said:

Maybe if you are travelling from the USA it is cheaper?

Yes, that makes sense. I use a different body when I travel from the US

[JamesE]

34 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

I had a look too, but saw that price for 3 months, so I wonder how JamesE got $156 for a full year...?

There are three ways of writing the policy: per trip, annual trip, annual full coverage. Per trip seems to be the most expensive. At the time I bought mine a two-month policy cost more than what I paid by over $50. My annual policy had a limit of 120 days per trip, which fit me fine. But, for a renewal next year I would have to pay more, about $200, but each trip has been limited to 60 days, so that might be a problem. I just had a look at their full coverage pricing. They break it up into an initial 3-month period with renewables and it worked out to about $900/year which is still not bad compared to the competition. Biggest drawback is that they only cover up to age 70 (you have to be no older than 69 to apply).

[AndynPhuong]

Just a observation of what happened in a group of people we know who traveled to Jamaica a couple months ago. virus tests before going, and on return, virus test (rapid) before leaving resort. 5 couples, half tested positive, and went into quarantine at the resort, remainder tested negative, and flew. Those were tested again after arriving in the US. 60 tested positive. Out of the 60, 55 were vaccinated. At least one (unvaccinated) spent 6 days in the hospital after quarantine and return to the states. More than one who later tested positive said they thought the resort sent them on back so as to not have to deal with them in quarantine...

[JamesR]

1 hour ago, Bob20 said:

I'm looking forward to more detail, as 50% reduction in hospitalisation or death should be more specified. It seems to mean purely hospitalisation (14.1% vs 7.3%). In the trial no deaths were reported in the group that received Molnupiravir within 29 days. Deaths were reported only in the placebo group, so for deaths it sounds more like a 100% reduction. 

It does look promising.

[JamesR]

1 hour ago, Bob20 said:

Yes, that makes sense. I use a different body when I travel from the US

You are teckin' piss our kid? 

[Stonker]

6 hours ago, dimitri said:

Can you substantiate this? (snip)

Proven facts, that means that there must be a scientific article somewhere.

I already have, on the previous page, with a quote from the Oxford University study under discussion and linked to:

"After three months, people who had breakthrough infections after being vaccinated with AstraZeneca were just as likely to spread the delta variant as the unvaccinated."

That seems pretty clear, at least to me.

6 hours ago, dimitri said:

As usual a lot of nonsense in your writings

There's no need to be unduly and deliberately offensive and argumentative. A personal attack doesn't add anything to your point, particularly if you're asking for something which has just been spelt out very clearly.

[JamesE]

How does a topic about the change in entry rules morph into a "but vaccinated people can catch it too" topic?

You guys really need to get a life.

[Stonker]

6 hours ago, dimitri said:

You are comparing 2 different things.  You are blaming behaviour of people. While you should just compare vaccinated and not vaccinated people. Not their behaviour. You should just compare the effectiveness of the vaccines.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with that as it's not possible to just take things in isolation when they're not isolated.

In this case the behaviour is a key factor as it's directly affected by whether someone's vaccinated or not. If they're vaccinated they're going to let their guard down more over social distancing, mask wearing, and socialising, for example, than someone who's not vaccinated who's going to be a lot more worried about their own safety.

That's basic human nature, particularly when they'll be less affected by the virus and may be asymptomatic, compared to someone who's unvaccinated who may notice some symptoms, as may those around them.

It's not just as simple as comparing the effectiveness of the vaccines when its the effectiveness of the vaccines that directly and indirectly affect the other key factors.

7 hours ago, dimitri said:

Also: Scientific research showed for example that people who are vaccinated are less likely to get infected at all. So if you compare the 2 groups of people, vaccinated and not vaccinated, the group with not vaccinated people will have a higher percentage of Covid infections (4 times more).

And I have to strongly disagree with that too.

I've never seen or heard of any scientific research that shows that unvaccinated people are four times more likely to be infected than vaccinated, particularly if the unvaccinated include a growing number of previously infected.

Far more likely to be seriously affected or die, yes, but not just infected - that certainly isn't the case with the NHE stats from the UK which don't show that.

I may well have missed that scientific research, so do you have it to hand as that would be very helpful?

[JamesR]

30 minutes ago, JamesE said:

How does a topic about the change in entry rules morph into a "but vaccinated people can catch it too" topic?

You guys really need to get a life.

I think it is something to do with conversation which usually leads onto other similar related topics. 

