national

Comiket will require proof of coronavirus vaccination or PCR test results for admission

32 Comments
By Casey Baseel, SoraNews24

It’s been almost two years since the last iteration of Comiket, the ordinarily twice-a-year gathering of dojinshi artists, cosplayers, and other connoisseurs of otaku culture. The coronavirus pandemic put a swift stop to the fun entirely in 2020 and also prevented a summer Comiket from happening this year, but in August came the joyful announcement that Comiket will still slide into 2021 with a two-day event at the tail-end of the year.

At least, that’s the plan. The organizers have repeatedly stated that everything depends on public health conditions, as it’s unlikely that Japan will be completely out of the pandemic before we’re out of 2021.

Because of that, specific rules and regulations for Comiket 99, as the next event will be called, have been coming out on a gradual basis while monitoring the current situation, and on Nov 12 came the announcement that if you want to get into Comiket, you’re either going to have to show proof of vaccination or a PCR test with a negative result. With clinics administering vaccinations easier to find in Japan than ones performing PCR tests, for any otaku who have been putting their jabs off, this should make for a nice incentive.

The event guidelines include the following statement: “We firmly request that all visitors, both to protect themselves from infection and prevent transferring infection to others, not think of this year as being like past Comikets, and to thoroughly read through the precautions on the event’s official website.”

The latest announcement also says that, as of this moment, attendance will be capped at 55,000 guests per day. While that’s only a fraction of what Comiket drew in pre-pandemic times (total attendance for the four-day 2019 winter Comiket is listed as 750,000), the organizers say it will still be the highest-attendance event held in Japan in 2021, and that in order to avoid congestion the event will be separated into two areas at the Tokyo Big Sight convention center, an East Area and a Southwest Area.

The connecting passage between the two will be closed at 9 a.m., one hour before visitors are admitted, and will remain closed throughout the day to exhibitors and cosplayers, though transfer between the two areas may possibly be allowed for regular visitors at times, depending on conditions. There’s no guarantee, though, and tickets for regular visitors and cosplayers will specifically grant entrance to one zone or the other.

And again, the organizers stress that these regulations may change as the event draws near, deepening on public health conditions, government regulations, Big Sight management guidelines, and other factors. For now though, Comiket is still on track to take place on December 30 and 31.

Related: Comiket official website

Source: Comiket official website via Hachima Kiko

Read more stories from SoraNews24.

-- Return of Comiket doujinshi manga convention announced for 2021 in Tokyo

-- The Comiket Cloud: Anime convention’s attendees reportedly creating weather

-- [Virtual dojinshi convention Comic Vket recreates the community joy of canceled otaku gatherings](Virtual dojinshi convention Comic Vket recreates the community joy of canceled otaku gatherings)

© SoraNews24

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

32 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Here it is again anti-vaxxers, your world is getting smaller by the day! That requirement will keep the event safe fore everyone to enjoy!

-12 ( +8 / -20 )

Good move. The performers should also provide proof of humour before selling tickets. Most of these routines aren't in the leat bit funny.

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

The performers should also provide proof of humour before selling tickets.

They do. Performers who haven't proven they are humorous don't sell tickets. Performers who don't sell tickets don't get signed for conventions that sell tickets. If the performer sells tickets, it means they've proven themselves humorous.

It's a straightforward meritocracy.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

@Paul Not a lot of "anti-vaxxers" in Japan. Plenty of hikikomori who have not been vaccinated yet but their world is already bedroom sized.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

PaulToday 08:00 am JST

Here it is again anti-vaxxers, your world is getting smaller by the day! That requirement will keep the event safe fore everyone to enjoy!

Actually, the world is getting smaller for the ones vaxxed by " the experimental vax " as so many around the world are dropping dead and getting seriously injured after the jab. The information is out there if you research. Even the CDC and FDA show the death and injury statistics, although the numbers are under reported. Still, it is in the many thousands.

What don't people understand " experimental vaccine " ? Why do the drug companies have protection against being sued if a person is injured by their vax ? What other products sold around the world have the same protection ? I just don't understand why so many people desire this jab when the Center of Disease control admits the vax is not so effective, therefore needing booster shots and even talking of vaxining peole every few months from now on.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

Paul

Here it is again from people like you.

Immediately labeling others says a bit about you as well.

How would someone’s world get smaller by not being able to attend Comiket.

