new coronavirus outbreak China, Korea, USA - mod warnings in OP (updated 24/02/20)

BloodBath

It's massively over estimated how easily this virus spreads as well. It doesn't affect the sinus which is the main way the flu spreads.

No runny nose, no sneezing. Coughing comes later though sure.

givyjoe

BloodBath wrote: »

It's massively over estimated how easily this virus spreads as well. It doesn't affect the sinus which is the main way the flu spreads.

No runny nose, no sneezing. Coughing comes later though sure.

Are you kidding? Have you missed the news stories on the cruise ship? It's been previously confirmed to be airborne, something which flu is not. Seriously leap you are making there which doesn't even remotely match with the reality on the ground in China.

PhantomHat

This thread is just going through periods of blind optimism and then it switches to waves of overreacting despair and then back again.

tuxy

givyjoe wrote: »

It's been previously confirmed to be airborne, something which flu is not.

The WHO have not confirmed it. How was it confirmed?
By some of the posters on this thread perhaps?

sweetie

wakka12 wrote: »

Yeh was thinking that too. Could be a good long cruise holiday imprisonment for some

fixed that for ya

wakka12

PhantomHat wrote: »

This thread is just going through periods of blind optimism and then it switches to waves of overreacting despair and then back again.

All in the space of about half a day as well. I like coming on here to see whether its been all overblown and a big fuss made out of nothing or the apocalypse will happen tomorrow

bodhrandude

Japan critical of the disembarkation of passengers from the Diamond Princess. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51555420

Somedaythefire

givyjoe wrote: »

Are you kidding? Have you missed the news stories on the cruise ship? It's been previously confirmed to be airborne, something which flu is not. Seriously leap you are making there which doesn't even remotely match with the reality on the ground in China.

It has absolutely not been confirmed that it's airborne. It is said to spread through respiratory droplets.

BloodBath

givyjoe wrote: »

Are you kidding? Have you missed the news stories on the cruise ship? It's been previously confirmed to be airborne, something which flu is not. Seriously leap you are making there which doesn't even remotely match with the reality on the ground in China.

It get's airborne through spreading bodily fluids through contact or coughing and sneezing. Since it doesn't affect the sinus this seriously reduces how bad the situation could have been if it did. The only way it get's airborne is through coughing/sneezing.

The reality on the ground is a city with 11 million people have had near 75k infections, a 0.68 infection rate in several months. Yes they have taken major measures to counter it which has helped massively I'm sure but the fact that it doesn't affect the sinus is a huge help in reducing how easily it spreads. Explosive sneezing and spreading fluids from runny noses is the main way the flu spreads.

tuxy

BloodBath wrote: »

It get's airborne through spreading bodily fluids through contact or coughing and sneezing. Since it doesn't affect the sinus this seriously reduces how bad the situation could have been if it did. The only way it get's airborne is through coughing/sneezing.

If it's contained in droplets from coughing and sneezing it is not considered airborne. These droplets only go short distances before coming to rest on a surface.
Airborne would be it spreading from people breathing.

BloodBath

tuxy wrote: »

If it's contained in droplets from coughing and sneezing it is not considered airborne. These droplets only go short distances before coming to rest on a surface.
Airborne would be it spreading from people breathing.

Well in that case then it is not airborne at all. I was going to say that initially but I wasn't sure.

AdamD

Drumpot wrote: »

There seems to be a strategy of prioritizing not spreading panic and prejudice of people infected at play. But like I said, the way they are not communicating anything has left a vacuum that will be filled , so they are leaving others to fill in the gaps. You can’t just whine about an information gap that you know scaremongers and fake news will fill, certainly in an age when it’s never been easier to dupe populations and we all know it.

Most people it appears are happy to remain ignorant on the subject in a “until it gets worse I will not worry” POV, therefore it seems the authority’s feel this suits them as they don’t want to make anymore of this then they have to. Again, this is a mistake bacause they are just letting others communicate their uninformed opinions that can become “fact” to some.

