Covid-XIX Part VI - 90 cases ROI (1 death) 29 in NI (as of 13 March) *Read OP*

smelly sock

I don't think anyone believe we are all doomed or this is the end of the world.

That's BS.

However some people do believe that we should take proactive steps now rather than in 2 weeks and end up like Italy.

It's inevitable there will be a lockdown / quarantine at this stage?

Our health system can't handle a vomiting bug FFS. it's going to collapse under this strain.

Naggdefy

Ridiculous economy focused thinking across most of the globe.

In 2001 foot and mouth was handled much better than this under the Department of Agriculture and Joe Walsh.

In the 19 odd years it seems our politicians have become totally emasculated. All talk and no action.

Mic 1972

robinph wrote: »

What are you basing that on? The videos of young, healthy and attractive people that you seen in adverts for cruise holidays, or actual details of who goes on cruise ships?

eheheh

igCorcaigh

Spleerbun wrote: »

It has probably already been discussed in one of the threads, but is there anything to be said for just letting this play out and (most of us) just going on about our business?

If the vast majority of us will survive anyway, is there much benefit in dragging this out by delaying the inevitable and spending billions in the process? It doesn't appear it will be stopped, so why shut the country down for nothing?

Give the elderly and people with proven underlying health conditions the option to self isolate of course (with full pay etc for those who work) ; but what's the point in following Italy for example and shutting the whole country down, isolating everyone for a couple of weeks, to achieve basically nothing because the virus will still be there when they emerge 2 weeks later and ready to continue spreading?

Maybe I'm missing something?

You're missing the huge pressure on the health system that will happen if we have a sudden surge in cases, ICU beds won't be available for people who need them for any reason.

That's why there is an emphasis on slowing down the rise in cases as much as possible, even if the same number of people eventually catch the virus anyway.

Spook_ie

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I remember my granddad, RIP, died of pneumonia technically, but he was very old and it was just what put him to rest in the end. A lot of old people will probably just die of Corona now instead of something else.

Yes, but not in a shortened time frame which will impose on the health services and funeral arrangements

robinph

Spleerbun wrote: »

It has probably already been discussed in one of the threads, but is there anything to be said for just letting this play out and (most of us) just going on about our business?

If the vast majority of us will survive anyway, is there much benefit in dragging this out by delaying the inevitable and spending billions in the process? It doesn't appear it will be stopped, so why shut the country down for nothing?

Give the elderly and people with proven underlying health conditions the option to self isolate of course (with full pay etc for those who work) ; but what's the point in following Italy for example and shutting the whole country down, isolating everyone for a couple of weeks, to achieve basically nothing because the virus will still be there when they emerge 2 weeks later and ready to continue spreading?

Maybe I'm missing something?

In the meantime though you have the otherwise healthy population not able to access the health services because it's overrun with Covid19 patients. People will still get sick and injured from normal things, but end up dying from them when they otherwise wouldn't, and you have a big hit on the health staff being out of action and burnt out from the stress of it all.

Away With The Fairies

Will Ireland go into lockdown? There was talk that they can't give us too much all at once or we won't cooperate, so it sounds like something serious is planned.

But for how long?

Mic 1972

Naggdefy wrote: »

Ridiculous economy focused thinking across most of the globe.

In 2001 foot and mouth was handled much better than this under the Department of Agriculture and Joe Walsh.

In the 19 odd years it seems our politicians have become totally emasculated. All talk and no action.

Politicians are getting infected left and right, this might bring back some logical thinking

Beasty

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Thoughtful question.

I went to my local cafe to get lunch today as I felt the need to support them. I was happy to see that they were quite busy though.

I am very conscious of the plight of small businesses with all this potentially taking away the livelihoods of owners and employees. I guess one way to look at it is to think some are actually likely to be quiet now, and probably as safe a place as any, so why not give them a bit of business. It might be the difference between survival and going under as this whole issue plays out

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Except there is no evidence to validate this according to the WHO. Why do people insist on posting unsubstantiated claims?



Same with the nonsense earlier in the thread about it causing kidney damage, heart damage etc etc. There is no actual evidence for any of this. Pure fearmongering by internet experts which is pretty much all this thread is this stage.

At this stage, a separate topic should be set up where people can post all this IMO. Keep this thread for actual factual updates

Hear hear. This is all so new and research takes quite a long time so most of what is being said can't possibly be known yet.

