Corona Virus and events

robinph

Just back from a 20 mile race in the rain.

Only time I was within 2meters of anyone was in the queue for the loo, and guess what, nobody was coughing on each other or shaking hands and we all washed our hands afterwards. There was about 10 seconds at the start where we were close together, but again nobody was coughing over each other or sharing bodily fluids with the whole rest of the field.

Nobody was spitting at the volunteer marshals, nobody was sharing water bottles with the whole field. I'm very happy to have had the chance to get out and race, winning a bottle of wine helps too. The risks of today having been some kind of super infection incident, or even one person getting infected whilst outside running in the rain are so tiny it's not worth calculating.

Now when I have to go to the shop later to fetch some more milk, that is a bit riskier, but I'll still do it. But I'll also be keeping distance from other people in the queue for the till and not stopping for a chat.

There are sensible precautions that we should all be taking by now. But getting angry about 200 fit and healthy people going for a run outside is not helping anyone or stopping any emergency services from doing their jobs or increasing the risk of infection any noticeable amount above zero.

Get angry about people still having to go to work in air conditioned offices tomorrow, or get on crowded public transport, or going to the pub. Going for a run/ race is not the major risk that it is being made out to be.

robinph

Itziger wrote: »

Aren't you the bloke who's needed medical attention on one or two occasions with your underlying health issue?

Yep. But that can be put down to some combination it being a race, technology failure, being a bit daft at the wrong moment and not having enough pockets in my shorts.

adrian522

SuspectZero wrote: »

His argument was stupid? who said?

Last time I checked, The WHO and HSE said that outdoor gatherings of less than 500 people were ok. Are you calling every high level medical official in the HSE and WHO stupid too? because it's their reccomendations is what he was quoting and actually an overcompensation compared to the ASJ reccomendations on mass gatherings during pandemics. I'd hardly call that a stupid argument, sometimes it's easier to do that than actually address a debate though.

I said it was stupid and stand by it. For reference this post is stupid:

The BHAA have cancelled the Raheny race in St Anne’s Park. I suspect the entire calendar for May and June will be lost.
BHAA and parkrun events pose no threat to the public. Sending home teenagers from school to hang around shopping malls and other unregulated environments is a far greater threat.
The witch-burnings and other national pastimes won't kick in for another two months, by which stage people will have ceased to operate the self-isolate strictures and so will be looking for human sacrifice to please their superstitions.

Other than the first sentence its all nonsense.

Also, I've posted the guidelines at least 3 times, he ignored those because they didn't suit his agenda. Nowhere does it say gatherings of below a certain amount are ok. It clearly says reduce social interactions and don't get within 2 meters of other people.

There are more important things than holding races right now. Hopefully the message starts to get through at some point. It doesn't seem to be getting through to a lot of people right now.

robinph

It's great that people are understanding the threat and the stress that will soon hit the health services. That hasn't happened in the UK or Ireland yet, so far it is just planning and preparing. There is going to be a lot of ill people in hospital, and the hospitals won't be able to cope. That moment is another week or so away though.

Running a race or parkrun isn't making any difference to the likelihood of infections and its not putting any strain on the health services this week.

Hopefully everyone is prepared to keep the shutdown in action for the months to come.

SuspectZero

adrian522 wrote: »

I said it was stupid and stand by it. For reference this post is stupid:



Other than the first sentence its all nonsense.

Also, I've posted the guidelines at least 3 times, he ignored those because they didn't suit his agenda. Nowhere does it say gatherings of below a certain amount are ok. It clearly says reduce social interactions and don't get within 2 meters of other people.

There are more important things than holding races right now. Hopefully the message starts to get through at some point. It doesn't seem to be getting through to a lot of people right now.

I watched the whole emergency press conference on TV the other day with Simon Coveney and the HSE and they were quite clear on mass gatherings limited to 500 people outdoors and 100 indoors. Leo Vradkar just came out and said he might look to reduce guidelines on mass gatherings. Heck, here's the newly updated citizens information from 5 hours ago clearly stating as one of the hedline bullet points:

Indoor mass gatherings of 100 people or more and outdoor mass gatherings of more than 500 people should be cancelled

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/health/covid19_overview.html

He gave up because you wouldn't listen and kept posting the same limited guidelines while the above was what he was trying to point out to you.