I'm sure governments would rather have a small subset of extremely interested people over reacting than the potential for panic among general population

tuxy

BloodBath wrote: »

Well in that case then it is not airborne at all. I was going to say that initially but I wasn't sure.

The WHO say they can not completely rule out the possibility of it being airborne but there is no evidence of it yet.

BloodBath

AdamD wrote: »

I'm sure governments would rather have a small subset of extremely interested people over reacting than the potential for panic among general population

The people over reacting are the same ones spreading fear and disinformation to the uninformed which doesn't help reduce panic at all.

Snow Garden

BloodBath wrote: »

The people over reacting are the same ones spreading fear and disinformation to the uninformed which doesn't help reduce panic at all.

People here are actually stockpiling food and provisions because they foresee some kind of zombie apocalypse in the coming months.

Somedaythefire

tuxy wrote: »

The WHO say they can not completely rule out the possibility of it being airborne but there is no evidence of it yet.

I would assume if this was like the measles and the virus gets suspended in the air, there would be a far far higher number of cases. It's possible, but there doesn't seem to be spreading of that nature outside of Hubei.

Drumpot

AdamD wrote: »

I'm sure governments would rather have a small subset of extremely interested people over reacting than the potential for panic among general population

So if you are extremely interested in how this is unfolding you are automatically over reacting? I presume that is not what you meant?

wadacrack

Snow Garden wrote: »

People here are actually stockpiling food and provisions because they foresee some kind of zombie apocalypse in the coming months.

Every expert in this field is very worried about this. Planning ahead for the worst case scenario is not a bad idea at all

4068ac1elhodqr

The virus can be spread through droplets AND aerosol.

That means a sneeze (droplets), or a dry cough (aerosol), the big difference is aerosol particles can be much smaller and somewhat airborne for a short time.
When you have small interior rooms on a crusie liner using powerful air-con, that may well spread aerosol particulates.

Not forgetting direct surface contact, via all othe body secretions (including sweat), entering mainly via the touching of the face (eyes/nose/mouth).

Nijmegen

Oh here we are back at "Ahh is it really serious." Government agencies have a job to preserve public order, which allows them to more effectively deal with the problem. So look at what they do rather than simply listening to their soothing words.

There's nothing to worry about, but:

• We've cut out 90% of international air travel capacity to China
• 10% of the worlds population is on lockdown
• They're spraying the streets with disinfectant
• Many countries have banned travel, rather than simply advised against it
• Citizens are being flown to the likes of military bases for quarantine when evacuated
• Factories and businesses have been so affected that production lines are shutting down and companies are warning of shortages for all sorts
• The public aspect of the Tokyo marathon, in a country with relatively few cases, has been cancelled and less than 1% of participants will now run

Like, sit back and say "It'll all be grand yeah", but maybe let people who think they might be wise to buy in a few provisions away with themselves just in case. The actions of government officials are not actions of people sitting in their offices saying "This? This is nothing."

givyjoe

tuxy wrote: »

The WHO have not confirmed it. How was it confirmed?
By some of the posters on this thread perhaps?

Possible, but not yet confirmed it seems. Who confirmed this wasn't easily transmissible??

Fcuk me, what an overreaction by the Chinese government so. What are we up to now, 730 million ordered to stay at home :rolleyes:.

There is a mind boggling cohort of people here desperate to believe this isn't something to worry about, isn't a big deal, will be all over soon etc etc.

Snow Garden

wadacrack wrote: »

Every expert in this field is very worried about this. Planning ahead for the worst case scenario is not a bad idea at all

Yeah we're all "very worried" about stuff.

