Social distancing Megathread

eddie73

Deleted User wrote: »

Social distancing matters as much outdoors as it does indoors. Why? Because you'll likely have very little warning (if at all) when someone coughs or sneezes in your direction. Having a decent amount of space between you and them, vastly improves your chance of avoiding infection.

I must admit I find the blase attitude a bit worrying, especially considering the deaths coming out of Italy. This isn't the flu. This isn't something that we've experienced before, and have fully explored all it's effects. Covid is still undergoing research and nobody should be getting complacent about how infectious it might be. Err on the side of caution. Keep distance between you and others....

It seems that sharing air with someone is all it takes to get this virus. It doesn't take a cough or a sneeze.

degsie

Dublin chavs couldn't care less anyway...

v638sg7k1a92bx

Yesterday there were people queuing outside the bank cheek to jowl waiting for the bank to open.

Seriously, what is the matter with some people? Aren’t they embarrassed or are they just so lumpen that they are completely unaware of their own ignorance?

AllForIt

Deleted User wrote: »

Social distancing matters as much outdoors as it does indoors. Why? Because you'll likely have very little warning (if at all) when someone coughs or sneezes in your direction. Having a decent amount of space between you and them, vastly improves your chance of avoiding infection.

I must admit I find the blase attitude a bit worrying, especially considering the deaths coming out of Italy. This isn't the flu. This isn't something that we've experienced before, and have fully explored all it's effects. Covid is still undergoing research and nobody should be getting complacent about how infectious it might be. Err on the side of caution. Keep distance between you and others....

It does not. Covid is not airborne. It is well understood that transmission is far far more likely indoors that it is outdoors.

As you rightly pointed out it is transmittable through sneeze droplets. But the chances of picking it up from someones sneeze if far far more likely indoors sitting beside them than it is by passing someone on the street outdoors. You'd have to be pretty unlucky outdoors to pick it up that way though it is possible.

I'm not being blaze about it, I'm just pointing out the facts.

fryup

fryup wrote: »

what's the story with cafe's?? are they meant to close or obliged to close....cause my local cafe is still open

Café's and restaurants are not obliged to close. We are not at that stage just yet, but ideally they should be creating distance between people by reducing their total capacity. For example, closing off tables.

And the pubs closed via a voluntary arrangement, not because the government banned them from opening.

Silvius

trapp wrote: »

To me this is the only sustainable option.

Isolation and everything that comes with it will destroy lives if implemented long term.

There is no getting away from that.

So...the vulnerable (meaning all the elderly and all the people with an underlying condition) stay in isolation for the forseeable future. So we'll just destroy the lives of the vulnerable and let everyone else get on with their lives. Is this what you're saying?

growleaves

So...the vulnerable (meaning all the elderly and all the people with an underlying condition) stay in isolation for the forseeable future. So we'll just destroy the lives of the vulnerable and let everyone else get on with their lives. Is this what you're saying?

World economy suspended long term -> food shortages -> mass death

eddie73

eddie73 wrote: »

It seems that sharing air with someone is all it takes to get this virus. It doesn't take a cough or a sneeze.

No. People have shared spaces like subway carriages and not been infected. Even with people obviously showing symptoms.

What we do know is that it's mostly passed through drops of fluid from an infected person. So, saliva is the most likely mode of transmission, which would be from a cough or sneeze. Or the spit spray from when someone is talking. Simply being near an infected person isn't enough, although some physical contact is also a likely cause of transmission.

Still, the truth is that they're still discovering new things about the virus, and it's best to reduce contact with others. Sharing a narrow space with another person is a high risk.

AllForIt wrote: »

It does not. Covid is not airborne. It is well understood that transmission is far far more likely indoors that it is outdoors.

I never said it was airborne.

As you rightly pointed out it is transmittable through sneeze droplets. But the chances of picking it up from someones sneeze if far far more likely indoors sitting beside them than it is by passing someone on the street outdoors. You'd have to be pretty unlucky outdoors to pick it up that way though it is possible.

I'm not being blaze about it, I'm just pointing out the facts.

You seem to think I'm making this into a competition. This is about social distancing yourself from others both inside and outside.

You walk close to another person outside, you're still placing yourself at risk should someone cough or sneeze in your direction. It's an unnecessary risk, and frankly, if Ireland wants to avoid the death toll of other countries, then people need to take this seriously.

It's not a competition to see who is right or wrong. This is about not increasing the rate of infection before we're capable of dealing with it. Be cautious. Maintain distance from other people. Walking on the road for a moment is far safer than passing a stranger on a narrow footpath. It's really that simple.

And you're not talking facts. You're stating your opinion.

Silvius

growleaves wrote: »

World economy suspended long term -> food shortages -> mass death

World economy?? China's economy is getting up and running again - they've shown what needs to be done to get through this. Seriouly, if you think sacrificing the weak to let the strong survive is an acceptable ideology you belong in Nazi Germany. Signing off boards now for good, totally disgusted by the lack of empathy and humanity in some of what I'm reading here.

Silvius

Silvius wrote: »

So...the vulnerable (meaning all the elderly and all the people with an underlying condition) stay in isolation for the forseeable future. So we'll just destroy the lives of the vulnerable and let everyone else get on with their lives. Is this what you're saying?

I'd say Pretty much. Although, do you have any evidence that extended periods isolated or in distance from others would destroy all their lives? Seems a bit over the top to me. I suspect it's an extreme minority who won't be able to handle it for a few months. Some people won't be able to handle it. Many will.

I suppose you could argue for everyone to hang out together, and while we'd suffer a death rate like Italy, at least, they wouldn't be depressed...

And it's not as if they're in solitary within a prison.. why exaggerate it so much?

And the fact is, that there's no real choice here. Unless you have a realistic alternative?

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

World economy suspended long term -> food shortages -> mass death

Any evidence to suggest that the "world" economy would be suspended long term?

I mean it... I keep seeing various posters suggest this, but I've seen nothing to suggest that it would happen. So... links, articles, evidence, etc Gimme something more than your scaremongering.

growleaves

World economy?? China's economy is getting up and running again - they've shown what needs to be done to get through this. Seriouly, if you think sacrificing the weak to let the strong survive is an acceptable ideology you belong in Nazi Germany. Signing off boards now for good, totally disgusted by the lack of empathy and humanity in some of what I'm reading here.

The post you were responding to said long term. That it what I and other commenters are talking about.

I'm not saying that anyone should be "sacrificed". I'm saying that if the worldwide system of production and distribution were to be disrupted in the long term then the elderly and vulnerable, and everyone else, would be dead from a means different from this virus.

Do you not realise that a huge amount of deaths can occur from a long-running open-ended lockdown of worldwide economic activity?

ForestFire

[

















]

ForestFire

I have to state my full disapproval of this thread and the example it is setting to others out there.

No wonder people are not taking this seriously.

From now on at least one blanks post between posts or I'll be reporting the lot of you to the mods!!

growleaves

Any evidence to suggest that the "world" economy would be suspended long term?

No, I'm only talking about if it were to happen. I don't have a crystal ball.

I mean it... I keep seeing various posters suggest this, but I've seen nothing to suggest that it would happen. So... links, articles, evidence, etc Gimme something more than your scaremongering.

But klaz no one knows. That's the point. There's no way of determining what effect stopping a 20 trillion economy in its tracks will have. There are no studies on it because up until 2 weeks ago it was unthinkable.

That doesn't mean its grand to go ahead and lockdown the world system of trade indefinitely and that you won't crash the world economy.

whisky_galore

paw patrol wrote: »

while I see the reasoning of the new legislation which will allow gardai to break up house parties.

I am very concerned at the effect on our liberty to grant agents of the state such powers. Sure it's temporary for the emergency but fcuking hell so was PRSI...:eek:

This is police state sh1t.
I hate how people actually approve of trading their freedoms for security :mad:

Which do you value more, parties or lives?

NIMAN

What are the social distancing guidelines for outdoor walking?

Recently to get out of the house, me and the kids went to walk on our local beach. Its very long and today there were maybe 20 people on it while we were there. People did kindly move away from each other when they were passing.

We would all assume that if out in public and there is enough space between people that this would be ok. But in Italy (and Spain?) aren't they just stopping people going out? Is it because even outside is not safe or is it because people simply can't be trusted?

v638sg7k1a92bx

paw patrol wrote: »

I don't agree - we have our own cases of garda overreach in Ireland even in recent times.
We had Donegal and more recently Garda McCabe and there appears something fishy in the midlands but as of yet unproven.
But we have enough with a small enough population.

I guess we can wait and when this is over campaign to repeal these laws if they aren't removed.



I don't get this , the gardai should only be able to enter your house if a law is being broken and the entry is warranted , this give them any reason to enter a private house.
That's utter pox. Tbh if that doesn't concern people , that is prob more worrying than the actual legislation.
People support this type of stuff cos they assume it will always affect "other people" and not them....

This reminds me of the Houses of the Oireachtas Inquiries referendum in 2011 after the financial crisis in 2008. FG held a referendum to give the Oireactas the power to legally compel witnesses to appear to before an Oireachtas inquiry and guess what? The referendum was defeated because people said “it would give the state too much power”. Since then for the last 9 years the same people bitched and moaned because nobody was held accountable and “the bankers” should have been compelled to appear before the inquiries.

Likewise here, people will ring the Gardai and complain yet in the same breath will bemoan that they have no legal authority.

v638sg7k1a92bx

NIMAN wrote: »

What are the social distancing guidelines for outdoor walking?

Recently to get out of the house, me and the kids went to walk on our local beach. Its very long and today there were maybe 20 people on it while we were there. People did kindly move away from each other when they were passing.

