CoVid-19 Part VII - 169 cases ROI (2 deaths) 45 in NI (as of 15 March) *Read OP*

is_that_so

Strazdas wrote: »

Four weeks.....maybe six weeks max

Most experts think total shutdown of a country for longer would be unsustainable (negatives begin to outweigh the benefits).

Do you have any links to pieces about the economics of this?

JP Liz V1

digitaldr wrote: »

On a lighter note, Ready, Steady - Cook! Is being rebooted just in time for the pandemic. For those of you too young to remember the original - two groups of contestants get a few mystery ingredients and compete to make the best meal. I can just imagine it now - dried penne, can of beans & some dog food!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CCMxE9Hly0

I like Rylan but couldn't get into the reboot

SharpshooterTom

The original Ready Steady Cook only ended in 2010.

I don't think too many people on here will be too young to remember it lol.

Spook_ie

Turtwig wrote: »

No we're not. There is no natural immunity to polio and small pox. These aren't really a problem though because we can inoculate ourselves with vaccines.

Do you happen to have a CoVid19 vaccine in your pocket?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

I have a home ventilator that I have never used. I was given it around the time I was diagnosed with cancer to help my breathing but the treatment worked fast so I never needed it. I wonder should I donate it? Would hospital even accept it or do they need to source equipment carefully?

Spook_ie

BluePlanet wrote: »

No that's why we have science.
We can vaccinate.

Another one with a CoVid19 vaccine in their pocket!

Strazdas

is_that_so wrote: »

Do you have any links to pieces about the economics of this?

It's not just the economics, behavioural scientists think the psychological impact of a society shutting down for months would be disastrous for the population.

I read somewhere during the week that experts think it should be 4-6 weeks max and then the lockdown must be lifted again, no matter what.

Clarence Boddiker

Simon Harris: "People packing into pubs could help to spread the virus"

Simon Harris: "Stopping flights from Italy just wouldn't work"

namloc1980

The government and authorities believed that there would be some responsibility taken by people. We're always very quick to point fingers at Government telling us what to do and treating us like kids / nanny state etc. They then ask us to exercise some responsibility and restraint in an unprecedented public health emergency and we can't. Some people won't heed any advice and just blame the gubbermint regardless.

Loafing Oaf

Strazdas wrote: »

Govt should be stressing that total nationwide "lockdown" and self isolation would only last for four weeks or so.

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

It won't last four weeks. I'm thinking 10-16 is a more likely number.

Seems Strazdas is saying total lockdown is only sustainable for a month or so before people start running out of food, essential medication etc., while Ciaran is saying pandemic could be raging for much longer. You could both be right...

trapp

Sustainability of social distancing needs to be discussed as a separate issue from the virus itself.

Of course the measures being taken are being implemented to save lives, prevent the health system from collapsing under the strain, to protect the vulnerable and at risk.

These measures are needed and I'm not in anyway against them.

But we can't just see everything in black and white. We could if there was an end in sight in a matter of weeks or even months but there isn't.

How long before the effects of isolation become another grave issue along with the virus?

Everyone is clear on the health effects of loneliness. Everyone is clear on the effects of unemployment on physical and mental health. Many are going to be effectively unemployed for a long period of time and may remain so after the crisis.

How will this isolation affect anyone with depression, suicidal tendencies, mental health difficulties?

How will this isolation affect people confined to home and living in dysfunctional families with problems of abuse, drugs and alcohol abuse?

How will this affect the most disadvantaged children in our society with no escape to school and no education for a prolonged period of time?

What will the rates of domestic abuse, suicides etc be if social isolation is implemented over a prolonged period?

I repeat, I support the measures being implemented to save lives. The experts are doing their best in an evolving situation where everything is new.

This can be done for weeks without doubt, but is it tenable for months?

I repeat, I don't know but it needs to be discussed.

Mental Health and suicide, anxiety etc were all major issues and thinking about suicide major killers up to a couple of weeks ago.

I know this virus has the potential to kill many more people than suicide but the long term effects of social isolation need to be discussed.

BLIZZARD7

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

Typical recency bias. Hyperbole to the extreme.

We'll eventually see the full impact of this over the next 2 years sure, but 150,000-600,000 were killed during the 2009 Flu Pandemic and AIDS killed 32 million in the 20th century. Some perspective.

We'll see also what happens to this virus during the summer whether or not it will sustain its exponential rise.

It's my opinion. Time will tell. No we won't see the full impact of this in the next 2 years, the economic impact from this will be felt for more than a decade. Neither AIDS or Swineflu had European countries shutting borders and a dramatic reduction in international travel.

I also think the timing of this combined with the background and legacy economic issues from the 2008 crash are going to amplify the effects of this immensely.

Hopefully the overall death's are far below the figures you mentioned above but there is every possibility they will be multiples higher.

ThePopehimself

Beasty wrote: »

Sobering thought

I suspect you'll still be able to get your fixes via Room Service

I see what you did there

banie01

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Other countries are doing things differently and are also being advised by highly qualified people. I disagree that people should go unquestioned. Doctors are fallible.

The UK have apparently based their advice on a cohort of 500 UK patients.

The rest of the world is following advice from the WHO based on a cohort of 72000 patients.

I will try and find a link to the source for this but it is based on an article I read recently.

Matt Hancock today has announced the NHS will buy any and all available ventilators, whilst also saying they will advise over 70s to self isolate for up to 4 months in the coming weeks.

UK advice is trying to have the best of both worlds, its current strategy is completely at odds with WHO measures.
It is at odds with the only countries that have had any arrest to date on Covid-19. SK, China and Taiwan.

