soccer

Qatar confirms COVID-19 test requirements for World Cup fans

20 Comments
By GRAHAM DUNBAR

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

20 Comments
Login to comment

is “regardless of the individual’s vaccination status,”

Qatari health authorities seem to be following the latest scientific guidance.

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

What's that @Bronco? Wearing a mask on public transport out of courtesy to others?

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Qatari health authorities seem to be following the latest scientific guidance.

What "latest" are you talking about? not testing vaccinated people have had no real scientific basis since the variants appeared, so is excepting from tests people with previous infection. Neither guarantees a person will not be infected (only reduce this risk). Qatar is choosing to focus on infection instead of reduction of risk.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

More than 97% of the population in Qatar has had at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, the data states.

Then basically everyone should be protected so how come . . .

theResidentToday  08:00 am JST

Wearing a mask on public transport out of courtesy to others?

Wearing a mask out of courtesy would not fall under the purview of following the latest scientific guidance.

Then again, credit them for not following the WHO's ever changing agency-advice about masks.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-masks-recommendation-trnd/index.html

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Wearing a mask out of courtesy would not fall under the purview of following the latest scientific guidance.

Neither is testing everyone irrespectively of their vaccination or infection status, it has been the recommendation from a long time ago.

 again, credit them for not following the WHO's ever changing agency-advice about masks.

The reccomendation of the WHO is to use masks, your 2 and a half year old link comes from a time where the evidence of benefit of the use of masks for asymptomatic people was just being reported, which still makes your point irrelevant (and the recommendation before that was not only from the WHO, but also from all other international public health authorities).

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Wearing a mask out of courtesy would not fall under the purview of following the latest scientific guidance.

Neither is testing everyone irrespectively of their vaccination or infection status, it has been the recommendation from a long time ago.

And so you understand the original statement it valid.

The reccomendation of the WHO is to use masks, your 2 and a half year old link comes from a time

Comes from CNN.

where the evidence of benefit of the use of masks for asymptomatic people was just being reported, which still makes your point irrelevant (and the recommendation before that was not only from the WHO, but also from all other international public health authorities).

In contrast to international public health authorities in Taiwan, Vietnam, Hong Kong, China, Japan, Korea etc.

And you do not have any source showing that wearing of masks was found to not limit the spread of Covid infections at that time, so that means the WHO now agrees with all those other global health authorities at the beginning of the crisis.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

And so you understand the original statement it valid.

As it misrepresent the measure as if it was something that have changed it is still wrong.

In contrast to international public health authorities in Taiwan, Vietnam, Hong Kong, China, Japan, Korea etc.

As you have repeatedly failed to provide evidence that all those authorities actually recommended masks use for asymptomatic people this is still validly considered false and a baseless appeal to authority.

And you do not have any source showing that wearing of masks was found to not limit the spread of Covid infections at that time

That has no relevance, your repeatedly deleted comments trying to misrepresent the recommendation of the WHO as contrary to the available evidence requires that evidence to be presented, if you can't provide it then your comment is still invalid and misleading. There was no scientific evidence at the beginning of the pandemic that would have made the recommendation invalid, and when that evidence appeared the CDC, EMA, WHO, etc changed the recommendations accordingly.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

This is fair as vaccination status has absolutely no bearing on contagion! While I'd like to see no checking at all non discriminatory checking of all I s the fairest solution

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

This is fair as vaccination status has absolutely no bearing on contagion!

There is a huge difference between vaccination not being a guarantee of a person becoming free of risk of infection and it having "absolutely no bearing" on it. Scientific evidence have proved vaccination do lower the risk of getting the infection, that would make your comment mistaken.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

wondering who really wants to go there?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Nah

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

over 6000 migrant workers have died in Qatar since 2010.

God forbid any of them run a temperature...

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

This is fair as vaccination status has absolutely no bearing on contagion!

There is a huge difference between vaccination not being a guarantee of a person becoming free of risk of infection and it having "absolutely no bearing" on it.

Their effect on infection and transmission is minimal, and short-lived.

So, although I disagree with their having a COVID-19 testing requirement, it makes perfect sense to make it independent the individual’s vaccination status.

My policy is that I avoid any place that has a vaccination or test requirement.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Their effect on infection and transmission is minimal, and short-lived.

Studies present evidence of this effect being significative, which is why they are still promoted as such by scientific and medical authorities, just saying they are all wrong is not a meaningful argument.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

wondering who really wants to go there?

ah people who want to go the World Cup

0 ( +0 / -0 )

quote: if fans do not develop symptoms of COVID-19.

It's largely asymptomatic.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Fans going to the World Cup in Qatar must show a negative COVID-19 test when they arrive as part of the host nation’s rules to combat COVID-19, organizers said Thursday.

No vaccination requirement.

Scientific evidence have proved vaccination do lower the risk of getting the infection, that would make your comment mistaken

This is false. No scientific evidence proved this.

Masks must be worn on public transport, including the subway system that many fans will use to get to the eight stadiums in and around Doha.

You don't need to be a medical expert to come up with this.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

This is false. No scientific evidence proved this.

It is terribly easy to bring scientific evidence that prove this,

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2336617-vaccinations-and-past-infections-reduce-risk-of-spreading-covid-19/

https://www.aha.org/news/headline/2022-03-11-cdc-pfizer-vaccine-reduces-omicron-infection-risk-31-59-children-age-5-15

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2119451

Your problem is assuming that if you ignore something it means it does not exist, in reality it just means you ignore that, even when it is extremely easy to find out.

Your repeated appeals for you not being a medical professional to justify being wrong are invalid excuses as well, anybody with an interest can confirm vaccines reduce rates of infection significantly in seconds.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Vaccines take about two weeks to reduce infection rates.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites