Jump to content

News Forum - Thailand could drop its mask mandate by mid-June, says Ministry of Public Health


Thaiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 5/22/2022 at 5:22 PM, Soidog said:

And Monkey Pox 

 

13 hours ago, Highlandman said:

Oh man up already you snowflake. I am unvaccinated and will never be vaccinated. No one that remains unvaccinated now will ever get the shot.

No unvaccinated person "wishes" they got the jab.

Maybe only the ones drawing their last breathe as they look into the eyes of their loved ones as they slip away

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DiJoDavO said:

Are you new in Thailand? Do you know Anutin? 😂

I know him better than you. You don't know Thailand because it's Thai people who hold muzzle wearing dearly, not foreigners. Already most foreign tourists aren't wearing them. It's Thais who will continue wearing them even if the mandate is dropped. Remember to thank me once I've been proven right in a few weeks time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Scarface said:

Would anyone know if this includes the poor kids at school? Truly hope so, but of course even if it did it would most likely 'divide' classrooms with some paranoid parents insisting that their kids keep them on, I mean logically if the parents still wear them they aren't likely to tell little Somchai he can be freed and be a normal child? 

Many Thai parents have less common sense than the government. They are actually the ones demanding these mandates, along with regular ATK testing remaining in place. Only the expat parents are fighting the mandates and arguing with school officials who insist they remain for now. It's also frustrating that the schools (even the most expensive ones, costing as much in tuition fees as the price of an average car) don't make their own rules and have to wait for daddy government to decide and can't even provide the parents with an idea, a rough ballpark date on when the rule will be scrapped.

That's not education, it's indoctrination. What's the difference then to sending your child to a public school? Sounds like the international schools are one big rip-off designed to traumatize children just as much as the public schools. If they had any decency, they would have scrapped this nonsense months ago.

Even in China, students don't have to wear masks anymore in most cases.

**Unsupported inference removed.

Edited by Smithydog
Text removed under Rule 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Highlandman said:

I know him better than you. You don't know Thailand because it's Thai people who hold muzzle wearing dearly, not foreigners. Already most foreign tourists aren't wearing them. It's Thais who will continue wearing them even if the mandate is dropped. Remember to thank me once I've been proven right in a few weeks time.

As you can see with the laughing emojis I was just kidding. Don't need to make this a competition on who knows Thailand better. Or do you just want to have people on this forum to drop their jaws because of your superior knowledge of Thailand and being more Thai than the Thai people themselves?🙄

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, Highlandman said:

Many Thai parents have less common sense than the government. They are actually the ones demanding these mandates, along with regular ATK testing remaining in place. Only the expat parents are fighting the mandates and arguing with school officials who insist they remain for now. It's also frustrating that the schools (even the most expensive ones, costing as much in tuition fees as the price of an average car) don't make their own rules and have to wait for daddy government to decide and can't even provide the parents with an idea, a rough ballpark date on when the rule will be scrapped.

That's not education, it's indoctrination. What's the difference then to sending your child to a public school? Sounds like the international schools are one big rip-off designed to traumatize children just as much as the public schools. If they had any decency, they would have scrapped this nonsense months ago.

Even in China, students don't have to wear masks anymore in most cases.

Why is Thailand stricter on mask usage than China? Is Thailand becoming the next North Korea? Something is seriously wrong here when China has more freedom than Thailand.

Yes, I feel like I've lost the will to live, as I know I'm fighting a losing battle. I've got 2 kids at private school 13 and 10 and the only solace I can take is that they don't seem to mind wearing the damned things. I only came here for a bit of fun 20 years ago, missus got pregnant etc and here I still am having to deal with this. It kills me and to be frank I feel like I've messed up big time. Just need to hang in for another half a dozen years or so then I need to get out of this lunatic asylum.

Edited by Smithydog
Disguised attempt at expletive removed.
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note from the Moderators

It has been noted that some members are using inferred statements in their comments without supporting such remarks as required under the Forum Guidelines. In doing so they have been misleading.

Such comments have been removed under Rule (11).

Members are reminded to ensure their posts are not misleading and such inferences are properly supported.

Moderator

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Highlandman said:

Many Thai parents have less common sense than the government. They are actually the ones demanding these mandates, along with regular ATK testing remaining in place. Only the expat parents are fighting the mandates and arguing with school officials who insist they remain for now. It's also frustrating that the schools (even the most expensive ones, costing as much in tuition fees as the price of an average car) don't make their own rules and have to wait for daddy government to decide and can't even provide the parents with an idea, a rough ballpark date on when the rule will be scrapped.