In a couple years we will probably be required to be on something else for annual Covid rounds, so you may as well get used to stop blaming others as pro or anti something (like my 85 year old grandpa)

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Actually, the world is getting smaller for the ones vaxxed by " the experimental vax " as so many around the world are dropping dead and getting seriously injured after the jab. The information is out there if you research. Even the CDC and FDA show the death and injury statistics, although the numbers are under reported. Still, it is in the many thousands.

oh ok then show us where these statistics are, over 5 billion vaccines administered around the world where are all these mass deaths you're referring too. heres another stat thats readily available, 5 million deaths worldwide from unvaccinated individuals

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

@Paul It will not keep the event safe because vaccinated people can still carry and spread the virus just as much if not more than unvaccinated people.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

vaccinated people can still carry and spread the virus just as much if not more than unvaccinated people.

Wrong.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

Actually, the world is getting smaller for the ones vaxxed by " the experimental vax " as so many around the world are dropping dead and getting seriously injured after the jab. 

As long as the people that die or injured are doing it at the same rate wheter they are vaccinated or not that still proves your idea completely false.

The CDC and the FDA data clearly prove the vaccines are not specially dangerous, and hugely safer than getting COVID,

 Why do the drug companies have protection against being sued if a person is injured by their vax ?

Because public health beneifts much more from losing money by absorbing that responsibility than by having lawyers getting rich by people trying to sue companies making both the claimants and the companies lose money with the risk of making a safe and effective health measure no longer used even if not a single case can be correlated to it. This way public health gets a vaccine to be commonly used and people that have even a tiny posibility of being affected by the vaccine get compensation without having to prove it first.

The CDC clearly say the vaccine is effective and recommend it for everybody for which is indicated, that is the contrary to what you are saying.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Good move. The performers should also provide proof of humour before selling tickets. Most of these routines aren't in the leat bit funny.

You should watch the performers before you judge them.

For that matter, you should know what Comiket is before you comment on it.

Hint: There are no performers.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It will not keep the event safe because vaccinated people can still carry and spread the virus just as much if not more than unvaccinated people.

wrong no evidence whatsoever that that vaccinated spreading the viruse more, what antivaxxers just cant understand is that the vaccine is meant to reduce hospitalisation and death from the unvaccinated, scientifically proven from multiple different countries that unvaccinated are about 11 times more likely to become hospitalized and die from covid FACT.

now lets please hear all the pseudoscience from the antivaxxers again

1 ( +5 / -4 )

well i am not interested to go there anyway...so nema problema...

1 ( +3 / -2 )

StrangerlandToday  11:19 am JST

vaccinated people can still carry and spread the virus just as much if not more than unvaccinated people.

Wrong.

Err.... according official UK data, vaccinated people get more infected than unvaccinated, see here:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1025358/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-41.pdf

Where do you get your opinion from?

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Where do you get your opinion from?

It seems you do not get your opinion from the links you put out there....

From your last link:

(p14) COVID-19 cases presenting to emergency care

Rates among persons vaccinated with 2 doses (per 100,000)

Under 18: 0.4 

18-29: 0.9 

30-39: 2.1 

40-49: 4.6 

50-59: 5.2 

60-69: 8.4 

70-79:  16.8 

80+: 37.3

Rates among persons not vaccinated (per 100,000)

Under 18: 3.3

18-29: 5.5

30-39: 10.1

40-49: 18.8

50-59: 25.7

60-69: 32.8

70-79:  51.2 

80+: 74.8

Where in that do you read 'vaccinated people get more infected than unvaccinated'?

Needing emergency care seems pretty infected to me.

The table on the following page shows many more unvaccinated ending up dead, too.

Invalid CSRF

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Err.... according official UK data, vaccinated people get more infected than unvaccinated, see here:

If you have more vaccinated than unvaccinated people that is an expected result, nowhere in the document it says that vaccinated people spread the infection as much or more than unvaccinated people. If the vaccinated people are less likely to be infected (thus having lower RATES of infection even if they as a group are more numerous) or to be symptomatic, or if the infection last for much shorter times that still means the unvaccinated people represent a higher risk of spreading.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

virusrexToday  03:22 pm JST

. If the vaccinated people are less likely to be infected (thus having lower RATES of infection even if they as a group are more numerous) or to be symptomatic, or if the infection last for much shorter times that still means the unvaccinated people represent a higher risk of spreading.

That conclusion does not follow from your premises.

Assuming vaccinated people are less likely to be infected and have lower rates of infection, or to be asymptomatic, or if the infection lasts for much shorter times, this has nothing to do with a higher risk (or any risk) of spreading by unvaccinated people. There is no connection between the two groups.

Come on guy---you can see the fallacy in that.

Just as a starter, how is an unvaccinated person who is not infected a risk for spreading an infection he doesn't have?

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Just as a starter, how is an unvaccinated person who is not infected a risk for spreading an infection he doesn't have?