For those of us who are immunocompromised, this is anxiety-inducing. I feel lucky that whilst I'm immunocompromised, I am quite knowledgeable on the science behind it. That is mostly helping me stay calm but it's even starting to get to me a bit.

People are citing immunocompromised people in taking their pops at the government and the HSE but I wish people would stop using us like that.

Spleerbun

BloodBath wrote: »

It's to slow down infection rates and allow the health care system to cope with a steady influx rather than exponential growth of ICU patients.

Fair enough, I was under the impression the only people who would actually need to be hospitalised from it would the the already-ill and the elderly. I thought for the rest of us it would just be bed rest

NegativeCreep

Bob24 wrote: »

The production capacity is probably already more than maxed out by orders from all over the world.
I don’t think our government would dare seizing the stocks of those companies and pissing off the original destination countries? (although I understand Germany did something like that with protective equipment this week).

I know it won’t happen. Our government don’t have the balls. But as you said, other countries are at it by requisitioning face masks and the like.

blanch152

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Its 0.5-1% if the illness levels are low enough that everyone who needs an ICU bed gets one. When you run out of ICU beds it skyrockets.

In ten years, with bodily immunity, a vaccine and with therapies developed, the death rate could be as low as the normal flu and it will circulate in the population.

Unfortunately, at this moment in time, we have no immunity, no vaccine and we are desperately searching for therapeutic responses.

wakka12

robinph wrote: »

What are you basing that on? The videos of young, healthy and attractive people that you seen in adverts for cruise holidays, or actual details of who goes on cruise ships?

Based on common sense. At the very least why would anyone with serious illness choose to travel so far away for a start rather than holiday closer by, or for such a long period of time.

Heres a study for you
https://academic.oup.com/jtm/article/23/3/taw013/2580707
19% of travellers reported a history of chronic illness.
About 60% of the American population have a chronic illness.
https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/resources/infographic/chronic-diseases.htm

ceadaoin.

Spleerbun wrote: »

It has probably already been discussed in one of the threads, but is there anything to be said for just letting this play out and (most of us) just going on about our business?

If the vast majority of us will survive anyway, is there much benefit in dragging this out by delaying the inevitable and spending billions in the process? It doesn't appear it will be stopped, so why shut the country down for nothing?

Give the elderly and people with proven underlying health conditions the option to self isolate of course (with full pay etc for those who work) ; but what's the point in following Italy for example and shutting the whole country down, isolating everyone for a couple of weeks, to achieve basically nothing because the virus will still be there when they emerge 2 weeks later and ready to continue spreading?

Maybe I'm missing something?

This is pretty much what most governments will decide to do IMO. it isn't airborne, we can live our lives as usual for the most part with added awareness and precautions. Protect our vulnerable people as much as possible.If outbreaks get out of control in certain areas then shut those places down for a short time until it's under control. It will be the new normal for the foreseeable future. There is no need to shut down entire countries completely for who knows how long. For example, coffee shops, supermarkets etc in italy are still open despite the "lockdown".

Some people have watched too much walking dead and disaster movies and are losing the run of themselves completely.

And I'm not one of the nothing to see here brigade at all. It is serious. I prepared weeks ago for an extended stay at home without panic buying and emptying shelves. Panic doesn't help matters at all but it sure does provide excitement for some.

If people are choosing to stay informed yet calm, even those who may be in a high risk group,it doesn't mean they are somehow stupid. If that's how they are choosing to deal with it then they shouldn't be berated for it.

Inquitus

igCorcaigh wrote: »

You're missing the huge pressure on the health system that will happen if we have a sudden surge in cases, ICU beds won't be available for people who need them for any reason.

That's why there is an emphasis on slowing down the rise in cases as much as possible, even if the same number of people eventually catch the virus anyway.

Yep we have limited ICU beds and limited respirators, blood re-oxygenators etc. if we get the Italy curve choices will have to be made between who lives and who dies, if we manage to flatten the curve to a more managable profile, then the equipment we have could be close to enough to deal with the influx, reducing the number of deaths and avoiding having to make horrific choices.

Spleerbun

robinph wrote: »

In the meantime though you have the otherwise healthy population not able to access the health services because it's overrun with Covid19 patients. People will still get sick and injured from normal things, but end up dying from them when they otherwise wouldn't, and you have a big hit on the health staff being out of action and burnt out from the stress of it all.

