Bob

I would note that, while I'm hoping that "in network" coverage applies, it might be "out of network" coverage (which provides somewhat less coverage). I'll advise once BC/BS responds in writing to me.

Thanks for the replies. It appears I am covered although, to be safe, I've asked for a written letter from BC/BS just to verify that. If I need any hospitalization (I'm not going to bother with routine medical stuff as I'll pay for that), I'll seek reimbursement via the international claim form. Hopefully, that will work (or, better yet, I won't need to try it out).

Place I first stayed when I went to first went to Phuket a decade ago. The place was wiped out by the tsunami and then I understood it was being rebuilt. But (and I don't have a clue where I read this), I remember reading something last year or so that the place no longer exists. Given my memory, I suppose I could be wrong.

Rather than string out the other thread on medical insurance, I'm wondering if any of you expats living in Thailand now are choosing not to buy separate medical insurance (relying on whatever insurance you have via your home country). I have medical insurance here in the states and, while it's expensive, I simply won't go without it. My policy (Blue Cross/Blue Shield) states that it will reimburse within its guidelines for policy holders obtaining covered treatments in other countries (including Thailand) although they request you notify them via their website and they'll recommend a given hospital, etc. (for example, they approve of Chiangmai Ram in Chiangmai - and I'll be in Chiangmai and I personally like that hospital, having been there a couple of times with Thai friends). I'm about to start a 7-month sojourn in Chiangmai and I'm undecided as to whether to buy additional insurance for two reasons. First, I've already have the coverage and, while the reimbursement deal from Blue Cross would probably be a hassle, I can handle that part. Second, I'm generally in good health and medical care in Thailand is relatively inexpensive (for example, I spent a day and a half in a private room in Sao Paulo Hospital in Hua Hin and the entire cost - five IV's, doctor's visits, rooms, and the drugs from the pharmacy they gave me when I left - totalled $379.00 (US). [Hell, here in the states, that day and a half would have been over 10 grand!]. So, I'm wondering - any of you going bare (meaning not obtaining additional "international" health insurance)for the same reasons?

Well, now you're making me want to go give it a try again! Just kidding, I'm not touching the stuff.

You certainly don't need support from us but, frankly, it sounds like a very good decision for you. Good luck with it. I personally believe that marijuana ought to be legalized for adults for the basic reason that it's likely less dangerous (overall) than alchohol; plus, again in my view, by legalizing it, it likely will lessen the flow of other illicit and more dangerous drugs at least here in the US (because the bulk of drug flow around here is pot and pot distributors normally only add a few other illicit and more dangerous drugs to the mix because what they're doing is illegal anyway). But, although I tried pot a couple of times when I was in my twenties, I absolutely won't use it myself. Why? For two basic reasons. First, every one of my friends and relatives who smoked it moderately or more eventually lost interest in anything that used to be important to them. I don't know what you call that psychologically but it likely relates to the notion that they eventually "learn" that reality sucks and only being stoned for them counts for anything (I'd note Thaiworthy's #5,#7 & #8 sound very close to what I saw happen with so many friends). So much talent wasted. Second, while representing people who were involuntarily committed to a state psychiatric hospital for over a decade, I saw too many people who were there solely due to use of marijuana. Like any drug, it affects some people rather severely (and even substantially affects some people depending on a given moment in time in their body clock). Interestingly, like Thaiworthy's #3, the diagnosis was usually paranoid schizophrenia.

Just squeeze the damn babies and you'll get some oil.... Yes, I'll acknowledge this retort is rather lame. Reminds me of the joke in the first place.

That's rather precious. You want an 8-year-old driving a car, voting, buying prescription drugs, having sex with a 45-year-old, etc.? (sort of rhetorical as I know you don't). My guess is we all agree there ought to be age limits for certain activities and the only disagreement in some cases is the exact age limit to apply. Generally, I agree with the age limits set in most countries as they seem to make sense. Sometimes, I don't (for one example only, I figure if that a kid at 18 can join the army and go off to war, he ought to be allowed go into a bar to buy a drink). But I do recognize that each society has the right to set the age limits and the penalties for violating those age limits.

While I disagree at least in part with tdperhs' notions, there's no need to respond as the first couple of posters did. I'd have no problem with the legalization of some currently illicit drugs - marijuana and some forms of cocaine being two of them - but I can't really believe that anybody would be suggesting that some of the more dangerous drugs (yaba or crystal meth being one of those) ought to be legalized. Meth is a very dangerous drug that too often results in terrible damage to the user and the user's friends and family. It's highly addictive and too often results in the user being totally fucked up and doing physical damage to himself or his loved ones. I've just heard too many stories from Thai friends about yaba-hyped kids committing suicide or yaba-hyped guys hacking their wife and/or children to death to not understand the dangerousness of this drug. I'm not against pleasure or elective fun and I generally believe a government has no right to ban anything unless it's actually dangerous. And yaba is more than dangerous.