IvoryTower

You have 22 posts so I take it he is actually you or did you register on boards for the sole purpose of defending someone

SuspectZero

IvoryTower wrote: »

You have 22 posts so I take it he is actually you or did you register on boards for the sole purpose of defending someone

back to attacking the poster I see

IvoryTower

SuspectZero wrote: »

back to attacking the poster I see

When did I attack a poster.

I'm just reading the argument and noticed that you are both posters which is pretty funny

adrian522

SuspectZero wrote: »

I watched the whole emergency press conference on TV the other day with Simon Coveney and the HSE and they were quite clear on mass gatherings limited to 500 people outdoors and 100 indoors. Leo Vradkar just came out and said he might look to reduce guidelines on mass gatherings. Heck, here's the newly updated citizens information from 5 hours ago clearly stating as one of the hedline bullet points:



https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/health/covid19_overview.html

He gave up because you wouldn't listen and kept posting the same limited guidelines while the above was what he was trying to point out to you.

That guideline is about not having large events above those numbers. It doesn't say events below those numbers should go ahead.

The guidelines also state very clearly what I posted, you can't just ignore the bits you don't like.

If what you say is true why are so many events cancelled? Why are training sessions cancelled? Why are people being advised to stay home?

Also can you point me to the post where there was an "Internet Lynching" please since you introduced that phrase?

SuspectZero

IvoryTower wrote: »

When did I attack a poster.

well not really:pac: but I mean in a discussion sense, it's kind of trying to undervalue my points by hinting as me been a sockpuppet rather than address the points. And 22 posts, definetely not, I've probably had 6,000+ on this forum over the years:) Probably 5900 of them been pointless arguing:pac:

SuspectZero

adrian522 wrote: »

That guideline is about not having large events above those numbers. It doesn't say events below those numbers should go ahead.

The guidelines also state very clearly what I posted, you can't just ignore the bits you don't like.

If what you say is true why are so many events cancelled? Why are training sessions cancelled? Why are people being advised to stay home?

Also can you point me to the post where there was an "Internet Lynching" please since you introduced that phrase?

I dont need to prove it true, I already just posted the citizen info for you, what more do you want?. And they did say what you said too but that wasn't the full story as you can clearly see now, I haven't ignored any of your points and think they are hugely important in fact. You ignored all the posts which had that guideline which was also linked though which is what I'm bringing to your attention, which you called a stupid argument despite not even reading the links that showed the essence of the points been made. Training sessions and the like are cancelled because people are been even more cautious than the governmental guidelines.

adrian522

Where was the Internet Lynching? Please link to that.

What I called stupid was the initial post about the following:

"Sending home teenagers from school is a far greater threat than races"

That is patently nonsense.

"The witch-burnings and other national pastimes won't kick in for another two months"

Seriously, wtf?

"by which stage people will have ceased to operate the self-isolate strictures and so will be looking for human sacrifice to please their superstitions."

Human sacrifice? Really?

How anyone can defend that post is beyond me.

SuspectZero

adrian522 wrote: »

Where was the Internet Lynching? Please link to that.

What I called stupid was the initial post about the following:

"Sending home teenagers from school is a far greater threat than races"

That is patently nonsense.

"The witch-burnings and other national pastimes won't kick in for another two months"

Seriously, wtf?

"by which stage people will have ceased to operate the self-isolate strictures and so will be looking for human sacrifice to please their superstitions."

Human sacrifice? Really?

How anyone can defend that post is beyond me.

I'm not going down this pointless road with you, I can see where this is going and it won't be fruitful for anyone.

adrian522

SuspectZero wrote: »

I'm not going down this pointless road with you, I can see where this is going and it won't be fruitful for anyone.

Well when you throw around phrases like Internet Lynching you should at least be able to back it up.

Burkie1203

robinph wrote: »

Running a race or parkrun isn't making any difference to the likelihood of infections and its not putting any strain on the health services this week.

Can you back this up with any evidence as community transmissions grow?

robinph

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Can you back this up with any evidence as community transmissions grow?

Well I can't prove a negative, but if running a race is such a dangerous activity then presumably there would be a load of cases of people who are now infected from having run races a couple of weeks ago, or even who had gone to football/rugby matches. Scotland played in Italy three weeks ago, not aware of any cases in Scotland being attributed to that match. As far as I'm aware the community transmissions have been between people hanging out together in indoors situations or on planes.

As for the health service not yet being overwhelmed, I haven't seen any clusters in the UK or Ireland being reported as overwhelming the local hospitals. They will be, but not yet and are just preparing for it at the moment. Italy is overwhelmed because they had a very concentrated cluster in one area, that needs dealing with differently than what we have which is widespread and the population knows about it better, hence we are all taking different actions which hopefully won't result in the same kind of extreme measures needed in China and Italy. Probably will, but it might be avoidable and might be for a shorter time.

Murph_D

If they feel it is pertinent, parkrun Event Directors and Run Directors are well within their rights to cancel events - independently of parkrun HQ - for safety reasons.

It was suggested earlier that token and scanning volunteers (theoretically the only ones who have to come within into close contact with others in the course of doing their task) could wear gloves.

This is true, but if you asking volunteers to take any conceivable risk at all in order to to facilitate a parkrun event, you are perhaps at the stage where you should consider not holding the event at all. I'm sure that's one point that was made to parkrun HQ by Irish EDs during the week.

Don't know what the argument is here anyway - the decision has been made in Ireland and elsewhere. parkrun UK have decided to trust the advice they have been given locally as the UK pursues its 'herd immunity' strategy. Good luck to them - I hope they are right, but we are well within the bounds of reason here deciding to take a different path.

Burkie1203

robinph wrote: »

Well I can't prove a negative, but if running a race is such a dangerous activity then presumably there would be a load of cases of people who are now infected from having run races a couple of weeks ago, or even who had gone to football/rugby matches. Scotland played in Italy three weeks ago, not aware of any cases in Scotland being attributed to that match. As far as I'm aware the community transmissions have been between people hanging out together in indoors situations or on planes.

As for the health service not yet being overwhelmed, I haven't seen any clusters in the UK or Ireland being reported as overwhelming the local hospitals. They will be, but not yet and are just preparing for it at the moment. Italy is overwhelmed because they had a very concentrated cluster in one area, that needs dealing with differently than what we have which is widespread and the population knows about it better, hence we are all taking different actions which hopefully won't result in the same kind of extreme measures needed in China and Italy. Probably will, but it might be avoidable and might be for a shorter time.

Footballers in UK and Italy.
A member of DFB
Multiple frontline health service staff

Darkness into light, women's mini Marathon both postponed. Multiple marathons and halfs around europe postponed

Parkrun is not necessary because it adds to the potential.

robinph

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Footballers in UK and Italy.
A member of DFB
Multiple frontline health service staff

So not transmissions among the crowds in the stands then, but people who spend large quantities of time in close proximity to each other indoors.

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Darkness into light, women's mini Marathon both postponed. Multiple marathons and halfs around europe postponed

That doesn't prove that they are risky to participate in, just some combination of extreme caution from the organisers, anticipation that by the time the event comes around the health services will be under extreme pressure and they won't have access to support services needed.

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Parkrun is not necessary because it adds to the potential.

parkrun isn't an essential activity. It is an extremely useful one though and could be verging on essential for some people. I really hope that the prison events continue as they definitely fall into the essential category for the group they serve.

My point is merely that the risks of participating in parkrun this weekend are basically zero in the UK and Ireland. Not so much in northern Italy, but still wouldn't see what the problem is with going for a run around a park with a handful of other people.

DM_7

For me individual events such as a race are not an issue in their own right but they are a broader issue when all events are considered.

Right now, as a country we are asked to minimise social interactions outside important tasks. That is going to take time to achieve and like washing hands will take people time to get into good habits.

Continuing with races and other events that bring large groups of people together goes against the idea of creating the habits we need to have over the coming weeks.

Races can also bring people from many regions together. Right now health officials are trying to maintain clusters of the virus and there is a need to minimise the number of people travelling around.

It also important to note the large level of social interaction that most races feature. It just takes one person to bring the virus to another person to help spread this disease.

Society needs people do be able to do jobs, go to the shop, measures to reduce risk will be taken. It does not need races right now or need people coming up with ways to minimise risk in this type of group event.

Cartman78

Just seen on Sky Sports News there that a half marathon took place in Liverpool today with over 6,000 people taking part (!)

DM_7

This is a great example of how distancing can work and the last line is sobering on why it is so important to maximise the oppertunity for our health services and minimise the number of people who have the virus at any one time.

https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/1239267360739074048?s=19

sideswipe

Cartman78 wrote: »

Just seen on Sky Sports News there that a half marathon took place in Liverpool today with over 6,000 people taking part (!)

Bath half went ahead too. Think Paul Pollock one, isn’t he a doctor?

I think people saying small races, park runs etc don’t make a difference are missing the point, it’s about civic action to stop meeting in groups to give this threat a smaller chance of exacerbating exponentially.

It’s about people working together and in unison. Let’s all just do what we can take the inconvenience of not having races and hopefully get back to normal and do so with a new appreciation for our sport, health and loved ones.
I’ve been reading some disturbing info on recovered cases that is only starting to come through now as this thing is so new. The headline grabber is the deaths which of course in the older generation but there is increasing info on young, formerly healthy people that are coming out of this with permanent lung damage. We’re talking compromised lung capacity by 30-40% decrease. We need to stop thinking of this as an old people’s problem.

DM_7

Cartman78 wrote: »

Just seen on Sky Sports News there that a half marathon took place in Liverpool today with over 6,000 people taking part (!)

They want the virus to spread to the 'stronger' people in the UK.

Here we are trying to delay the rate of infection, the uk are trying to increase it to a certain level before slowing it down in the hope that it will leave them stronger in 6 months time when the second wave could hit (less people getting and less who can pass it on). Meanwhile telling those at high risk of complications to stay at home now.

I think it shows a country can have its own ideas but it is important citizens act in the way that meets the needs of their country.

sideswipe

DM_7 wrote: »

They want the virus to spread to the 'stronger' people in the UK.

Here we are trying to delay the rate of infection, the uk are trying to increase it to a certain level before slowing it down in the hope that it will leave them stronger in 6 months time when the second wave could hit (less people getting and less who can pass it on). Meanwhile telling those at high risk of complications to stay at home now.

I think it shows a country can have its own ideas but it is important citizens act in the way that meets the needs of their country.

They seem to be backing away from the herd immunity avenue already-

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/world/2020/3/15/21180414/coronavirus-uk-herd-immunity-vallance-johnson

Don’t think I ever remember such a fast moving international ‘event’, scary stuff.

plodder

sideswipe wrote: »

Bath half went ahead too. Think Paul Pollock one, isn’t he a doctor?

I think people saying small races, park runs etc don’t make a difference are missing the point, it’s about civic action to stop meeting in groups to give this threat a smaller chance of exacerbating exponentially.

It’s about people working together and in unison. Let’s all just do what we can take the inconvenience of not having races and hopefully get back to normal and do so with a new appreciation for our sport, health and loved ones.
I’ve been reading some disturbing info on recovered cases that is only starting to come through now as this thing is so new. The headline grabber is the deaths which of course in the older generation but there is increasing info on young, formerly healthy people that are coming out of this with permanent lung damage. We’re talking compromised lung capacity by 30-40% decrease. We need to stop thinking of this as an old people’s problem.

Do you have a link to that? Because, I listened to an Italian doctor on RTE Radio 1 today who (I'm fairly sure) said the complete opposite - that it was notable that people who recovered from the virus didn't show evidence of fibrosis (scarring) of the lungs

sideswipe

plodder wrote: »

Do you have a link to that? Because, I listened to an Italian doctor on RTE Radio 1 today who (I'm fairly sure) said the complete opposite - that it was notable that people who recovered from the virus didn't show evidence of fibrosis (scarring) of the lungs

Can’t find the main article, it was linked on Twitter, here’s another one I read-

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-recovery-damage-lung-function-gasping-air-hong-kong-doctors-2020-3?r=US&IR=T

I’ll see if I can find the other in the morning

average_runner

DM_7 wrote: »

They want the virus to spread to the 'stronger' people in the UK.

Here we are trying to delay the rate of infection, the uk are trying to increase it to a certain level before slowing it down in the hope that it will leave them stronger in 6 months time when the second wave could hit (less people getting and less who can pass it on). Meanwhile telling those at high risk of complications to stay at home now.

I think it shows a country can have its own ideas but it is important citizens act in the way that meets the needs of their country.

Here we are focused on saving lives. We are trying to keep the graph below our max ICU number of beds so we can give the best treatment we can. UK seems to want to blow that, hence more will die than necessary.

Italy blew it , now are at a level where they wont save a certain age group as lower priority

plodder

sideswipe wrote: »

Can’t find the main article, it was linked on Twitter, here’s another one I read-

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-recovery-damage-lung-function-gasping-air-hong-kong-doctors-2020-3?r=US&IR=T

I’ll see if I can find the other in the morning

The article seems to be referring to elderly patients rather than younger ones.

robinph

DM_7 wrote: »

They want the virus to spread to the 'stronger' people in the UK.

Here we are trying to delay the rate of infection, the uk are trying to increase it to a certain level before slowing it down in the hope that it will leave them stronger in 6 months time when the second wave could hit (less people getting and less who can pass it on). Meanwhile telling those at high risk of complications to stay at home now.

I think it shows a country can have its own ideas but it is important citizens act in the way that meets the needs of their country.

The UK is not trying to increase infection rates and the mention of herd immunity was never made as being their aim, just a potential side effect that would be useful if it happened.

The aim of the UK plan as of last week was purely down to making best use of the timing of a lockdown. Maybe shutting everyone's movements down totally now will slow infection rates, how long will that be effective for and what then happens when it fails and the rates rise again? The UK is just aiming to use the crude tool of a lockdown to slow the infection rate when they think they can then temporarily keep control in the health service.

It's a risky move with timing it right. But if they time it wrong they just end up in the same position as every other country will be when their lockdowns fail.

deisedude

If the Olympics do go ahead later this year or next year I hope Pollock isn't anywhere near it. Extremely selfish behaviour running Bath today.

sideswipe

plodder wrote: »

The article seems to be referring to elderly patients rather than younger ones.

That wasn’t my reading of it. Either way it’s still too early to fully comprehend lasting effects post recovery therefore, especially as runners to whom lung capacity is important, we should not be thinking of this as an old person’s disease.
I’ll post up that other piece when I find it.

laura_ac3

sideswipe wrote: »

That wasn’t my reading of it. Either way it’s still too early to fully comprehend lasting effects post recovery therefore, especially as runners to whom lung capacity is important, we should not be thinking of this as an old person’s disease.
I’ll post up that other piece when I find it.

You've hit the nail on the head with your own follow up. Too early to fully comprehend lasting effects post recovery is a different message to a definitive younger people being left with permanent damage. The article then linked says post sickness effects can be improved with exercise.

To be clear I'm not dismissing the potential seriousness to young or old but merely the importance of making sweeping concrete statements with no reputable source links or long term studies. The article linked references a small sample, has use of the words "might" and a vague "some". Again, I'm not disregarding the need to consider possibilities and potential outcomes but I think we all have a responsibility to be careful with our language and how we spread confirmed and potential information. There's a lot of misinformation and hypotheticals being passed off as gospel.

SuspectZero

sideswipe wrote: »

Can’t find the main article, it was linked on Twitter, here’s another one I read-

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-recovery-damage-lung-function-gasping-air-hong-kong-doctors-2020-3?r=US&IR=T

I’ll see if I can find the other in the morning

Alot of well known Docs have came out to debunk this saying there is no evidence to back up the claims that it is happening. General rule of thumb for twitter or the media is if it says "specialists say" "Doctors say" but doesn't back it up with an actual name and position, it should be taken with a grain of salt.

SuspectZero

average_runner wrote: »

Here we are focused on saving lives. We are trying to keep the graph below our max ICU number of beds so we can give the best treatment we can. UK seems to want to blow that, hence more will die than necessary.

Italy blew it , now are at a level where they wont save a certain age group as lower priority

It's not as simple as that, It would be great if it was but people need to keep open minds in this situation. Alot of people are looking at this as a COVID-19 problem, it's much more than that, it's a pandemic problem and that needs to be considered too. Let me give you an example, A country over-reacts and goes into lockdown which then cripples the economy, homelessness spirals out of control, people with other illnesses dont get treatment, supply lines collapse and this is before you see an explosion in suicide rates and mental health issues further down the road. An over reaction could cause more damage, death and suffering than the disease itself.

An underreaction which most people are talking about could cause the disease to explode and cause widespread death and destruction and many possible side effects and outcomes been mentioned around that could have been prevented had they acted earlier and stronger.

So while it's easy to say things like the curve needs to flattened at all costs and that is the stricter countries are more focused on saving lives, that may not be true because nobody knows whats going to happen or what is the best approach so people need to be open minded. These are the tough questions been asked in every government the world over, what is the right level of reaction? and I sure as heck don't envy any of them because an over reaction could be as costly as an under-reaction

average_runner

SuspectZero wrote: »

It's not as simple as that, It would be great if it was but people need to keep open minds in this situation. Alot of people are looking at this as a COVID-19 problem, it's much more than that, it's a pandemic problem and that needs to be considered too. Let me give you an example, A country over-reacts and goes into lockdown which then cripples the economy, homelessness spirals out of control, people with other illnesses dont get treatment, supply lines collapse and this is before you see an explosion in suicide rates and mental health issues further down the road. An over reaction could cause more damage, death and suffering than the disease itself.

An underreaction which most people are talking about could cause the disease to explode and cause widespread death and destruction and many possible side effects and outcomes been mentioned around that could have been prevented had they acted earlier and stronger.

So while it's easy to say things like the curve needs to flattened at all costs and that is the stricter countries are more focused on saving lives, that may not be true because nobody knows whats going to happen or what is the best approach so people need to be open minded. These are the tough questions been asked in every government the world over, what is the right level of reaction? and I sure as heck don't envy any of them because an over reaction could be as costly as an under-reaction

Good points but the economy is gone now. All over the world its crashing. Could be dark times ahead

Snodge

Does anyone think/know if IMC meets will go ahead? Or has it been suggested when races may start up again. Firstly, I admit that in the grand scheme of things races are not not important so please refrain from any nasty comments or critisim

IvoryTower

Snodge wrote: »

Does anyone think/know if IMC meets will go ahead? Or has it been suggested when races may start up again. Firstly, I admit that in the grand scheme of things races are not not important so please refrain from any nasty comments or critisim

As it stands they wont be on, just have to wait and see what happens

plodder

robinph wrote: »

It's a risky move with timing it right. But if they time it wrong they just end up in the same position as every other country will be when their lockdowns fail.

Not sure if you are equating lock downs with social distancing there, but there is a good article on the Washington Post with a simulation of the effects of lockdowns and social distancing generally. They don't have to be completely watertight to be effective and if the models are any way close to reality then will slow the increase in number of cases significantly. Though clearly, the more people that observe the restrictions, the better.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/?itid=sf_coronavirus

IvoryTower

well the "lockdown" seems to have been bs anyway , still just pubs for now

walshb

deisedude wrote: »

If the Olympics do go ahead later this year or next year I hope Pollock isn't anywhere near it. Extremely selfish behaviour running Bath today.

And isn't he a doctor?

robinph

plodder wrote: »

Not sure if you are equating lock downs with social distancing there, but there is a good article on the Washington Post with a simulation of the effects of lockdowns and social distancing generally. They don't have to be completely watertight to be effective and if the models are any way close to reality then will slow the increase in number of cases significantly. Though clearly, the more people that observe the restrictions, the better.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/?itid=sf_coronavirus

Yep, seen that article.

There should be more going on to stop public transport and people going into offices where they could work from home (great time to setup a mobile IT support company to fix peoples wifi etc for them). Pubs closing is good, indoor events stopping is good, people standing further away from each other in the queue to buy toilet roll is good.

Schools closing is not necessarily as useful as it appears though, it would likely actually cause more of an instant strain on the health services due to staffing problems, and whilst it makes for a good scary headline and gets people to notice that something serious is going on which is very useful, that you have those kids then still out mingling with each other and then getting looked after by grandparents so that the parents can still go to work in the hospitals destroys much of the benefit. Yes, close the schools in the areas directly adjacent to known cases, national shutdown at this point is less obvious benefit.

Now if there was a specific location that was the main source of infections in the country then having a total lockdown on that area will be very useful. China seems to have done that pretty well, Italy less so and more cases escaped the quarantine. Ireland and the UK and most of the rest of the world do not have areas that it's worth quarantining so different tactics are required...but nobody knows what that is yet.

