Negative COVID ATK test results, proof of 2 jabs required for Bangkok Loy Krathong

[misskit]

This year’s celebrations of the annual Loy Krathong festival, on Friday November 19th, will embrace the “new normal” lifestyle, as all visitors to the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA)’s approved venues must show proof of two COVID vaccination jabs or COVID-19 negative test results for a test done within 72 hours prior to entering the venue.


Deputy Governor of Bangkok, Kriangyod Sudlapa has announced this year’s locations for official Loy Krathong festivities in the capital, under the COVID-Free Setting and Universal Prevention measures.


The first location is under the Rama 8 Bridge and the event will be held from 5pm-10pm. This location will invoke the atmosphere of an olden day market, with local products from 50 the districts in Bangkok for sale and Thai traditional performances.


Meanwhile, the festival at Ong Ang canal will be held from November 19th-21st from 5pm onwards. The event will be extended to nearby locations, such as Damrong Sathit Bridge, Phanuphan Bridge, Han Bridge, Bophitphimuk Bridge, Osathanond Bridge and Chao Phraya Sky Park. The event will also feature Thai traditional performances and music, a mini-concert by Thai rapper “Wonderframe” and street performances.


Apart from the two prime locations, 30 public parks across Bangkok will be open for the festival from 5am-midnight. People at all locations must maintain social distancing, wear face masks at all times, wash their hands frequently and have their temperature screened.


Each venue will also limit the number of visitors, to avoid overcrowding, with only 1 person per 4 square metres. Food stalls and shops will be available, but without eating areas.


The sale and use of fireworks and sky lanterns are strictly prohibited. If any venue plans to use fireworks, they must seek prior permission from the district office.


The BMA is also urging citizens to use krathongs (floating baskets) which are made from natural materials, such as banana leaves, banana trunks or bread, instead of those made from polystyrene foam. Visitors are also urged to use one krathong per family, to reduce waste.


Last year, the BMA collected 492,537 krathongs, 474,806 of which were made from natural materials (96.4%), while 17,731 were made from foam (3.6%). Total krathongs collected in 2020 was a decrease from the year before, when 502,024 were collected.


Negative COVID ATK test results, proof of 2 jabs required for Bangkok's Loy Krathong | Thai PBS World : The latest Thai news in English, News Headlines, World News and News Broadcasts in both Thai and English. We bring Thailand to the world

[harrybarracuda]

Someone should give Chiang Mai a call....

[Farang Ky Ay]

Most relevant part is the negative test, the double jab requirement makes little sense as you're still at risk of getting infected and infectious with them.

TBH if the situation was so dire, why would they allow such mass gatherings?

[cyrille]

As in other parts of the world the situation isn't good, but life has to restart at some point.

[harrybarracuda]

Most relevant part is the negative test, the double jab requirement makes little sense as you're still at risk of getting infected and infectious with them.

TBH if the situation was so dire, why would they allow such mass gatherings?

Because people have a big downer on both Prayut and the monarch, and they don't want to give them another excuse to start protesting?

[Farang Ky Ay]

Well covid is such a safety issue that we get to restrict liberties to avoid "the worst"...unless it put our job at risk?

It's time they get to the bottom of this vaccination drive compared to its efficacy against current and new variants (and for which timespan) and how being vaccinated prevent (limit significantly) the disease from spreading...


What I mean is if the sanitary situation requires liberties restrictions, at least refer to tangible things, being vaccinated doesn't equals being protected from the virus and inability to pass it to others, the covid tests give a far better indication on those risks..

[harrybarracuda]

being vaccinated doesn't equals being protected from the virus and inability to pass it to others, the covid tests give a far better indication on those risks..

But being vaccinated means a much higher level of protection against the virus and a much reduced ability to pass it to others.

Vaccination is still the way out of this mess, followed closely by infection, which hopefully will thin out the shallow antivax end of the gene pool.

[armstrong]

There was a temp check machine next to where you float the krathongs. Didn't see anyone use it.

[Farang Ky Ay]

But being vaccinated means a much higher level of protection against the virus and a much reduced ability to pass it to others.

Vaccination is still the way out of this mess, followed closely by infection, which hopefully will thin out the shallow antivax end of the gene pool.

So you just admitted vaccines do not equals not infected nor infectious, covid testing seems more effective to ensure that. If the situation is that bad they have to restrict rights, the criteria should be relevant regarding the risk to spread the disease which vaccines aren't, negative tests are a better indicator that people won't spread the virus.

Hope your last statement won't bite you in the back later on, I wouldn't miss the irony of it but still...

[Stumpy]

As in other parts of the world the situation isn't good, but life has to restart at some point.

I fully agree. Let's just get on with it already. This will all sort itself out at some point. We can't live in a bubble and in fear. Get vaccinated and move on. If you chose not to for whatever reason...OK. If those people fall ill it was a risk they took.

I avoided the local Loy Krathong party/gathering by the river near our house as my wife and I wanted to do our own deal. Being so close to the river where it was all set up, we heard the band and enjoyed the fireworks from the privacy of our pool area.

[baldrick]

So you just admitted vaccines do not equals not infected nor infectious, covid testing seems more effective to ensure that.

1. when you are vaccinated , you can still catch covid
2. when you are vaccinated , the window of being infectious is quite small because your body rids itself of the virus quickly
3. when you have gotten over your covid , you can still shed fragments of the virus that can be picked up for up to 20 days afterwards with the PCR test

so now you know this information - design the rules you think people should be following

[Farang Ky Ay]

You should add
4. Being somewhat "protected" with double shots, or even a third one, doesn't mean you'll be protected for very long from the variants the shots have been designed for, and then with other variants the level of protection remain to be assessed.

My number 4 contradict, or at the very least tone down significantly, your number 2.

I'd stick with a test result as it's the only way to assess one's infectious risk (yes some covid "survivor" could get positive results for 20 days after remission and thus get denied access for this short timespan, still better than a permanent yet unsubstantiated denial of unvaccinated people) and/or enforce social distancing and other hygienic rules (temp test, mask etc) ... meaning no overcrowded areas allowed, and certainly not government sponsored gatherings.

If I were them, I would focus most of health care effort on curing people as the vaccines efficacy is debatable be it for the time span and level of the protection they provide or the new variants issues.

[baldrick]

doesn't mean you'll be protected for very long from the variants the shots have been designed for, and then with other variants the level of protection remain to be assessed.

the spike protein is common - and the mRNA vaccines accurately identify it

My number 4 contradict, or at the very least tone down significantly, your number 2.

you are guessing - from personal experience I know , because I did not even have any symptoms and only a pre flight PCR test showed that I had it or had had it

[Farang Ky Ay]

Then why they are pushing for booster shots, even for people innoculated with mRNA vaccines?

I guess the rules I proposed weren't so out of touch?

[OhOh]

[baldrick]

Then why they are pushing for booster shots, even for people innoculated with mRNA vaccines?

I suggest you research the reasons via methods other than farcebook and youtube - I have no interest in educating the wilfully ignorant

if you find that simple acts on your part that help keep society as a whole safer, infringe on your perceptions of freedoms , ...

[Farang Ky Ay]

So sure to know the truth apparently, even if the vaccines haven't been properly tested yet either for its (dropping) efficacy rate or long terms side effects ... restricting people's rights on this basis is more than debatable.

And I may add that a vaccine can get mandatory when there's no cure to the disease it prevents, it's not the case with covid and the vaccines doesn't even prevent you from getting it so the logic behind this vaccine drive is flawed (at best)

[baldrick]

rights

your right is to not get the vaccine and to stay in your house

and the vaccines doesn't even prevent you from getting it so the logic behind this vaccine drive is flawed (at best)

what vaccine can you name that 100% prevents anything

[Farang Ky Ay]

^ first part of your answer is a great example of how sheepish (I mean by that docile and gullible) some people are, fully supporting groundless privation of rights, believing it's for the common good despite the fact that it's been clearly established that the de facto mandatory vaccines don't mean non infectious...at least base the restrictions of rights on tangible and relevant criteria regarding infectiousness, and for now only negative tests provide that.

I don't know of any vaccines which efficacy drop between 30 and 50% during a 6 months timespan, if you then add to that the variants issue, the picture isn't that bright.

[baldrick]

I mean by that docile and gullible

I am not a selfish cnut

[Hugh Cow]

Balders, you do realise you are pissing upwind. You will never convince anti vaxxers no matter how many experts you can produce. They ignore the basic facts. They will always look for self justifying arguments. Despite the vast majority of the medical profession being right behind vaccination others know better. It will not matter what facts stats etc are shown there is always a way not to believe evidence. Statistics and facts can always be distorted by people who refuse to believe the truth. Out of all the reasons to be vaccinated I will only offer one which to me is reason enough.
1: You are far less likely to be hospitalised.
This mean by being vaccinated you have helped to keep beds available for urgent surgical patients that really need them, rather than the terminally stupid.

[baldrick]

Balders, you do realise you are pissing upwind

yes - but I feel that showing the real side of posters is beneficial to others sometimes

his attempts to weasel around with diminished logic when it is obvious that his agenda has nothing to do with " rights " indicate that he is not some one whose statements can be trusted

just another one of the selfish who want all the benefits of living in societies without having to contribute and will not fcuk off to a cave because it does not have macdonalds and wifi

[Farang Ky Ay]

Oh my, how dared I to use logic and facts to make my point?

I don't have an "agenda", unless having an opinion is now equivalent to having an agenda? For all I care you're free to get the vaccine shots, I'm not criticizing you for your health choices...I prefer to wait and see what those vaccines actually worth both in terms of efficacy against the variants they are designed for and the newer ones, and the side effects. That's the path any vaccine (or any medication) has to follow, this process hasn't been completed for any of the vaccines yet. The protection they have been advertised to provide seems to decline sharply in quite a short timespan, it was their main selling point though.

Pot, kettle, black ... ain't you exposing yourself by calling me names - I'm not an anti Vax, I actually checked my vaccines and renewed those that needed to (after more than 10 years) prior to moving here. Difference is those vaccines are well known both for their efficacy and side effects. I'm now a c unt for not eating what they try to spoon feed to me despite evidences that vaccines are not (yet) the safety net they advertised.

Time will see, if my doubts were proven wrong meaning the vaccines do provide immunity and limited/manageable side-effects, I could still get it, probably the last and more efficient versions of it (hopefully with less shots required).
In the meantime I keep limiting interactions with people, note that doesn't mean I should have my rights limited groundlessly, if authorities want to do it they should do it on relevant criteria regarding infectiousness, being vaccinated is not equivalent to non infectious, a negative test is. And your reaction is quite telling TBH.
But if time proves that indeed the current vaccines aren't that efficient, what will this make of you? Will you eat your hat?

Edit: thanks for the Red Neverna and for calling me dumb...hope it won't bite you in the back later on. My bad for advocating basing rights restrictions on criteria relevant to being non infectious (negative test).

[baldrick]

Oh my, how dared I to use logic and facts to make my point?

no , you are using selfishness to make your point

I prefer to wait and see what those vaccines actually worth both in terms of efficacy against the variants they are designed for and the newer ones, and the side effects.

the simplest way to control is to just make people who are unvaccinated stay in their homes - the idea that managing the complexity of testing and trusting the selfish to be honest is just naive vacillation
and in the meantime you and your ilk while you are making excuses for not getting vaccines that are available to you, prolong the time it takes to get this pandemic under control and risk a newer variant that might well become even harder to control

In the meantime I keep limiting interactions with people, note that doesn't mean I should have my rights limited groundlessly, if authorities want to do it they should do it on relevant criteria regarding infectiousness, being vaccinated is not equivalent to non infectious, a negative test is. And your reaction is quite telling TBH.

But if time proves that indeed the current vaccines aren't that efficient, what will this make of you?

efficient ? they work much better than water - but that is not the message you are trying to disseminate - you are attempting to weasel some justification for your being a selfish cnut

soon as the next wave of infections start in the cold climes because people are gathered together inside because of the cold and the unvaccinated start dying in numbers , the narrative from the nutbags will be the government is murdering them by making them stay home - I hope the irony hits them in the face

[Farang Ky Ay]

There's indeed no point in debating, you're convinced to be in the right, and thus I'm a selfish cnut for not bowing to your (you and others) claims that vaccines provide protection and significantly prevent the spread.

Looks like you and your "ilk" are into self-validation
From my POV you seem to think that vaccinated people earned their rights to infect others because they have been compliant, if time prove you were wrong in pushing/supporting rights restrictions on irrelevant criteria what will that make of you?

I stick to my point, restrict rights if you want but do it on relevant criteria regarding infectiousness, which vaccines aren't, you want to do it or you're supporting this then negative test it is...if logistic is too complex to achieve that then don't do it, keep to other prevention measures.

Efficiency. Yeah vaccines may be more efficient than water, I don't doubt that I didn't say the contrary...does that make it a good and sustainable solution to covid issues? No, or at least not yet according to efficacy figures





Lancet article on declining mRNA vaccines efficacy



If I'm in the wrong then I'll get a vaccine that has been thoroughly studied both for efficacy and side-effects not a better-than-nothing expedient offering a waning protection and with which I would be on my own if I have side-effects (the legal disclaimer you have to sign prior to get the shots, the clause that prevent companies from being sued in government purchase contracts)

I reserve my name calling for when facts will be ascertained.