Eh? The same could be asked of a vaccinated person.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

If both can still be infected, what is the use of the proof of the medical procedure?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Temyong

If both can still be infected, what is the use of the proof of the medical procedure?

....and if the vaccination protects people, why are the vaccinated so worried about the evil unvaccinated?

Somehow that never gets answered.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

StrangerlandToday  04:03 pm JST

Eh? The same could be asked of a vaccinated person.

So you're saying in both cases, neither is a risk?

If you say yes, you are agreeing with me.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

cleo

It seems you do not get your opinion from the links you put out there....

From your last link:

(p14) COVID-19 cases presenting to emergency care

Rates among persons vaccinated with 2 doses (per 100,000)

It seems you look at links selectively. You found the table on page 14, which refers to "emergency care" and confirms your opinion. However I was talking about INFECTION.

You skipped the table on page 13, which shows that the vaccinated in all age groups except the very young are more infected than the unvaccinated. And this table compares rates not total numbers, so it compares apples to apples.

So yes, you can make the argument that the vaxx reduces emergency care. You can NOT claim that it prevents infection. Rather to the contrary, according to this official paper.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Sorry if I missed it, but where in the article does it confirm what the headline states?

I see the good old "request" line trotted out from event organisers, but where's the requirement that the headline mentions?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Please read the third paragraph.

Just as a starter, how is an unvaccinated person who is not infected a risk for spreading an infection he doesn't have?

That has no importance, if vaccinated people are infected less, have less symptoms and for shorter time that means they will spread the disease in lower numbers. There is never a requirement for any unifnefted person to spread the disease, we are talking about populations.

So you're saying in both cases, neither is a risk?

But since this situation is more likely to be presented in vaccinated people then the risk lowers by vaccination, which demonstrate the conclusion you tried to disprove actually follow the premises, you just never followed the logic properly.

If both can still be infected, what is the use of the proof of the medical procedure?

If people that are sober still can have traffic accidents, what is the use of testing for sobriety in drivers?

...and if the vaccination protects people, why are the vaccinated so worried about the evil unvaccinated?

Yet again the blindness of deeply self centered people that can't even consider that vaccinated people can worry about those that can't be vaccinated or that are insufficiently protected by vaccines and are much safer after the population they belong reaches herd immunity. All because they themselves are incapable of having those considerations and forget most people do. This is answered repeatedly and still people still keep thinking everybody only consider their own personal benefit.

You skipped the table on page 13, which shows that the vaccinated in all age groups except the very young are more infected than the unvaccinated. And this table compares rates not total numbers, so it compares apples to apples.

This requires the assumption that both populations are demographically equivalent, but we know this is not the case because not everybody had the same priority to be vaccinated. People are not randomly distributed between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups nor their demographics equalized. The simple fact that people at a higher risk of infection (for example people treating and dealing with patients or large number of people because of their job) were prioritized for vaccination has to be considered before comparing between numbers, raw numbers without proper epidemiological analysis can't be used as an argument.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

virusrex

That has no importance, if vaccinated people are infected less,

As you say, that is IF. However, according to official UK data, vaccinated people are infected MORE.

So can revise your opinion?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Paul

Here it is again anti-vaxxers, your world is getting smaller by the day! 

I am waiting for the Novavax vaccine. Does that make me an "anti-vaxxer"? Pls explain.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

What an overdoing at the wrong place, I guess all those comic and manga otaku don’t want to have their scene closed or locked down, so that they abide to all precautions like masks , distance and vaccinations much more than any other group in population.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As you say, that is IF. However, according to official UK data, vaccinated people are infected MORE.

But once again, the issue is that the people that are vaccinated are not the same as those that remain unvaccinated.

Unless you can provide proof both groups are demographically the same the conclussion is that the people that actually are a a much higher risk of infection have been already vaccinated, but the reduction of the risk thanks to vaccination is not enough to make them equivalent to the low risk population rates. To say that vaccinated people are infected more you need to provide data comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated people of high risk of infection (for example only medical personnel treating COVID patients) and show vaccinated people have higher rates of infection.

I am waiting for the Novavax vaccine. Does that make me an "anti-vaxxer"? Pls explain.

This means you are choosing to have a higher risk for no rational reason. Like someone that chooses to drive without a seatbelt because some newer model that is supposedly safer (or better looking, etc) will come out in the future.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

virusrex

This means you are choosing to have a higher risk for no rational reason. Like someone that chooses to drive without a seatbelt because some newer model that is supposedly safer (or better looking, etc) will come out in the future.

The Novavax recombined protein shot is a vaccine according to the traditional definition. The Pfizer/Moderna mRNA shots can only called "vaccines" by new, watered-down definition adopted by the NHI. Are you saying you did not know that?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites