News Forum - TAC explains what happens if a tourist or child gets Covid-19

[Thaiger]

One question that has frequently come up, and scared people from coming to Thailand in the age of Covid-19, is that of what happens if you test positive for the virus when you land in the country. An official with the Phuket Tourist Assistance Centre recently laid out the procedure for a tourist – or a child – who test positive for Covid-19. While Thailand has bombarded potential tourists with announcement after announcement of sandbox schemes, and later the Test & Go programme as well as quarantine option, details on the actual process of what happens did you arrive in Thailand […]

The story TAC explains what happens if a tourist or child gets Covid-19 as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[Podgey]

And what is the real reason why People dont Travel to Thailand. They determine on site what they deem necesseary . Thats a joke. Good that THE thaiger adress this. Havnt seen Any info about this before.

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, Thaiger said:

TAC explains what happens if a tourist or child gets Covid-19

A totally misleading headline.

Phuket TAC don't "explain what happens if a tourist or child gets Covid-19" but what happens if a tourist or child arrives with Covid-19.

Totally different.

[Stonker]

7 minutes ago, Podgey said:

And what is the real reason why People dont Travel to Thailand. They determine on site what they deem necesseary . Thats a joke. Good that THE thaiger adress this. Havnt seen Any info about this before.

Why "a joke" with a doctor / specialist  determining the best course of action depending on the individual severity of symptoms?

What would you prefer - that all cases are hospitalised, even if you're asymptomatic?

 That it's left to your insurers to decide what they'll pay for so you could end up being in an SHA+ / AQ hotel when you should be hospitalised for treatment as that's all they'll pay for?

[Chatogaster]

 

In phrases such as "they may still be asked to stay in the hospital" I wonder what the verb "to ask" actually means.

If I were a positive arrival with mild symptoms, I'd be perfectly willing to stay isolated on my chosen location (and strictly adhere to that without the need for enforcement). So if I was asked to go to a hospital nevertheless, I would reply "no thank you".

If that would result in me being transported to a guarded hospital section normally reserved for treating prison inmates, it would be so much clearer to use the verb "to force" instead.

Don't get me wrong: I fully understand why Thailand (and many other countries as well) are doing what they're doing, and also why certain aspects are left unmentioned or phrased in vague, positive sounding ways. It's just that while I generally agree with (or at least understand) policies, I could vehemently disagree with applying them to certain individual cases, especially when I could be such a case. For that reason, I'd choose to simply not travel at all.

 

[Stonker]

46 minutes ago, Chatogaster said:

For that reason, I'd choose to simply not travel at all.

A wise move!

It could be considerably worse.

Sweden, for example, where tourism makes up 10% of GDP, has no tourists allowed at all from outside the EU until at least the end of next month and currently just "recommends" that arrivals get a test once they've arrived, with no details at all of what happens if they don't do as 'recommended' or if they test positive.

Ho hummm ...

[Stonker]

52 minutes ago, Chatogaster said:

If I were a positive arrival with mild symptoms, I'd be perfectly willing to stay isolated on my chosen location (and strictly adhere to that without the need for enforcement). So if I was asked to go to a hospital nevertheless, I would reply "no thank you".

Unfortunately a number have said just that and then changed their minds and 'absconded' at the first opportunity, and many SHA+ hotels aren't SQ / ASQ graded as while there are similarities and some are both, the two are far from the same thing.

As you rightly say, though, it's an issue in many countries and there's no 'right' answer.

[Rain]

It's all about the health and well being of the populations. 

Of course it is.

[Podgey]

2 hours ago, Stonker said:

Why "a joke" with a doctor / specialist  determining the best course of action depending on the individual severity of symptoms?

What would you prefer - that all cases are hospitalised, even if you're asymptomatic?

 That it's left to your insurers to decide what they'll pay for so you could end up being in an SHA+ / AQ hotel when you should be hospitalised for treatment as that's all they'll pay for?

"local health officials would evaluate that situation should it arise and make a determination on a case by case basis" that i think is s joke. Do you trust a local health official? To determine IF you should stay in quarantine. You must be insane

[Chatogaster]

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

Unfortunately a number have said just that and then changed their minds and 'absconded' at the first opportunity, and many SHA+ hotels aren't SQ / ASQ graded as while there are similarities and some are both, the two are far from the same thing.

As you rightly say, though, it's an issue in many countries and there's no 'right' answer.

My self-vouching is with complete self-confidence (being an anal-retentive asperger), but I fully agree there's no unequivocally right answer. If I was in charge, I'd (also) go for the macroscopic and not the microscopic; I'd consider the relatively few injustices happening a price worth paying. Still, I'd be very pissed of if such an injustice happened to me. 
 

[AussieBob]

Ifs   Buts  Maybes   No definitive answers    No specific plans   Decided 'locally'??   

I am glad to see that Thaiger has finally published something about it - this matter is being heavily discussed on all the Thailand and travel forums - and the vast majority of potential tourists who find out about it, do not like that there is no definitive answer.

Fully vaccinated. Tested before departure. Fully insured.  That should be it. No tests on arrival - Thailand takes the risk - not the tourist.  But they cannot do that - nor can most places - and with Omicron coming (probably) then they must not.   

Right now it is a big risk to travel to Thailand - and everyone has to make that decision themselves. But the problem I and many others have, is that many people dont know about that risk - TAT dont mention it - CCSA doesn't - Thailand Pass website not either.  No one and nothing says what happens if you test positive on arrival under the test and go arrangement.  

But the Phuket Tourist Assistance Centre has recognised the problem and they have released something to at least not hide the matter - but it is of course very vague and incomplete because the National Bodies have not given any Provinces what they believe should be the directives.  There is no way that what PTAC says can be definitely applied in every Province - so what do they all say? Will they say anything?

 

 

[cognito]

Local authority = tea money. C’mon. Visitors will never get to stay home. The whole point of mandatory Q is the revenue of hotels and hospitals. If you want to argue, why was it ok for everyone to travel for songkran last year resulting in huge transmissions???

[PapayaBokBok]

2 hours ago, atiger said:

Knowing how business works in Thailand, i think any doctor who works for a hospital would be under pressure to refer ALL tourists who test positive to hospitals because they have a vested interest to make their employer more money.

This would be a major turnoff to foreigners considering travel to Thailand knowing it could cost them hundreds of thousands of baht if they catch Omnicron variant which most will eventually.

On top of the major hassle of completing requirements for a travel pass, i doubt Thailand will ever see anywhere near as many tourists as they could which will continue the punishment for Thai's relying on tourism for their livelihood.

I was going to comment but your avatar has distracted me.........(takes a cold shower)

[Stonker]

3 hours ago, atiger said:

This would be a major turnoff to foreigners considering travel to Thailand knowing it could cost them hundreds of thousands of baht if they catch Omnicron variant which most will eventually.

On top of the major hassle of completing requirements for a travel pass, i doubt Thailand will ever see anywhere near as many tourists as they could which will continue the punishment for Thai's relying on tourism for their livelihood.

Jesus H Christ.

How many times does it have to be repeated?

It WON'T "cost them hundreds of thousands of baht" if they're hospitalised after testing positive for Covid as they have to have medical insurance to cover that.

[Stonker]

2 hours ago, AussieBob said:

Ifs   Buts  Maybes   No definitive answers    No specific plans   Decided 'locally'??   

I am glad to see that Thaiger has finally published something about it - this matter is being heavily discussed on all the Thailand and travel forums - and the vast majority of potential tourists who find out about it, do not like that there is no definitive answer.

Fully vaccinated. Tested before departure. Fully insured.  That should be it. No tests on arrival - Thailand takes the risk - not the tourist.  But they cannot do that - nor can most places - and with Omicron coming (probably) then they must not.   