Here is an Irish expert who doesn't appear to be "very worried"

rte.ie/news/2020/0218/1116149-coronavirus-questions-answered/

It's possible we will get a small number of cases

There is a minimal to negligible risk of acquiring coronavirus in Ireland at this time

Mic 1972

Deleted User wrote: »

Your analysis of the data is reading a few figures of a non-official website. Why are you not taking the remaining cases and then taking their age groups and associated death rate statistics we have so far, and then adding the percentage of cases which are never reported, to come to your figure?

Do you believe you have a more accurate figure than professional organisations, based on the data you are using and your methods?

I don't have any data. I'm pulling stats from Workdometer, which uses the data that is currently open to the public, it's the same data you will find anywhere else
What do you mean by "taking the remaining cases"? Any case that hasn't been reported won't show up in these stats. Stats are based on actual data only

givyjoe

PhantomHat wrote: »

This thread is just going through periods of blind optimism and then it switches to waves of overreacting despair and then back again.

Genuinely interested to see any posts you can quote even remotely close to this description. Blind optimism on the other hand seems to be rampant.

odyssey06

Nijmegen wrote: »

Oh here we are back at "Ahh is it really serious." Government agencies have a job to preserve public order, which allows them to more effectively deal with the problem. So look at what they do rather than simply listening to their soothing words.

There's nothing to worry about, but:

• We've cut out 90% of international air travel capacity to China
• 10% of the worlds population is on lockdown
• They're spraying the streets with disinfectant
• Many countries have banned travel, rather than simply advised against it
• Citizens are being flown to the likes of military bases for quarantine when evacuated
• Factories and businesses have been so affected that production lines are shutting down and companies are warning of shortages for all sorts
• The public aspect of the Tokyo marathon, in a country with relatively few cases, has been cancelled and less than 1% of participants will now run

Like, sit back and say "It'll all be grand yeah", but maybe let people who think they might be wise to buy in a few provisions away with themselves just in case. The actions of government officials are not actions of people sitting in their offices saying "This? This is nothing."

All those actions have been taken by countries who have some capability of dealing with large scale emergencies.

In Ireland, we don't have the capability to deal with a full blown crisis so we're terrified of something that looks like one ... and anyone who says I think I see one coming must be a scaremongerer.

The latest interview I heard was Ireland will be grand... as long as we only get 10 - 20 cases.

MD1990

Snow Garden wrote: »

People here are actually stockpiling food and provisions because they foresee some kind of zombie apocalypse in the coming months.

Ridiculous.

0 confirmed cases here so far.

These people will send everyone into a panic if a case happens here.

Snow Garden

MD1990 wrote: »

Ridiculous.

0 confirmed cases here so far.

These people will send everyone into a panic if a case happens here.

Ah shure if we do get a few cases here this thread will absolutely lose it's shiit

And if we get a single death from this new corona virus, they'll be digging bunkers and shooting strangers.

gozunda

BloodBath wrote: »

The people over reacting are the same ones spreading fear and disinformation to the uninformed which doesn't help reduce panic at all.

Username checks out;)

Drumpot

Snow Garden wrote: »

Yeah we're all "very worried" about stuff.

Here is an Irish expert.

rte.ie/news/2020/0218/1116149-coronavirus-questions-answered/

I put that link up earlier, just without the pejorative insinuation. Interestingly, your own quote says:

There is a minimal to negligible risk of acquiring coronavirus in Ireland at this time

I would agree with that , at this time, while the virus does not appear to be spreading much outside of China there is a negligible risk in Ireland. I accept that and think its a reasonable stance to take. I have decided to take some small steps to mitigate this small but potential chance this virus does start spreading more then we can control. I am not building a bunker in my back garden, but have thrown a few euros at a few things in case there is a bit of panic. Hopefully , by being prepared more, I will be able to inform others and not be a part of the panic that will ensue if it starts creating serious problems on our healthcare system.