What has China done in the rest of the country which wasn't locked down? There must have been cases escaped from Wuhan, and new ones come in from elsewhere. What have they been doing to prevent those creating new clusters across the country? Something different has been happening with those cases and that would be more similar to what has been happening with cases in the rest of the world where it appears in multiple places at the same time from multiple sources.

Chivito550

IvoryTower wrote: »

well the "lockdown" seems to have been bs anyway , still just pubs for now

Lots of BS going round. I've deleted Twitter and Facebook apps off my phone. Too much negativity, rumours and misinformation. Not good for one's mental health. Judging by this thread, I might take a holiday from this forum too.

sideswipe

Yeah, I know where you’re coming from. I’ve learned a few lessons myself about information processing and recognising fact and fiction.
While the lockdown seems BS for now looking at the trajectory of other countries it remains a possibility in the future. What seems impossible one week becomes possible the next with this thing.

average_runner

Chivito550 wrote: »

Lots of BS going round. I've deleted Twitter and Facebook apps off my phone. Too much negativity, rumours and misinformation. Not good for one's mental health. Judging by this thread, I might take a holiday from this forum too.

If feeling down, don't cut off the world. Maybe create a thread of good vibes.
Don't want to see someone suffering, we should all help each other

plodder

robinph wrote: »

Schools closing is not necessarily as useful as it appears though, it would likely actually cause more of an instant strain on the health services due to staffing problems, and whilst it makes for a good scary headline and gets people to notice that something serious is going on which is very useful, that you have those kids then still out mingling with each other and then getting looked after by grandparents so that the parents can still go to work in the hospitals destroys much of the benefit. Yes, close the schools in the areas directly adjacent to known cases, national shutdown at this point is less obvious benefit.

Kids are not supposed to be out mingling when they are off school in this situation. Obviously, health authorities are only too aware of the effect it will have on staffing but still consider it a step worth taking, which is not surprising as the description of young children being like "petri dishes" is quite apt.

robinph

plodder wrote: »

Kids are not supposed to be out mingling when they are off school in this situation. Obviously, health authorities are only too aware of the effect it will have on staffing but still consider it a step worth taking, which is not surprising as the description of young children being like "petri dishes" is quite apt.

But would it be better to keep the kids together, their parents working, and the grandparents isolated from the kids. Would be less of a strain on the health services if the staff just needed to change collection arrangements so it wasn't done by the grandparents but they otherwise keep working. If you take that health worker out of service totally due to child care it's bad, and if you have the kids hanging out with the grandparents it's bad.

I don't think there is a good answer to what to do, just different versions of bad.

SuspectZero

Chivito550 wrote: »

Lots of BS going round. I've deleted Twitter and Facebook apps off my phone. Too much negativity, rumours and misinformation. Not good for one's mental health. Judging by this thread, I might take a holiday from this forum too.

I find the only way to not let this stuff and social media in general get to you is to stand back and not take it personally because they are pretty much like warzones especially in circumstances like this, disagreements on even the slightest issues get taken as personal attacks rather than discussion and it spirals from there.

Chivito550

SuspectZero wrote: »

I find the only way to not let this stuff and social media in general get to you is to stand back and not take it personally because they are pretty much like warzones especially in circumstances like this, disagreements on even the slightest issues get taken as personal attacks rather than discussion and it spirals from there.

I'm not even getting into many debates really. Just find scrolling through a twitter feed 15 times a day and seeing nothing but negativity is not good for anyone. I'll stick to a daily news update on TV.

Anytime somebody tries to shine a light of positively and encouragement, there are 10 people ready to piss all over it.

average_runner

robinph wrote: »

But would it be better to keep the kids together, their parents working, and the grandparents isolated from the kids. Would be less of a strain on the health services if the staff just needed to change collection arrangements so it wasn't done by the grandparents but they otherwise keep working. If you take that health worker out of service totally due to child care it's bad, and if you have the kids hanging out with the grandparents it's bad.

I don't think there is a good answer to what to do, just different versions of bad.

But kids aren't hanging out with grandparents. Our grandparents wont see the kids till this is over. Kids not mingling either.

Having kids in school are a bigger risk, easier to pass things around, bring it home, person goes to supermarket and spread it, or to a pub or concert. Older generation will then get it.