Right now it is a big risk to travel to Thailand - and everyone has to make that decision themselves. But the problem I and many others have, is that many people dont know about that risk - TAT dont mention it - CCSA doesn't - Thailand Pass website not either.  No one and nothing says what happens if you test positive on arrival under the test and go arrangement.  

But the Phuket Tourist Assistance Centre has recognised the problem and they have released something to at least not hide the matter - but it is of course very vague and incomplete because the National Bodies have not given any Provinces what they believe should be the directives.  There is no way that what PTAC says can be definitely applied in every Province - so what do they all say? Will they say anything?

The questions you say are discussed on forums, etc, answered here by the PTAC have all been given answered before.

I detailed them here, again, maybe a week ago.

There are no ifs, buts, maybes, etc.

There's room for varience because, for example and as I've explained a number of times, not all SHA+ hotels (particularly the cheaper / smaller ones) are also SQ / ASQ so not everyone can be quarantined at the hotel they book into if necessary.

If all hotels had to be both SQ and SHA registered then the costs would be higher and instead of complaints about clarity there'd be complaints about cost.

The problem isn't a lack of clarity or answers, it's an over abundance if wannabe experts who for reasons only they know are determined to muddy the waters.

[Stonker]

3 hours ago, Podgey said:

"local health officials would evaluate that situation should it arise and make a determination on a case by case basis" that i think is s joke. Do you trust a local health official? To determine IF you should stay in quarantine. You must be insane

I now understand why you've not been able to find the correct information before as you're evidently not capable of reading and comprehending basic explanations.

The part you've quoted has nothing to do with any decision by a local health official to determine if you should be quarantined or not.

NOTHING AT ALL.

Here's what it very clearly states:

"One situation that does not have a clear plan ready is if a single parent travelling with their child should become infected with Covid-19. The TAC said that local health officials would evaluate that situation should it arise and make a determination on a case by case basis. They did warn though that if the parent and child stay together, the child could become infected and parents would be responsible for the cost of treatment for the child".

NOTHING to do with deciding if you should be quarantined or not, as you've mis-read / mis-represented it.

If that's the limit of your ability to understand simple explanations maybe you should stay at home until things are simpler.

 

[JamesE]

1 hour ago, Stonker said:

Jesus H Christ.

How many times does it have to be repeated?

It WON'T "cost them hundreds of thousands of baht" if they're hospitalised after testing positive for Covid as they have to have medical insurance to cover that.

This report is actually good news as it puts the decision in the hands of a physician. Doctor prescribed quarantine (regardless of venue) is covered under most insurance plans (as my AXA policy does) but administrative procedurally imposed quarantine is not. If one should test positive under Test & Go or any other entry model the best course of action is not "No, thank you" but "Sure, please have my test reviewed by a doctor and written, signed instructions for my treatment plan sent to me."

[Stonker]

9 hours ago, Thaiger said:

One situation that does not have a clear plan ready is if a single parent travelling with their child should become infected with Covid-19. The TAC said that local health officials would evaluate that situation should it arise and make a determination on a case by case basis. They did warn though that if the parent and child stay together, the child could become infected and parents would be responsible for the cost of treatment for the child

I'm beginning to understand why so many on @AussieBob's forums are confused about what happens - not only has @Podgey mis-interpreted what the Thaiger have said, I thought very clearly, but if you read the original article in the Phuket Mail then the Thaiger have also mis-interpreted or mis-represented what the Phuket Mail reported (albeit nit quite so badly), with the odd typo thrown in for good measure saying 'hotel' when they meant 'hospital'.

 

6 hours ago, Chatogaster said:

In phrases such as "they may still be asked to stay in the hospital" I wonder what the verb "to ask" actually means.

If I were a positive arrival with mild symptoms, I'd be perfectly willing to stay isolated on my chosen location (and strictly adhere to that without the need for enforcement). So if I was asked to go to a hospital nevertheless, I would reply "no thank you".

If that would result in me being transported to a guarded hospital section normally reserved for treating prison inmates, it would be so much clearer to use the verb "to force" instead.

Don't get me wrong: I fully understand why Thailand (and many other countries as well) are doing what they're doing, and also why certain aspects are left unmentioned or phrased in vague, positive sounding ways. It's just that while I generally agree with (or at least understand) policies, I could vehemently disagree with applying them to certain individual cases, especially when I could be such a case. For that reason, I'd choose to simply not travel at all.

If you read the original article then "what the verb "to ask" actually means" is clear.

Within obvious limits depending on symptoms, someone testing positive has a degree of choice about where they're quarantined which is why they're "asked".

Agreed, there's confusion and a lack of clarity - but the wrong person's being blamed for it.

[Stonker]

26 minutes ago, JamesE said:

This report is actually good news as it puts the decision in the hands of a physician. Doctor prescribed quarantine (regardless of venue) is covered under most insurance plans (as my AXA policy does) but administrative procedurally imposed quarantine is not. If one should test positive under Test & Go or any other entry model the best course of action is not "No, thank you" but "Sure, please have my test reviewed by a doctor and written, signed instructions for my treatment plan sent to me."

Of course it is - it doesn't leave any wriggle room for insurers to say that you chose to be quarantined when it wasn't necessary or mandated.

There's no shortage of competition, but the idea that "Do you trust a local health official? To determine IF you should stay in quarantine. You must be insane" as if anyone else is better qualified or has more authority to do so has to be one of the most absolutely asinine comments I've ever read here.

[Podgey]

17 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Of course it is - it doesn't leave any wriggle room for insurers to say that you chose to be quarantined when it wasn't necessary or mandated.

There's no shortage of competition, but the idea that "Do you trust a local health official? To determine IF you should stay in quarantine. You must be insane" as if anyone else is better qualified or has more authority to do so has to be one of the most absolutely asinine comments I've ever read here.

I would trust a Doctors opinion , what i ment was "a health offical" what is that kind of titel ? how do you become a local health offical =) it seems abit unqualified , to trust the outcome of my vacation . But hey if you got that high regard of officials in Thailand be my guest to travel =)

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, Podgey said:

I would trust a Doctors opinion , what i ment was "a health offical" what is that kind of titel ? how do you become a local health offical =) it seems abit unqualified , to trust the outcome of my vacation . But hey if you got that high regard of officials in Thailand be my guest to travel =)

What you "ment" isn't what the article reported, as they don't have any say or input on the 'outcome of your vacation'.

Edited December 18, 2021 by Andrew Reeve
Argumentative comment removed

[Podgey]

54 minutes ago, Stonker said:

What you "ment" isn't what the article reported, as they don't have any say or input on the 'outcome of your vacation'.

If you're still not able to understand that you shouldn't be going out alone.

you shouldnt be rude just because  people got another opinion.

Edited December 18, 2021 by Andrew Reeve
Mention of a another forum is not allowed also name calling removed

[think-and-ask]

most, positive tested people, are not sick or very sick.

most who are sick, are not sick in 1-2 days later.

who is sick, normally not, fly or travel long.

if virus test is made before travel, arrive positive can normally never  happen.

Edited December 18, 2021 by think-and-ask

[AndyMartin]

What age from to children get tested when arriving into Thailand for covid-19? 
 

 

[Robbie_Flyer]

Still no information on what happens to you if someone sitting near you on the plane tests positive... Or what it's going to cost you. In my view this is the most unjust and outrageous risk. You're perfectly healthy, have acted responsibly, and passed two PCR tests, yet if the rumours are true you stand to be locked up for most of your holiday and have to pay extra.  If that is the case it would explain why the government won't include it in their publicity...  All the time this goes on the tourist industry won't get anywhere near recovery, and thousands of poor Thais will remain unemployed. Such a shame.