Good point

uck51js9zml2yt

sjb25 wrote: »

Defense forces preparing to assist

https://twitter.com/DF_COS/status/1237773625404637184?s=20

That was a lot of hash tagging

blanch152

Spleerbun wrote: »

It has probably already been discussed in one of the threads, but is there anything to be said for just letting this play out and (most of us) just going on about our business?

If the vast majority of us will survive anyway, is there much benefit in dragging this out by delaying the inevitable and spending billions in the process? It doesn't appear it will be stopped, so why shut the country down for nothing?

Give the elderly and people with proven underlying health conditions the option to self isolate of course (with full pay etc for those who work) ; but what's the point in following Italy for example and shutting the whole country down, isolating everyone for a couple of weeks, to achieve basically nothing because the virus will still be there when they emerge 2 weeks later and ready to continue spreading?

Maybe I'm missing something?

You are missing something, it's called flattening the curve.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/10/covid-19-coronavirus-flattening-the-curve

tobefrank321

To reiterate, closing schools and banning large public gatherings eg over 500 people, should help hugely to flatten the curve.

This in turn will give our health services some respite and may make Covid 19 more manageable. It will undoubtedly save lives.

It doesn't actually mean you no longer go to shops and restaurants as if you take enough precautions, social distance, no handshakes, wash hands, these can continue as normal and there's little reason to fear infection.

Public transport might be a different issue though. It all depends on research around it.

Downlinz

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Will Ireland go into lockdown? There was talk that they can't give us too much all at once or we won't cooperate, so it sounds like something serious is planned.

But for how long?

They'll close schools and events first before then asking people who can to work from home. That'll probably be the extent of it.

igCorcaigh

Spleerbun wrote: »

Fair enough, I was under the impression the only people who would actually need to be hospitalised from it would the the already-ill and the elderly. I thought for the rest of us it would just be bed rest

The percentage of identified cases that need hospital treatment is around 11pc.

robinph

wakka12 wrote: »

Based on common sense. At the very least why would anyone with serious illness choose to travel so far away for a start rather than holiday closer by, or for such a long period of time.

We're not talking about people on their last legs boarding cruise ships, but they will have a multitude of otherwise well managed health conditions that once combined with a bit of Covid19 suddenly becomes deadly.

Wibbs

Boggles wrote: »

And the HSE are now encouraging visitor restrictions.

Maybe it's time to give the Department of Fisheries a crack at his.

At this point B, getting a bunch of toddlers to flip coins would be better than the HSE's "efforts". It's beyond ridiculous, scarily inept. If anything comes out of this mess, it has to be a gutting of the morons at the top and middle levels of that "organisation". They're like a bad Paddy Irishman joke by a 1970's end of Brighton Pier English comedian made flesh.

smelly sock

ceadaoin. wrote: »

This is pretty much what most governments will decide to do IMO. it isn't airborne, we can live our lives as usual with added awareness and precautions. If outbreaks get out of control in certain areas then shut those places down for a short time until it's under control. It will be the new normal for the foreseeable future.

Some people have watched too much walking dead and disaster movies and are losing the run of themselves completely.

And I'm not one of the nothing to see here brigade at all. It is serious. I prepared weeks ago for an extended stay at home without panic buying and emptying shelves. Panic doesn't help matters at all but it sure does provide excitement for some.

You see you're wrong. The issue with Ireland is it's such a small local type country. if Dublin for example has to shutdown / isolate and quarantine then it has huge implications on most of the South East, Midlands and North East where hundreds of thousands commute from. Going on that logic then those areas and people also need to self isolate.

It has nothing to do with the walking dead or zombies. It's a potentially life threatening virus which could visit all of families.

YFlyer

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Why would they

They did before when on strike.

GooglePlus

Downlinz wrote: »

They'll close schools and events first before then asking people who can to work from home. That'll probably be the extent of it.

Government departments will be working from home next week onwards.

gabeeg

The WHO have said we can finally call it a pandemic

Knock yourselves out lads

Croohur1

GooglePlus wrote: »

Government departments will be working from home next week onwards.

In your opinion, or you know this to be the case?

Mic 1972

blanch152 wrote: »

In ten years, with bodily immunity, a vaccine and with therapies developed, the death rate could be as low as the normal flu and it will circulate in the population.

Unfortunately, at this moment in time, we have no immunity, no vaccine and we are desperately searching for therapeutic responses.

10 years?? if this stays around for 10 years the only way to survive will be by naturally developing antibodies, at the expense of a large chunk of the population who wont survive
There is potential for a vaccine within 1 year or so