The various boards annually go through the "I love it" or "I hate it" views of Songkran. It's fun if your a kid at heart whereas many falang simply hate it. The Thais seem to love it. I spent this last Songkran in Hua Hin where it's only celebrated for one day (other than some minor/preparatory water tossing on the back sois during the evening of April 14th). Typically, I'm in Chiangmai and, although it's only 3 days there, it's a bloody war surrounding the moat of the old city. But, hell, wear a t-shirt, flipflops, shorts, and put your wallet in a plastic baggie - and go enjoy the smiles/carnage/etc.

Throughout Thailand, it's April 13-15. In Pattaya, about 4 more days tacked on the end.

Dateline 2020, Pattaya, Thailand: With strobe lights attached to his zimmer frame and perky flames erupting from his sequined Depends, Jim Lumsden rock and rolled out onto the Ambience stage to announce that this was his last show on the Pattaya scene. Of course, he had forgotten that he said that the prior twelve weeks.

You've had a rough life!

A weekend with granny, bossy, and the L & L twins? Hey, it could be worse - you could be required to teach English grammar and spelling to a few select posters.

That doctor ought to get a nuclear colonoscopy himself as he's full of shit. Every guy ought to get an annual checkup including a PSA screening and digital rectal exam. Prostate cancer is highly treatable if caught early. As to the dumbass doctor's comment that there's no sense having any tests unless you have "symptoms", that's incredibly stupid. Many prostate cancers, in early stages, have no (zero) symptoms at all - and some are too advanced for effective treatment once symptoms appear. My dad, one brother, and several friends (all in their 40's and 50's) have had prostate cancer detected by annual screenings - and not one of them had any symptoms (other than my dad if you want to count his complaint in his mid-seventies that he couldn't "piss like a racehorse" anymore). My brother was 47 when it was detected and his prostate was removed successfully with no further problems (other than some erection problems). The old advice is that the screenings start at age 50....but now it's suggested at age 40. Again, catch it early and you very likely won't die of it. What a stupid fucking doctor. [A high PSA number doesn't mean you have cancer - but it's a good reason to have further testing and maybe a biopsy. What most doctors are looking for is a jump in the PSA number as that is a special reason to check things out further (but that alone doesn't necessarily mean cancer)]

Thanks, Mark, for the information - and I still acknowledge that you had no obligation at all to lay out that information here. Your efforts are commendable.

As noted before, absolutely agree with that. However, other than university tuition expenses, you and GT are making me feel like an absolute cheap charlie.

Heck, difficult for me to see a problem there. The boy's just trying to make some money for himself and the bar (i.e., that's his job). If he gets you to buy him a drink, he's done it well. I wouldn't blame him. And, if he didn't want to go off with me, I wouldn't blame him either (hell, I wouldn't want to go off with me!).

Well, something was kinda deep there. I'm not sure if I should yell "hallaluyah" or get my wadders on. Sorry, the devil made me do it (or had expectations that I would).

Have only seen it once in Thailand and that was at dinner with some friends. Rather gross to see seaweed (or whatever that green slimey stuff was) wrapped around it every time the kid opened his mouth. I'd rather have my bf put a bone through his nose.

Rather shocked me too. I understand that the average Thai grosses around 6k per month! But, to each his own. It's always bothered me when some have criticized others for paying too much to the boys, almost with the notion that they are "ruining it" for others. I don't buy that and, if you're able to give, give what you want. But, if I was a young and good looking Thai man, I'd park my ass at the airport until GT showed up and then start a waggin' it....hehe.

No need to explain to me, GT, and, yes, I accepted you were being honest about it. As was I with my feelings about it. Wish you well in making your choices, whatever they may be. In another couple of months, I'll have been in a 10-year relationship with a Chiangmai boy (well, if one considers a 31-year-old man a boy) and it's been a joy/pain-in-the-ass/friendship/struggle as probably many other relationships are. Part of the fun and stuggle, I suppose, is that we're both a lot a like (equally stubborn, that's for sure) and, of course, we're both different as hell. But - and I suspect like you - I wouldn't regret a minute even if it ended tomorrow. Speaking of ending, I have to go chat on MSN with the joy/pain-in-the-ass for the next hour or two......

I've read all the posts you've read and I don't believe I'm knowledgeable enough to give any advice (even if I was inclined to do so - and I'm not). You ask what I suggest he does? I don't. I'll leave that to GT and his personal wisdom as he's in the best position to make choices acceptable to him. And I'll wish him well. And that makes me "wrong?" Fine by me.

Puzzling and bothersome to me. GT, you're a decent and intelligent guy (we don't know each other personally but that's what I've gathered from reading your posts over the years) and I start out my comments that way so you're not too personally offended by my next comments. With that preamble, I'm still going to say how I honestly reacted to your post. What bothers me is you lay out part of a totally private scenario on a public internet board and essentially ask strangers to provide advice or comments to help you decide what to do with your private life. I recognize you have the right to do that but, good lord, man, you're a mature and intelligent guy and I simply don't understand why you felt the need to seek the advice here. I couldn't possibly know enough about the relationship to give any intelligent advice to you about it and, frankly, I'd feel rather idiotic suggesting to another guy about my age what he ought to do with his private sexual relationships. Regardless of that, all I can say is "chok dee."

Mark (no obligation to answer unless you feel like it), do you regularly test your staff and, if so, what's the cost to do that and what do you do if the first test is positive?