[Stonker]

6 hours ago, Bob20 said:

From the report: "This is likely to be due to a variety of reasons, including differences in the population of vaccinated and unvaccinated people as well as differences in testing patterns."

And in fact the same report shows that studies indicates a 35-50% lower transmission rate from vaccinated people (page 7)

Agreed, @Bob20, but 35 -50% lower is nowhere near the level some think it is  - 400% lower!

[Stonker]

46 minutes ago, JamesE said:

How does a topic about the change in entry rules morph into a "but vaccinated people can catch it too" topic?

You guys really need to get a life.

Maybe because that's one of the effects / considerations / issues as a result of the change in entry rules?

[Freeduhdumb]

14 hours ago, TheDirtyDurian said:

2 tests.

*** It's important to point out that these are not really quarantine procedures. You are free to move about the islands of Samui and Phuket on arrival. The other newly added islands also have freedom of travel, within selected zones. So the point is, you will not be held up in a hotel room for 7 days. 

[JamesE]

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

Maybe because that's one of the effects / considerations / issues as a result of the change in entry rules?

But it's not. If you're betting your entire population on the vaccine then do it. This is what Thailand seemed to be doing this week - with the hedge that there will be some restrictions to minimize the risk. Whether or not vaccinated people can get it too was not part of the calculus and had exactly nothing to do with "New eased rules for travellers entering Thailand enacted". Now, you may very well wish to discuss how it should have been part of the deliberations about opening more and easing the rules, but there's already a place for that over at the CCC.

[gummy]

On 10/2/2021 at 6:04 AM, Thaiger said:

The Tourism Authority of Thailand released a slew of press releases yesterday declaring a broad revision to Sandbox and entry programs and making it easier for international travellers to enter Thailand. The two biggest revisions that just went into effect are the abolishment of an approved country list for travellers to arrive from, and shortening arrival quarantine times from 14 days to just one week. Since launching the first Sandbox in Phuket on July 1, Thailand has maintained a list of countries that were considered low and high risk for Covid-19 transmission. Only those travelling from countries on the safe […]

The post New eased rules for travellers entering Thailand enacted appeared first on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

They may be optimistic but yesterdays report from the BBC's Jonathan Head possibly gives a more balanced view

Covid threat looms over Thailand's plans to open up to tourists - BBC News

[Stonker]

4 hours ago, JamesE said:

But it's not. If you're betting your entire population on the vaccine then do it. This is what Thailand seemed to be doing this week - with the hedge that there will be some restrictions to minimize the risk. Whether or not vaccinated people can get it too was not part of the calculus and had exactly nothing to do with "New eased rules for travellers entering Thailand enacted". Now, you may very well wish to discuss how it should have been part of the deliberations about opening more and easing the rules, but there's already a place for that over at the CCC.

Well, that's your view and you're entitled to it.

I wasn't at the TAT meeting where the "new eased rules for travellers entering Thailand" were discussed, so I don't know if the possibility that those vaccinated can get the virus was raised or not, as I would have thought it should be. 

You must be kept busy, attending meetings at  the TAT and the CCSA and moderating this forum.

[JamesE]

Typically when you don't know, you should stay quiet.

36 minutes ago, Stonker said:

I don't know

 

[Stonker]

8 hours ago, Freeduhdumb said:

*** It's important to point out that these are not really quarantine procedures. You are free to move about the islands of Samui and Phuket on arrival. The other newly added islands also have freedom of travel, within selected zones. So the point is, you will not be held up in a hotel room for 7 days. 

Agreed - as I said earlier, you get the choice of walking round a hotel room in Bangkok or walking round Phuket, so the idea of quarantine seems to have been binned in order to push everyone to Phuket.

That appears to even include the previous  one or two days waiting for the results of the first PCR test, so those vaccinated but infected can wander around infecting everyone until their test results arrive.

Not so bad now, with arrivals quarantined until their test results come through and arrivals only allowed from / after staying in low risk countries, but still considerably higher than the national level.

...But now they're going to be arriving from anywhere, with India as the main target country where not only is the Covid case level off the charts by Thai standards but entire planeloads have had faked Covid paperwork on arrival in Canada, with over 10% caught with faked Covid paperwork on arrival in the UK just by simple spelling mistakes.

What could possibly go wrong?

[Stonker]

Locally they've already taken precautions themselves, and despite suffering the loss of income from tourism as badly as anywhere else they've closed more popular tourist sites months ago including local caves / temples.

These signs went up a couple of days ago, put up by one local village when some "returnees" from Bangkok bought a dose of Covid back with them:

(rough translation: go away, we're closed.)