I would also take the same stance on my house burning down. There is a negligible risk that this will happen any given year, less so as neither myself nor my wife smoke (or even drink much) therefore we are by default less likely to have moments of being negligent or not sober to be careful. But I have house insurance to rebuild my house if it does burn down, a smoke alarm as an early warning device and a small fire extinguisher under my sink in the Kitchen that may hopefully help me prevent a potential fire from going out of control. Is that me panicking or just taking some measures that in the highly unlikely chance of a fire in my house I have some safety nets to help reduce the impact?

tuxy

givyjoe wrote: »

Possible, but not yet confirmed it seems. Who confirmed this wasn't easily transmissible??

Fcuk me, what an overreaction by the Chinese government so. What are we up to now, 730 million ordered to stay at home :rolleyes:.

There is a mind boggling cohort of people here desperate to believe this isn't something to worry about, isn't a big deal, will be all over soon etc etc.

You have said it has been confirmed that it is airborne.
I would just like a source. Why are people so offended and reluctant when asked for a source?

givyjoe wrote: »

Genuinely interested to see any posts you can quote even remotely close to this description. Blind optimism on the other hand seems to be rampant.

You must admit that many are posting misinformation, saying it is airborne is the perfect example of this.

Snow Garden

Drumpot wrote: »

I put that link up earlier, just without the pejorative insinuation. Interestingly, your own quote says:


I would agree with that , at this time, while the virus does not appear to be spreading much outside of China there is a negligible risk in Ireland. I accept that and think its a reasonable stance to take. I have decided to take some small steps to mitigate this small but potential chance this virus does start spreading more then we can control. I am not building a bunker in my back garden, but have thrown a few euros at a few things in case there is a bit of panic. Hopefully , by being prepared more, I will be able to inform others and not be a part of the panic that will ensue if it starts creating serious problems on our healthcare system.

I would also take the same stance on my house burning down. There is a negligible risk that this will happen any given year, less so as neither myself nor my wife smoke (or even drink much) therefore we are by default less likely to have moments of being negligent or not sober to be careful. But I have house insurance to rebuild my house if it does burn down, a smoke alarm as an early warning device and a small fire extinguisher under my sink in the Kitchen that may hopefully help me prevent a potential fire from going out of control. Is that me panicking or just taking some measures that in the highly unlikely chance of a fire in my house I have some safety nets to help reduce the impact?

Well that rambling boy scout anecdote has me thoroughly convinced to go out and stockpile food in the anticipation that this negligible risk will lead to a breakdown of society and empty shops.

Or maybe I will just accept the risk and continue living my life as normal.

4068ac1elhodqr

tuxy wrote: »

You have said it has been confirmed that it is airborne.
I would just like a source. Why are people so offended and reluctant when asked for a source?

Does not need a source.

It can be (temporarly) airbone, as it can be spread through droplets AND aerosol. Also via surface contact.
It's a different type of (stable)airborneness when compared to a gas, but aerosols are also airbone by definition.

Mic 1972

Snow Garden wrote: »

Well that rambling boy scout anecdote has me thoroughly convinced to go out and stockpile food in the anticipation that this negligible risk will lead to a breakdown of society and empty shops.

Or maybe I will just accept the risk and continue living my life as normal.

the decision is entirely up to you

tuxy

Legacy Better Explosion wrote: »

Does not need a source.

It can be (temporarly) airbone, as it can be spread through droplets AND aerosol. Also via surface contact.

But the WHO is saying there is no evidence that it is airborne.
Perhaps there is evidence of it spreading through the air not contained in droplets. But that would be a new development I am not aware of yet.
A source would be appreciated.

Drumpot

Snow Garden wrote: »

Well that rambling boy scout anecdote has me thoroughly convinced to go out and stockpile food in the anticipation that this negligible risk will lead to a breakdown of society and empty shops.

Is this the only way you can converse on this topic? When a person reverts to insulting somebody to perhaps avoid meaningful engagement, one has to wonder if they lack the capacity for objective reasoning. Can you discuss this without reverting to insults please ?

Call Me Jimmy

tuxy wrote: »

You have said it has been confirmed that it is airborne.
I would just like a source. Why are people so offended and reluctant when asked for a source?



You must admit that many are posting misinformation, saying it is airborne is the perfect example of this.

Warning I cannot confirm the source so it could be AI generated or from a different outbreak:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czTONW70IX0

BloodBath

Legacy Better Explosion wrote: »

Does not need a source.

It can be (temporarly) airbone, as it can be spread through droplets AND aerosol. Also via surface contact.
It's a different type of (stable)airborneness when compared to a gas, but aerosols are also airbone by definition.

It doesn't affect the sinus so aerosol is not really a problem outside of normal sneezing.

Somedaythefire

Legacy Better Explosion wrote: »

Does not need a source.

It can be (temporarly) airbone, as it can be spread through droplets AND aerosol. Also via surface contact.
It's a different type of (stable)airborneness when compared to a gas, but aerosols are also airbone by definition.

That's not airborne. Airborne means the virus can survive through air circulation. If it was airborne you'd get infected just by being in the same area as someone who has it. With this, and pretty much all coronaviruses, you need direct contact with the droplets from an infected person, or to touch and transfer those droplets off surface to your nose or mouth.

givyjoe

tuxy wrote: »

You have said it has been confirmed that it is airborne.
I would just like a source. Why are people so offended and reluctant when asked for a source?

I literally just said it was possible, but not confirmed, i.e. my earlier point about it being confirmed is not correct. Go have a google! I'm not offended. I actually can't find the the source I was reading stating it was possible, so a different news source quoting the WHO who haven't confirmed/rule out airborne transmission yet, stating more studies/data is required.

The CDC's own site is hardly conclusive with how its spreading.

Question for you, do you believe this virus is NOT easily transmissible and if you do, why? This is the crux of the baseless point that I disagreed with it. The reality of what has happened clearly contradicts this unfounded notion that it isn't extremely easily spread. That is the point that I was making, regardless of confirmation of exact forms of transmission, it's quite clearly easily transmissible.

givyjoe

tuxy wrote: »

You have said it has been confirmed that it is airborne.
I would just like a source. Why are people so offended and reluctant when asked for a source?



You must admit that many are posting misinformation, saying it is airborne is the perfect example of this.

That is complete and utter nonsense. The airborne theory was literally reported in mainstream media new broadcasts, as was the original theory of transmission from the asymptomatic patient in Germany. Commenting on those reports is clearly not panicking, its ridiculous to even infer that. Again, no posts I have seen could remotely be construed as panicking.

Ps. Please create a new post instead of wholesale additions to your original after the fact.

tuxy

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Warning I cannot confirm the source so it could be AI generated or from a different outbreak:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czTONW70IX0

While that is better than most who post no source at all, it is an official press conference so it should available on official news source. I had a quick look and could not find it yet.
I would be worried if the WHO were to contradict their official written statements during a press conference.

tuxy

givyjoe wrote: »

That is complete and utter nonsense. The airborne theory was literally reported in mainstream media new broadcasts, as was the original theory of transmission from the asymptomatic patient in Germany. Commenting on those reports is clearly not panicking, its ridiculous to even infer that. Again, no posts I have seen could remotely be construed as panicking.

Source?
The WHO still say it is not airborne, are there other health organisations contradicting this?

pc7

Bloody hell what’s happened in here? Is everyone hangry over lunchtime? I haven’t seen anyone scaremongering or panicking. It’s been a fairly well discussed topic (it is a discussion board after all) with both sides ‘nothing to see here’ to ‘throw a few bits in the press’ Incase we need to stay in for a bit. I’ve found it a mostly interesting thread with lots of good sources and info (and some that looks fake so I make my own call on it) of a potential threat not just physically but even economically for the world. Absolutely no need for the agro being posted at all, can we just get back to as we were and be thankful we aren’t in Wuhan/Hubei!

tuxy

pc7 wrote: »

Absolutely no need for the agro being posted at all, can we just get back to as we were and be thankful we aren’t in Wuhan/Hubei!