That mass events are still ongoing, is frankly unbelievable from an outside standpoint.

macnug

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I have a home ventilator that I have never used. I was given it around the time I was diagnosed with cancer to help my breathing but the treatment worked fast so I never needed it. I wonder should I donate it? Would hospital even accept it or do they need to source equipment carefully?

They wont use it. Youd be better off keeping it in case you or someone you know needs it.

Edit: Actually HSE wont use it but voluntary organisations or local nursing homes might.

Lundstram

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I have a home ventilator that I have never used. I was given it around the time I was diagnosed with cancer to help my breathing but the treatment worked fast so I never needed it. I wonder should I donate it? Would hospital even accept it or do they need to source equipment carefully?

Ring them and ask. I'd say they'd take it and clean/modify it somehow if there's a shortage in the future. Very kind of you, fair play.

completedit

namloc1980 wrote: »

The government and authorities believed that there would be some responsibility taken by people. We're always very quick to point fingers at Government telling us what to do and treating us like kids / nanny state etc. They then ask us to exercise some responsibility and restraint in an unprecedented public health emergency and we can't. Some people won't heed any advice and just blame the gubbermint regardless.

What do you mean? Nobody thinks they are part of the other 100 people. If everyone has the mentality that I’m not the problem someone else is or we are not the problem, they are, then quickly all pubs, bars, restaurants will fill up and thus show the 100 person limit was nonsensical.

It had to be communicated to the public that this wasn’t a ordinary weekend. By telling people 100 people is permissible, it gave them the green light to go out,

Ger Roe

namloc1980 wrote: »

The government and authorities believed that there would be some responsibility taken by people. We're always very quick to point fingers at Government telling us what to do and treating us like kids / nanny state etc. They then ask us to exercise some responsibility and restraint in an unprecedented public health emergency and we can't. Some people won't heed any advice and just blame the gubbermint regardless.

Yes... and knowing all that, the Gov still decided to appeal to the better nature that they don't have.

Act faster and harder.

is_that_so

Strazdas wrote: »

It's not just the economics, behavioural scientists think the psychological impact of a society shutting down for months would be disastrous for the population.

I read somewhere during the week that experts think it should be 4-6 weeks max and then the lockdown must be lifted again, no matter what.

I was just looking for data on it. I know the behavioural aspect of it has been mentioned regularly at briefings.

Funsterdelux

I was just out to a garden centre to buy some seed spuds and onion sets.
It wasnt too busy, but there were people there with kids etc.

Then I stopped by aldi to pick up some bits, the car park was full but the shop wasnt too busy apart from the tills, they had 4 open. Again lots of families too.

I think we need these stricter measures sooner rather than later.

harr

Reading posts from some British people on social media they are really coming across as brain dead and brainwashed to a point that it’s scary...they have blind faith in what the government are doing. And it’s a “ **** you once I am alright “ attitude. I suppose nothing should surprise us after brexit ... it’s still only a cold to a lot of them not even a flu only a cold .:eek:

Blanco100

namloc1980 wrote: »

The government and authorities believed that there would be some responsibility taken by people. We're always very quick to point fingers at Government telling us what to do and treating us like kids / nanny state etc. They then ask us to exercise some responsibility and restraint in an unprecedented public health emergency and we can't. Some people won't heed any advice and just blame the gubbermint regardless.

People whinging about the government not closing pubs. "I wouldn't have went if the government had closed it. Bastids".

Jin luk

Can we go close the borders with the uk now?really never thought id even imagine it, but f*ck it close the border these brits are gone crazy again.

Strazdas

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Seems Strazdas is saying total lockdown is only sustainable for a month or so before people start running out of food, essential medication etc., while Ciaran is saying pandemic could be raging for much longer. You could both be right...

I'm also saying a deeply depressed nation would outweigh the impact of even several thousand people dying of a virus. You can only put an entire society on hold for a limited period of time.....people have to be allowed to live (not allowing it would be the equivalent of locking up the nation in a maximum security prison).

wakka12

50% increase in global deaths from coronavirus in the last 5 days
4000 deaths on 10th March, over 6000 now.

Over 300% increase in cases in Europe in the last 5 days.

BluePlanet

i'm surprised i haven't read any character attacks on Patrick Vallance the chief medical advisor in the UK.
He's not a virologist and was President, and R&D at GlaxoSmithKline.

A massively for-profit big pharma company.

rob316

I'd imagine the shutting up shop for more than 4 weeks would be the max the country could sustain. Someone said 16 weeks. There would be mass riots, breakdown in society, banks meltdown, social welfare system . Alot of small business won't be liquid come the 30th March if the restrictions are lifted anyway.
It would make the 2008 recession look like a bad day at the exchange.

The bigger picture will have to be looked at in a few weeks time.

ShooterSF

Told my boss I won't be going back in if the pub stays open. At this point I have to think of my parents I'm back living with. He was understanding. Not sure how the owner takes it but if they have a problem they can something where the sun don't shine.

trapp

Strazdas wrote: »

I'm also saying a deeply depressed nation would outweigh the impact of even several thousand people dying of a virus. You can only put an entire society on hold for a limited period of time.....people have to be allowed to live (not allowing it would be the equivalent of locking up the nation in a maximum security prison).

This is so important to remember.

Especially for vulnerable groups regarding mental health etc.

Ger Roe

Jin luk wrote: »

Can we go close the borders with the uk now?really never thought id even imagine it, but f*ck it close the border these brits are gone crazy again.

http://arethebritsatitagain.com/