That's not education, it's indoctrination. What's the difference then to sending your child to a public school? Sounds like the international schools are one big rip-off designed to traumatize children just as much as the public schools. If they had any decency, they would have scrapped this nonsense months ago.

Even in China, students don't have to wear masks anymore in most cases.

Why is Thailand stricter on mask usage than China? Is Thailand becoming the next North Korea? Something is seriously wrong here when China has more freedom than Thailand.

Yes, but many students still do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Expert industrial hygienist testifies how masks don't work... 
 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mandy said:

Maybe only the ones drawing their last breathe as they look into the eyes of their loved ones as they slip away

Their choice !

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Highlandman said:

I know him better than you. You don't know Thailand because it's Thai people who hold muzzle wearing dearly, not foreigners. Already most foreign tourists aren't wearing them. It's Thais who will continue wearing them even if the mandate is dropped. Remember to thank me once I've been proven right in a few weeks time.

Its their choice to wear a mask ! Some still feel that this helps prevent …

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, Freeduhdumb said:

Expert industrial hygienist testifies how masks don't work... 
 

He is partially right, and partially wrong.

He is right to say that control experiment must be done (I always stress this to my students, often they present me data without controls and I always reply them how can I understand if that experiment is good or not without a reference... and yet the next time they return without control... d'oh), and if those research he generally mentioned did not have controls, they are basically nonsense. However, since he talked generally, not much can be said (and all teh data he is presente can be rebutted by other studies as well).

He is also right that ventilation is very important, indeed there are strong suggestions that even by keeping both car's windows (passenger and driver) open a few cm is enough to guarantee a sufficient air change to prevent the virus to spread from one car occupant to another for as much as 30 minutes (a few minutes only if the car is kept closed).

He is wrong when he suggest masks are too large to stop viruses because aerosols are just 5 mcrons and a virus is 500 times smaller than whatever and droples falls within minutes. That's why there is a general consensus in defining a potential transmission if one has been near to another at less than 1 meter, for at least 15 minutes, as this is the distance and time for a droplet to exist outside the emitter before falling to ground.

He is also wrong in this aspect because masks are not just passive mechanical filters. Viruses are delayed by both tortousity of the pores/fibers, but also, and importantly, by electrostatic interaction with the surface of such fibers, which he did not say, and it is this interaction that most of all helps to prevent them to enter the body (electrostatic interaction is the reason geckos can walk on floors and ceiling, by the way, to underline it is not just a little thing). This may be something that an industrial hygiene expert could ignore, even with 45 years of experience like this guy, if he does not have an understanding of materials and surface science. That's why it is better to work in synergy with other professional figures (physicians,  etc.), not against them to disprove facts that cannot be disproven based only on own personal experience, although extensive. 

He is also a bit naive on the lateral contamination due to imperfect sealing of either N95 or common masks. Yes, they are not sealed on the side, but it is also a very uncommon way of entry on an everyday use. Masks are designed to block what is going out of one's mouth and nose as much as possible. It is rare for someone to talk or spit or emit droplets exactly on the lateral entrance point between cheeck and mask, mostly that is a voluntary act. Yet, there is still a propagation pattern that follow a direction from the mouth of an unmasked people to the outer surface of a masked one, and it is not that magically all viruses can enter from the side.

Masks are a quick compromise between the strict parameters that this guy is proposing thorugh engineering controls (which are unrealistic in the real world, aside from airplane ventilation and already existing ventilation environment, of course), or the impossibility for the people to live with respirators all day, and going everybody maskless with the risk of a huge transmission and the overload of healthcare facilities. Everybody knows. Questioning relentlessly on their effectiveness (or lack of) without considering all boundary conditions is rather pointless.

Edited by Ivo_Shandor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ivo_Shandor said:

He is partially right, and partially wrong.

He is right to say that control experiment must be done (I always stress this to my students, often they present me data without controls and I always reply them how can I understand if that experiment is good or not without a reference... and yet the next time they return without control... d'oh), and if those research he generally mentioned did not have controls, they are basically nonsense. However, since he talked generally, not much can be said (and all teh data he is presente can be rebutted by other studies as well).

He is also right that ventilation is very important, indeed there are strong suggestions that even by keeping both car's windows (passenger and driver) open a few cm is enough to guarantee a sufficient air change to prevent the virus to spread from one car occupant to another for as much as 30 minutes (a few minutes only if the car is kept closed).

He is wrong when he suggest masks are too large to stop viruses because aerosols are just 5 mcrons and a virus is 500 times smaller than whatever and droples falls within minutes. That's why there is a general consensus in defining a potential transmission if one has been near to another at less than 1 meter, for at least 15 minutes, as this is the distance and time for a droplet to exist outside the emitter before falling to ground.

He is also wrong in this aspect because masks are not just passive mechanical filters. Viruses are delayed by both tortousity of the pores/fibers, but also, and importantly, by electrostatic interaction with the surface of such fibers, which he did not say, and it is this interaction that most of all helps to prevent them to enter the body (electrostatic interaction is the reason geckos can walk on floors and ceiling, by the way, to underline it is not just a little thing). This may be something that an industrial hygiene expert could ignore, even with 45 years of experience like this guy, if he does not have an understanding of materials and surface science. That's why it is better to work in synergy with other professional figures (physicians,  etc.), not against them to disprove facts that cannot be disproven based only on own personal experience, although extensive. 

He is also a bit naive on the lateral contamination due to imperfect sealing of either N95 or common masks. Yes, they are not sealed on the side, but it is also a very uncommon way of entry on an everyday use. Masks are designed to block what is going out of one's mouth and nose as much as possible. It is rare for someone to talk or spit or emit droplets exactly on the lateral entrance point between cheeck and mask, mostly that is a voluntary act. Yet, there is still a propagation pattern that follow a direction from the mouth of an unmasked people to the outer surface of a masked one, and it is not that magically all viruses can enter from the side.

Masks are a quick compromise between the strict parameters that this guy is proposing thorugh engineering controls (which are unrealistic in the real world, aside from airplane ventilation and already existing ventilation environment, of course), or the impossibility for the people to live with respirators all day, and going everybody maskless with the risk of a huge transmission and the overload of healthcare facilities. Everybody knows. Questioning relentlessly on their effectiveness (or lack of) without considering all boundary conditions is rather pointless.

In other words... masks don't work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Freeduhdumb said:

In other words... masks don't work. 

In other words, you didn't read and/or understand what I wrote.

TLDR: no, masks do work, but not as effectively as other solutions like respirators or correct ventilation systems, which are impractical in normal conditions.

Edited by Ivo_Shandor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ivo_Shandor said:

In other words, you didn't read and/or understand what I wrote.

TLDR: no, masks do work, but not as effectively as other solutions like respirators or correct ventilation systems, which are impractical in normal conditions.

No Ivo they don't work... you clearly didn't want to listen to the expert. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Freeduhdumb said:

No Ivo they don't work... you clearly didn't want to listen to the expert. 

My reply was indeed on top of what he said, he being a 45-year expert in industrial hygiene, me being a 15-year expert in materials science. Free to have your opinion. Besides, it takes the same time to read and assimilate my reply than listen to him, so your very quick response before evidences your position quite clearly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ivo_Shandor said:

My reply was indeed on top of what he said, he being a 45-year expert in industrial hygiene, me being a 15-year expert in materials science. Free to have your opinion. Besides, it takes the same time to read and assimilate my reply than listen to him, so your very quick response before evidences your position quite clearly.

Just because I don't accept your lame response doesn't mean I didn't read it... YOUR WRONG! The expert is correct. Get over it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ivo_Shandor said:

My reply was indeed on top of what he said, he being a 45-year expert in industrial hygiene, me being a 15-year expert in materials science. Free to have your opinion. Besides, it takes the same time to read and assimilate my reply than listen to him, so your very quick response before evidences your position quite clearly.

Masks don't work... Dr. Anthony Fauci in America tells the truth about Masks.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/mWPRZlwFU0eQ/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ivo_Shandor said:

He is partially right, and partially wrong.

He is right to say that control experiment must be done (I always stress this to my students, often they present me data without controls and I always reply them how can I understand if that experiment is good or not without a reference... and yet the next time they return without control... d'oh), and if those research he generally mentioned did not have controls, they are basically nonsense. However, since he talked generally, not much can be said (and all teh data he is presente can be rebutted by other studies as well).

He is also right that ventilation is very important, indeed there are strong suggestions that even by keeping both car's windows (passenger and driver) open a few cm is enough to guarantee a sufficient air change to prevent the virus to spread from one car occupant to another for as much as 30 minutes (a few minutes only if the car is kept closed).

He is wrong when he suggest masks are too large to stop viruses because aerosols are just 5 mcrons and a virus is 500 times smaller than whatever and droples falls within minutes. That's why there is a general consensus in defining a potential transmission if one has been near to another at less than 1 meter, for at least 15 minutes, as this is the distance and time for a droplet to exist outside the emitter before falling to ground.

He is also wrong in this aspect because masks are not just passive mechanical filters. Viruses are delayed by both tortousity of the pores/fibers, but also, and importantly, by electrostatic interaction with the surface of such fibers, which he did not say, and it is this interaction that most of all helps to prevent them to enter the body (electrostatic interaction is the reason geckos can walk on floors and ceiling, by the way, to underline it is not just a little thing). This may be something that an industrial hygiene expert could ignore, even with 45 years of experience like this guy, if he does not have an understanding of materials and surface science. That's why it is better to work in synergy with other professional figures (physicians,  etc.), not against them to disprove facts that cannot be disproven based only on own personal experience, although extensive. 

He is also a bit naive on the lateral contamination due to imperfect sealing of either N95 or common masks. Yes, they are not sealed on the side, but it is also a very uncommon way of entry on an everyday use. Masks are designed to block what is going out of one's mouth and nose as much as possible. It is rare for someone to talk or spit or emit droplets exactly on the lateral entrance point between cheeck and mask, mostly that is a voluntary act. Yet, there is still a propagation pattern that follow a direction from the mouth of an unmasked people to the outer surface of a masked one, and it is not that magically all viruses can enter from the side.

Masks are a quick compromise between the strict parameters that this guy is proposing thorugh engineering controls (which are unrealistic in the real world, aside from airplane ventilation and already existing ventilation environment, of course), or the impossibility for the people to live with respirators all day, and going everybody maskless with the risk of a huge transmission and the overload of healthcare facilities. Everybody knows. Questioning relentlessly on their effectiveness (or lack of) without considering all boundary conditions is rather pointless.

Two things regarding masks and relating to your posts.

1) The primary advantage is by wearing one you reduce the chance of passing on a virus to others if you are infected. This is why “choice” is not entirely reasonable. It’s like saying most road fatalities are caused by alcohol and then saying it’s everyone’s choice if they wish to drink and drive.
 

2) This all comes down to probability of spreading the virus. Even with my hand over my mouth while I sneeze and cough, I must be reducing the number of aerosol droplets and hence reducing the risk to others.
 

During the high case stages of the Covid virus and pre-vaccination, I was an avid supporter of masks and wished my government had acted quicker to introduce them as law. Now we have this largely under control, I believe it is time to stop the laws to make people wear them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Sawarot said:

How can you expect to be treated as a grown-up if you didn't even take the vaccine?

Why would I take the vaccine? I'm not at risk and it doesn't prevent infection. As a matter of statistics I will have the antibodies. 

Edited by Tigermask
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Highlandman said:

Oh man up already you snowflake. I am unvaccinated and will never be vaccinated. No one that remains unvaccinated now will ever get the shot.

No unvaccinated person "wishes" they got the jab.

Up to you big guy. There is no manning up to be done. Simply put you are an antivaxer and that is your choice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, PapayaBokBok said:

Thanx P-BokBok. That was a great come back and even throwing in the Fox jab was hilarious and to the point. They can do wahte ever they want, but don't come crying when they get sick and say I was wrong and then die off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HolyCowCm said:

Thanx P-BokBok. That was a great come back and even throwing in the Fox jab was hilarious and to the point. They can do wahte ever they want, but don't come crying when they get sick and say I was wrong and then die off.

Our snowflake friend seems to have runaway, as they all tend to do once you call them out....SAD!!!  

His epitaph will read "I owned the Libs".....

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 3:56 PM, Tigermask said:

Why would I take the vaccine? I'm not at risk and it doesn't prevent infection. As a matter of statistics I will have the antibodies. 

This is where "acting as a grown-up" is an appropriate phrase. Your mask wearing and you taking the vaccine isn't meant to protect you, they're meant to protect others around you. And if you can trust others around you to also act as grown-ups, you'll be protected in return. But you failed. Miserably. Childishly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 12:53 PM, Freeduhdumb said:

Expert industrial hygienist testifies how masks don't work... 
 

The thing about "experts" is everyone has one... 🤷 Regardless, if you live in Asia, mask wearing is not going away quickly (maybe never). However, it would be appreciated if they gave people a choice vs. mandates. Soon, I hope. 

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