Is it ago to ask for a source when someone is posting information that can not be found easily on google?

Drumpot

Drumpot wrote: »

I would also take the same stance on my house burning down. There is a negligible risk that this will happen any given year, less so as neither myself nor my wife smoke (or even drink much) therefore we are by default less likely to have moments of being negligent or not sober to be careful. But I have house insurance to rebuild my house if it does burn down, a smoke alarm as an early warning device and a small fire extinguisher under my sink in the Kitchen that may hopefully help me prevent a potential fire from going out of control. Is that me panicking or just taking some measures that in the highly unlikely chance of a fire in my house I have some safety nets to help reduce the impact?

Yes but the real question is 'are you more likely to die of a normal flu than a house fire?' If yes then sure you may throw out your fire alarm!

Sorry couldn't resist!

4068ac1elhodqr

Somedaythefire wrote: »

That's not airborne. Airborne means the virus can survive through air circulation. If it was airborne you'd get infected just by being in the same area as someone who has it. With this, and pretty much all coronaviruses, you need direct contact with the droplets from an infected person, or to touch and transfer those droplets off surface to your nose or mouth.

Point was that aerosols can be 'temporarly suspended' in the air, unlike droplets which won't be suspended for very long as they're larger/heavier.

If you spray air freshener in a room, leave the room, then come back after 20mins chances are you can still smell the flowers as the aerosol is still suspended. After 3hrs, not so much if at all.

SeaBreezes

Somedaythefire wrote: »

It has absolutely not been confirmed that it's airborne. It is said to spread through respiratory droplets.

There's a good discussion on it here:
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/02/unmasked-experts-explain-necessary-respiratory-protection-covid-19P

Milton cautions that the difference between aerosol and droplet transmission is largely in name only. Respiratory droplets, emitted with a sneeze or a cough, are commonly thought to land within 6 feet of patients and are too large to be buoyant on air currents. Respiratory aerosols are droplets too, Milton said, but smaller and light enough to travel farther.

"You cannot tell the difference epidemiologically between something aerosol transmitted by weak sources and large droplet spray," said Milton. "They behave so similar, it's very hard to pick up the difference."

He said he suspects the capability of long-distance transmission with COVID-19 will be connected to source strength, or how symptomatic a person is.

What I found interesting in that rte q&a was this quote:

"It's possible we will get a small number of cases, but if we believe the figures it looks like the Chinese authorities have done a good job containing the virus," he said.

"If we believe the figures". Interesting wording. I understand of course that the figures can change with retrospect after the event. Not to mention errors can be made and so on but to use the words 'if' and 'believe' suggests (to me) that maybe this expert doesn't believe the Chinese and if he doesn't believe it then does that undermine him saying we'll only get "a small number of cases".

I don't know, the wording just stood out to me. If he'd said "if the figures are correct" it wouldn't have.

saabsaab

Saw a headline today stating that the two flown back from the cruise ship here were 'not screened'. I know that they are supposed to be in 'self quarantine' but that seems mad.

givyjoe

tuxy wrote: »

Source?

Oh for gods sake. From now on I'm going to demand a source for every single post of yours :rolleyes:.

TV news, ITV for the airborne piece (hang on til i trawl through my TV recordings of the last 2 weeks broadcasts to find which one of these reported it).. as for the asymptomatic patient, there's multiple sources if you google it. I am not the one writing these reports or TV pieces for Christ Sake!

Again, seen as you keep missing the point I made.. no evidence anywhere to back up a ludicrous claim that it isn't easily transmissible, when the situation on the ground clearly contradicts this.

Please provide us with a source, quoting scientific research that confirms this is NOT easily transmissible. I look forward to it.