We would all assume that if out in public and there is enough space between people that this would be ok. But in Italy (and Spain?) aren't they just stopping people going out? Is it because even outside is not safe or is it because people simply can't be trusted?

Because people are stupid and cannot be trusted to stay inside and instead decide to take their kids for a walk on the beach when there is a worldwide pandemic outside.

v638sg7k1a92bx

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Café's and restaurants are not obliged to close. We are not at that stage just yet, but ideally they should be creating distance between people by reducing their total capacity. For example, closing off tables.

And the pubs closed via a voluntary arrangement, not because the government banned them from opening.

Who would actually want to go to a cafe or restaurant during a time like this?

Sam Quentin

It suits me fine and now I blend in

NIMAN

Liliana Tiny Barbershop wrote: »

Because people are stupid and cannot be trusted to stay inside and instead decide to take their kids for a walk on the beach when there is a worldwide pandemic outside.

So I assume you favour a total lockdown? No-one out of the house at all?

I don't see how we are going against Gov and HSE advice.
We are told to stay 6ft apart from other people. I would say to walk on the beach today we didn't come within 20ft of another person, before getting back into the car and going home.

Quantum Erasure

whisky_galore wrote: »

Which do you value more, parties or lives?

lives now, parties later

Quantum Erasure

Liliana Tiny Barbershop wrote: »

Because people are stupid and cannot be trusted to stay inside and instead decide to take their kids for a walk on the beach when there is a worldwide pandemic outside.

that's bollocks,

a stroll on the beach, with appropriate distancing, and hygiene, is vastly more desirable than being locked inside for months at a time

Vicxas

The biggest pain in all this is watching my son listen to the next door neighbours play in their back garden and he cant join in.

I dont care about me being isolated but he's still young and doesnt fully understand.

Lord TSC

NIMAN wrote: »

So I assume you favour a total lockdown? No-one out of the house at all?

I don't see how we are going against Gov and HSE advice.
We are told to stay 6ft apart from other people. I would say to walk on the beach today we didn't come within 20ft of another person, before getting back into the car and going home.

There’s literally zero difference between family members sitting in a confined sitting room together or going for a walk on the beach together. AFAIK, the advise is close family groups are ok going for walks, but to not meet up with people outside of your home to do so, and maintain social distancing with strangers.

The issue seems to be that in some countries, they’ve found a zero tolerance plan easier to implement. It’s easier to just tell everyone no than it is to have patrols stopping multiple groups. That individuals are all going to the same place, thus making a crowd.

Harry Palmr

Vicxas wrote: »

The biggest pain in all this is watching my son listen to the next door neighbours play in their back garden and he cant join in.

I dont care about me being isolated but he's still young and doesnt fully understand.

Put on gloves and play throw the ball across the fence as a sort of volleyball for idiots!

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

No, I'm only talking about if it were to happen. I don't have a crystal ball.

So, you're scaremongering based on absolutely nothing. Right.

But klaz no one knows. That's the point. There's no way of determining what effect stopping a 20 trillion economy in its tracks will have. There are no studies on it because up until 2 weeks ago it was unthinkable.

That doesn't mean its grand to go ahead and lockdown the world system of trade indefinitely and that you won't crash the world economy.

No economy has been "stopped". None. While the majority of people are either isolated or seeking distance, economies are still running. In China, they didn't shut down everything. In the west, a lot of services/sales/etc can and will be shifted to an online presence.

Local Economies will stumble/stutter somewhat, but the world economy will continue.

As for the world economy of trade, a huge percentage of actual trade is already automated, or requires the minimum in human input... and that's if people are isolated completely long term, which they won't be. Precautions will be developed, along with technological discoveries (I'm sure there's many entrepreneurs already out there thinking up new products to deal with this crisis). The vast majority of services will be reactivated within a few weeks, simply because, people can't afford not to work.

NIMAN

NIMAN wrote: »

What are the social distancing guidelines for outdoor walking?

Recently to get out of the house, me and the kids went to walk on our local beach. Its very long and today there were maybe 20 people on it while we were there. People did kindly move away from each other when they were passing.

We would all assume that if out in public and there is enough space between people that this would be ok. But in Italy (and Spain?) aren't they just stopping people going out? Is it because even outside is not safe or is it because people simply can't be trusted?

Because Italian and Spanish culture encourages physical contact when they meet. Kissing on the cheeks, hugs, etc. Many Spanish will ignore the risks believing that their traditions are more important. It's like the idiotic american politicians claiming that they'll continue shaking hands during the crisis. Some people have warped logic when it comes to what should be acceptable.

growleaves

So, you're scaremongering based on absolutely nothing. Right.

I'm not "scaremongering". You keep insisting that the majority of services of services will be resumed relatively quickly, but no one in authority - bar Boris Johnson - has made those kind of assurances.