Quarantine cost ?

[natway09]

The situation is changing worldwide day by day. To say Thailand is being stupid  is a bit of an overstatement.

Put yourselves in their position & if you are up to date on the world situation & obviously your first priority is to protect your people would you want anybody that did not have to be admitted from the UK,,Spain, Italy, USA, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Africa etc,etc at the moment & possibly for at least the next 4 months.  I wouldnt.

But you people that keep saying it is a "storm in a teacup, I would be interested in hearing not your ramblings, but how you would do it. 

Keep in mind that many parts of the UK & USA where they have bucked the lockdowns are starting to show a resurgence of the virus. It is not an easy choice

 

[DaRoadrunner]

2 hours ago, lopburi3 said:

But with that we would have the issues of government tracking or mind control which we hear even with this system.  

 

I can see this leading to a chip being implanted in all of us. As if it is not enough that the Govt would know where I am, it's more the problem of Lady Roadrunner being able to track me with an App!

 

Meanwhile they are talking about inviting Chinese tourists back. Will they get 14 days quarantine?

 

Make your mind up Thailand, what the F do you want? Can't have it both ways.

Edited May 26, 2020 by DaRoadrunner

[JackThompson]

21 hours ago, Mulambana said:

The article is frightening. It seems Thailand is bracing for no entry for most foreigners for at least  year, may be more. It keeps talking about untill a vaccine is found or the virus disappears. It may take few years before the virus disappers. Spanish flu took 3-years to disappear. What the perpetual tourists would do? Their days are numbered. All the efforts TI put to deny entry for years was achived by China by unleasing this virus. Dreams of Issan girls for winning a lottery by finding a foreign husband are dashed. Dreams of foreigners for finding a bride and a marriage visa in Thailand are shattered. Dreams of countless people engaging in sex orgy in Thailand would remain dreams only. Now people have to learn to live in their home lands and find brides in their own country or engage in sex orgy with native sex workers. Issan girls have to get education or work in fields or sell chickens. Is that going to be the "new normal"? Sad sad sad.

All this leaves out "testing."  Anyone who can be tested reliably can be allowed to travel, and tested again upon arrival.  The vaccine solution means every time a new virus crops up with a death-rate above the seasonal-flu rate, the world has to stop for 18 months.   That's madness. 

 

But, hopefully, quick-test systems can be put in place at airports and border-crossings, which can be rapidly-adapted for new viruses much more quickly than a vaccine can be tested, found SAFE, and then released.

 

Such a system could be very helpful in the future, if a virus were to appear which has the death-rate the experts incorrectly predicted for this one.

[BritTim]

15 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

The vaccine solution means every time a new virus crops up with a death-rate above the seasonal-flu rate, the world has to stop for 18 months.   That's madness. 

It means that every time:

• there is a new virus with a high death rate; and
• the virus has a high infection rate without extraordinary measures being used to control it; and
• governments are too incompetent to institute a test, trace, isolate, treat strategy

then strict social distancing measures (that will, at a minimum, include preventing those with a reasonable possibility of being infected from mixing with the general population) becomes the only reasonable option.

 

Some countries may choose to sentence a significant portion of their population to death instead, but most leaders who are not sociopaths will consider that unacceptable.

 

Of course, it would be far preferable if there was an effective international response to control virus outbreaks before they go totally out of control in the first place. However, the reality is that we are now in a transition period to see which countries can control Covid-19 and which cannot. Once that becomes clear, travel between countries where the virus has been eliminated in the general population will become possible again. Those countries whose governments have decided not to properly control the virus will find their citizens unable easily to travel. I believe, whatever their short term justifications for failing to act effectively, in the long term they are not acting in their citizens' best interests.

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, BritTim said:

It means that every time:

• there is a new virus with a high death rate; and
• the virus has a high infection rate without extraordinary measures being used to control it; and
• governments are too incompetent to institute a test, trace, isolate, treat strategy

then strict social distancing measures (that will, at a minimum, include preventing those with a reasonable possibility of being infected from mixing with the general population) becomes the only reasonable option.

For this particular virus, the key is preventing those who are vulnerable from contacting the pathogen.  In this case, we have known since early April who is at risk, and the data just gets clearer.  Here is a chart from the USA, where between ~40% and ~55% of deaths occurred in long-term care facilities (depending on which study - this one 42%) - many of them in hospice (< 6 months expected time to live):

 

https://freopp.org/the-covid-19-nursing-home-crisis-by-the-numbers-3a47433c3f70
 

Of the younger, it is those with pre-existing medical conditions.  In my view, it does not make any sense to continue any measures other than to encourage self-quarantine of the vulnerable - with state-support for those who cannot afford it otherwise. 

 

Granted, we did not know this data in February, when the border to Wuhan was left wide open (by many governments), under advise of the CDC, who at that time claimed closing borders did not make a significant difference in controlling outbreaks - even after they admitted the virus was spreading person-to-person.

 

Quote

Some countries may choose to sentence a significant portion of their population to death instead, but most leaders who are not sociopaths will consider that unacceptable.

Of course it is unacceptable to not care, but it is not a binary choice between only 2 options.  The reason for this continuing overreaction - in spite of the new data - and all the 2ndary deaths and suffering this reaction continues to cause, is politicians being afraid of being called "sociopaths."  Anyone who says, "Let's look at the data and find a balance," is caricatured with blood on their hands.

 

This not only does harm today, but risks a reaction in the opposite direction in the future, if a more deadly virus should appear.  People may say, "Oh no, not this bull again.  Last time the death rate was not nearly what they predicted."  But maybe, with the next bug, it is a high % figure.  I've read some lab-studies on "gain of function" research on very deadly bugs - is scary - and one of those could get lose from a lab, or occur naturally.

 

Quote

Of course, it would be far preferable if there was an effective international response to control virus outbreaks before they go totally out of control in the first place. However, the reality is that we are now in a transition period to see which countries can control Covid-19 and which cannot. Once that becomes clear, travel between countries where the virus has been eliminated in the general population will become possible again. Those countries whose governments have decided not to properly control the virus will find their citizens unable easily to travel. I believe, whatever their short term justifications for failing to act effectively, in the long term they are not acting in their citizens' best interests.

It is not a matter of if a source-country did this or that - which is a domestic policy issue.  For travel, it is whether the individual boarding a plane, or crossing a border, is a carrier.  Once that is easily determined, the problem is solved. 

 

In the future, in the case of a new outbreak, the testing-systems being installed now could be calibrated for new protein-detection, for new pathogens.  There would still be a temporary travel shutdown, but it might only last a week or so.

 

Testing is everything, for future-travel.  Once one can get tested before boarding a plane, tested at the other end, and perhaps tested a couple days later (in case of a recent-infection the test could not detect), containment is mostly solved ("mostly" because no testing-regime is perfect). 

Edited May 26, 2020 by JackThompson

[geisha]

I just read that article and it is frightening. When you see that countries have had deaths in the 20 to 40 thousands , that they have confined and  are now in de -confinement , that travel is most probably going to be possible by August to October, what on earth is the reasoning of the Thai authorities ? For a country that has had 3000 infected and 60 deaths only , I find  these predictions Very very strange. Or , that immigration officer has the Anutin maladie and has spouted rubbish he’s just made up ? 

[Caldera]

Pretty much all of Europe is opening up (at least for travel WITHIN Europe) in June/July, which is an interesting experiment. I could imagine that whatever will happen there will have an impact on what Thailand will do - after watching from a safe distance.

[BritTim]

7 hours ago, JackThompson said:

For this particular virus, the key is preventing those who are vulnerable from contacting the pathogen.  In this case, we have known since early April who is at risk, and the data just gets clearer.  Here is a chart from the USA, where between ~40% and ~55% of deaths occurred in long-term care facilities (depending on which study - this one 42%) - many of them in hospice (< 6 months expected time to live):

How do people in the vulnerable populations become infected? Most often, it is because family and friends (especially those living in the same household) infect them. It is a pipe dream to believe that you can allow the virus to spread uncontrolled among younger people without comorbidities and still prevent their family and friends from becoming infected.

 

As for the statistics from the US, in almost all cases, they omit deaths that occur in the home. Unfortunately, the US does not report overall death rates from all causes on a week-to-week basis. In the UK, where such data is reported, examination of the figures shows that just considering deaths in hospitals and care homes grossly underestimates the total death toll from Covid-19. The biggest reason is believed to be many more cardiac arrests at home (induced by the blood clots that are a characteristic of coronavirus infection). Anecdotal reports from first responders indicate a similar pattern in the US.

 

Unless you are going to lock away everyone over the age of 60 plus those with underlying health conditions in a government isolation facility for months or years, forbidding visits by family and friends, you cannot protect vulnerable populations when there is a high infection rate in the general population. Probably, you would also need to isolate the workers in those isolation facilities.

 

Look at how countries like Taiwan and New Zealand have dealt with the outbreak. New Zealand acted early, had a strict shutdown for a month (combined with a test, trace, isolate, treat capability) and has totally eliminated community transmission. With the exception on an almost total ban on foreigners entering the country, and quarantine for returning nationals, there remain few restrictions, for instance:

• maximum gathering sizes of 100;
• in bars you must remain in your own social group and remain seated (no mingling) plus there is a dedicated server for each table.

Further loosening is expected in New Zealand in June, probably including free movement between New Zealand and Australia (where the virus is also under control).

 

Do not assume that you can convince people to go out and get themselves infected just because they are allowed to do so. Many will choose to protect themselves even if there is no lockdown. Limiting economic damage is best ensured by eliminating the virus, and convincing your people that it is safe for them to live more or less normally.

 

Go early and go hard to prevent losing control is the key that has allowed some countries to successfully control Covid-19 with minimum casualties and impact on the economy.

[JackThompson]

1 minute ago, BritTim said:

How do people in the vulnerable populations become infected? Most often, it is because family and friends (especially those living in the same household) infect them. It is a pipe dream to believe that you can allow the virus to spread uncontrolled among younger people without comorbidities and still prevent their family and friends from becoming infected.

We MUST allow it to spread among the healthy, so the virus will die out.  The primary reason for the shutdowns, was to "flatten the curve" so hospitals were not overwhelmed all at once.  With that done, the next step is allowing herd-immunity to be reached before winter.

 

1 minute ago, BritTim said:

As for the statistics from the US, in almost all cases, they omit deaths that occur in the home. Unfortunately, the US does not report overall death rates from all causes on a week-to-week basis. In the UK, where such data is reported, examination of the figures shows that just considering deaths in hospitals and care homes grossly underestimates the total death toll from Covid-19. The biggest reason is believed to be many more cardiac arrests at home (induced by the blood clots that are a characteristic of coronavirus infection). Anecdotal reports from first responders indicate a similar pattern in the US.

In the USA, any death attributed to COVID nets the hospital a pile of money.  Mortiticans are reporting many never-tested are being listed as covid-deaths, to maximize those returns.  Granted, hospitals are mostly "for profit" in the USA, now (not the case pre 1980s - long tangent on why this was evil, skipped), so UK data may be more useful, in this respect.  But the age-breakdown in the UK looks similar.

 

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/weekending15may2020

 

I hope they are testing those cardiac-arrest patients, and classifying them as to whether their heart-attacks - which are a leading cause of death w/o covid - were truly due to covid.

 

1 minute ago, BritTim said:

Unless you are going to lock away everyone over the age of 60 plus those with underlying health conditions in a government isolation facility for months or years, forbidding visits by family and friends, you cannot protect vulnerable populations when there is a high infection rate in the general population. Probably, you would also need to isolate the workers in those isolation facilities.

They should self-isolate if they choose, and govt-funding should be available to support them while everyone else gets immune.  This targeted-strategy would only to this type of virus, of course - not something like a dystopic-future H5N1, adapted to human ACE2 receptors, with a 50% mortality-rate.

 

1 minute ago, BritTim said:

Look at how countries like Taiwan and New Zealand have dealt with the outbreak. New Zealand acted early, had a strict shutdown for a month (combined with a test, trace, isolate, treat capability) and has totally eliminated community transmission. With the exception on an almost total ban on foreigners entering the country, and quarantine for returning nationals, there remain few restrictions, for instance:

• maximum gathering sizes of 100;
• in bars you must remain in your own social group and remain seated (no mingling) plus there is a dedicated server for each table.

Further loosening is expected in New Zealand in June, probably including free movement between New Zealand and Australia (where the virus is also under control).

That seems like a good "flatten the curve" strategy.  I think banning large-group gatherings so that the herd-immunity spread does not overwhelm hospitals, is a good idea for this virus.  Each pathogen will require a tailored response.  

 

With functional testing, the "quarantine" period could be reduced to a few days.  I am putting my hope in testing-systems / infrastructure.

 

1 minute ago, BritTim said:

Do not assume that you can convince people to go out and get themselves infected just because they are allowed to do so. Many will choose to protect themselves even if there is no lockdown. Limiting economic damage is best ensured by eliminating the virus, and convincing your people that it is safe for them to live more or less normally.

 

Go early and go hard to prevent losing control is the key that has allowed some countries to successfully control Covid-19 with minimum casualties and impact on the economy.

I would not tell anyone else what to do regarding their own personal safety.  The risk-averse should be free to take whatever precautions they believe are best for them.  I would only interfere with other's freedom, to the extent it is absolutely necessary to prevent hospitals being overwhelmed - where the matter crosses from "individual liberty" into "shared infrastructure."

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

In the USA, any death attributed to COVID nets the hospital a pile of money.  Mortiticans are reporting many never-tested are being listed as covid-deaths, to maximize those returns.

 

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

I hope they are testing those cardiac-arrest patients, and classifying them as to whether their heart-attacks - which are a leading cause of death w/o covid - were truly due to covid.

It would be far better if the infrastructure was in place to test all those who die at home for Covid-19. In the US, this almost never happens. As far as the conspiracy theory goes that doctors are conspiring with their hospitals to commit fraud, I do not believe it. Not a single case has been prosecuted. Yes, as with deaths at home, there has been a problem of many deaths in US hospitals having to be diagnosed based on symptoms rather then tests. That does not mean those dying of traffic accidents are being reported on their death certificates as victims of Covid-19.

[DrJack54]

I thought there was a forum for covid-19.

Guess this thing spreads everywhere, including Thai visas forum

Edited May 27, 2020 by DrJack54

[ubonjoe]

7 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

I thought there was a forum for covid-19.

Not easy to keep topics on topic. So many people are obsessed about it.

I only have so many hours a day to try and do it.