Are we better off getting it now and out of the way?

Imreoir2

paleoperson wrote: »

Right, it would end up a lot worse than Italy. Nobody put that on the table as an option, except that CNBC host who later apologized for his remarks.

If it's not on the table, what do you think will happen? How do you think the virus runs through thye population without causing mass casualties?

Airyfairy12

From the little bit of research that's been done, COVID -19 causes long term damage to lungs, even young people who got the virus and didnt feel many symptoms had xrays that showed scar tissue on their lungs. Some people will be left with 20 - 30% less lung function. That in itself is reason enough to not take the risk.

Never mind the thousands of people that will die, the thousands that will need hospital treatment and the crippling effect it will have on the HSE and the economy if we all decided sure feck it, might as well get a dose to get it over and done with.

We will begin to see the consequences of that attitude in the UK in about 2 to 3 weeks time.

paleoperson

Imreoir2 wrote: »

If it's not on the table, what do you think will happen? How do you think the virus runs through thye population without causing mass casualties?

The social distancing will help slow the spread of the virus. The first phase is "containment", the next is the "delay" phase. We're in the delay phase at present.

A large percentage of the population will get it eventually over the next 18 months, but hopefully the most at risk people will avoid it and the virus will die out due to herd protection.

There is no specific treatment for it, but proper care at the right time leads to extremely good outcomes while the immune system fights off the virus. A lot less people will die.

Don't worry - the delay phase is if anything more restrictive of movement than the containment phase. The only difference is that we expect a large percentage of the population will get it.

And for the slow-mo science deniers that believe it doesn't effect the young think again:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8124901/Young-people-dying-coronavirus-despite-elderly-people-worst-affected.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline

DM I know, but there are many young people under 30 and especially under 40 with no underlying conditions dying or having their lungs ruined. These are Chinese scientists who appear to have been through the worst of it, not Italian statistics where lots of elderly were allowed to die without treatment to prioritize the young.

And let me just emphasize again how I find it horrifying that certain people consider it "scaremongering" if I say anything about their precious generation can die while it seems to be like ah who cares if it's elderly people. Seriously, cop on.

tuxy

Airyfairy12 wrote: »

From the little bit of research that's been done, COVID -19 causes long term damage to lungs

I do toner how common that will turn out to be.
Many endurance athletes have tested positive, so it would be career ending for them.

Stheno

paleoperson wrote: »

The social distancing will help slow the spread of the virus. The first phase is "containment", the next is the "delay" phase. We're in the delay phase at present.

A large percentage of the population will get it eventually over the next 18 months, but hopefully the most at risk people will avoid it and the virus will die out due to herd protection.

There is no specific treatment for it, but proper care at the right time leads to extremely good outcomes while the immune system fights off the virus. A lot less people will die.

Don't worry - the delay phase is if anything more restrictive of movement than the containment phase. The only difference is that we expect a large percentage of the population will get it.

And for the slow-mo science deniers that believe it doesn't effect the young think again:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8124901/Young-people-dying-coronavirus-despite-elderly-people-worst-affected.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline

DM I know, but there are many young people under 30 and especially under 40 with no underlying conditions dying or having their lungs ruined. These are Chinese scientists who appear to have been true the worst of it, not Italian statistics where lots of elderly were allowed to die without treatment to prioritize the young.

And let me just emphasize again how I find it horrifying that certain people consider it "scaremongering" if I say anything about their precious generation can die while it seems to be like ah who cares if it's elderly people. Seriously, cop on.

Are you discounting all the clinical trials going on st the moment testing different treatments?

Best hope is a combination of short suppression to ease the burden on health service and successful treatments being identified

paleoperson

Stheno wrote: »

Are you discounting all the clinical trials going on st the moment testing different treatments?

Best hope is a combination of short suppression to ease the burden on health service and successful treatments being identified

Nothing I said indicated I was discounting them. I said a large amount of the population might get it.

Here we are again, just because I say something you think is foreboding you have me marked as some kind of fear-mongerer and inventing stances I never even had. I'm just trying to say the most accurate things.

That being said, it's very unlikely there will be a substantial cure of this any time soon.

Stheno

paleoperson wrote: »

Nothing I said indicated I was discounting them. I said a large amount of the population might get it.

Here we are again, just because I say something you think is foreboding you have me marked as some kind of fear-mongerer and inventing stances I never even had. I'm just trying to say the most accurate things.

That being said, it's very unlikely there will be a substantial cure of this any time soon.

But what you are saying is inaccurate there are over 100 clinical trials in progress with existing drugs or combinations of them going on at the moment.

And you appear to think I'm some twenty something selfish prick to quote one of your posts who doesn't give a ahit about older people

Get over yourself tbh

nocoverart

tuxy wrote: »

This was the exact strategy the UK were aiming for until today.

until today = they were wrong.

paleoperson

Stheno wrote: »

But what you are saying is inaccurate there are over 100 clinical trials in progress with existing drugs or combinations of them going on at the moment.

And you appear to think I'm some twenty something selfish prick to quote one of your posts who doesn't give a ahit about older people

Get over yourself tbh

There is nothing "inaccurate" about what I said. That's not how it works. Until there is a proper vaccine there will be things that might slightly help. It's like giving people paracetamol or vitamin C - it might help but not proved to. I heard they are trying AZT (AIDS pharmaceuticals) for it, they're basically throwing the kitchen sink at it. Please don't contradict what I say because you just won't be right. I am always very cautious in what I say, I go by the experts so that is why I don't get major things like this wrong.

Also 100 clinical trials sounds like a lot - do you have a link for it?

Stheno

paleoperson wrote: »

There is nothing "inaccurate" about what I said. That's not how it works. Until there is a proper vaccine there will be things that might slightly help. It's like giving people paracetamol or vitamin C - it might help but not proved to. I heard they are trying AZT (AIDS pharmaceuticals) for it, they're basically throwing the kitchen sink at it. Please don't contradict what I say because you just won't be right. I am always very cautious in what I say, I go by the experts so that is why I don't get major things like this wrong.

Also 100 clinical trials sounds like a lot - do you have a link for it?

So you even understand the difference between a vaccine and a treatment? Yes it will take 12 to 18 months for a vaccine at least one of which is undergoing trials

As for your experts and you always being right there are actually 300 clinical trials of treatments underway https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-new-treatment-for-critically-ill-patients-to-begin-as-soon-as-next-week-11959914

Now you'll need to read the article

And btw they are not using AZT the world has moved in from that

Skippyme

It's not something to take a chance on ... can lead to anyone developing long term ill health over their lifetime with permanently damaged lungs & other organs. People go around oblivious to the fact that technically their body may be just ticking over & automatically compensating for things outside the norm. Diabetes ( undetected ) , leukamia, autoimmune disorders ( perhaps undiagnosed), cancer, cardiac or liver problems, renal or old age can cause patient to become critically & terminally ill.

It is the plague by another name in some contexts like it's ability to spread like wildfire & it's unseen presence & lack of symptoms until it takes a serious hold. This link advises that people may never fully recover.

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

We really do need to just avoid people like the plague until it dies out without it's next host. The Italian flights should have been stopped like the Prof on PT had said. They were a week late at least in implementing a harder line approach ... they let it in to a large extent.

sadie1502

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Yes you had it in October and the first case did not appear in China until November the 17th?

You do realise there are loads of other bugs going around and yes I had that dose before Christmas also.

That's reported case. Who's to say it wasn't there before. Yes I know that plenty of other things floating about. But that was my experience I am allowed to share it and my opinion.

sadie1502

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Yes you had it in October and the first case did not appear in China until November the 17th?

You do realise there are loads of other bugs going around and yes I had that dose before Christmas also.

That's reported case. Who's to say it wasn't there before. Yes I know that plenty of other things floating about. But that was my experience I am allowed to share it and my opinion.

threeball

Imreoir2 wrote: »

If it's not on the table, what do you think will happen? How do you think the virus runs through thye population without causing mass casualties?

Have you being paying attention at all. Flatten the curve. I'm sorry to break it to you but you are part of that curve, probably towards the end of it as you are more observant of the measures introduced but still part of it.

The key is keeping the old and vulnerable out of it which unfortunately is not possible for everyone, hence a certain level of deaths.

CinemaGuy45

sadie1502 wrote: »

That's reported case. Who's to say it wasn't there before. Yes I know that plenty of other things floating about. But that was my experience I am allowed to share it and my opinion.

Everybody is allowed share their opinion that does not mean everybody has to agree with it.

That dose going around last year was unusual and it stayed with me for ages.

I am only sharing my opinion there was no spike in deaths with the old and vulnerable last year unlike the carnage hitting Italy this year.

sadie1502

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Everybody is allowed share their opinion that does not mean everybody has to agree with it.

That dose going around last year was unusual and it staying with me for ages.

I am only sharing my opinion there was no spike in deaths with the old and vulnerable last year unlike the carnage hitting Italy this year.

That's true.

CinemaGuy45

sadie1502 wrote: »

That's true.

Now that we have cleared that up I think we can all admit there is a lot of unanswered questions around this whole mess.

I will admit my opinion is not fact.

This whole situation is like a waking nightmare.

GreeBo

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Our current strategy is to suppress the virus and ensure that the vast majority never get it. The virus can do significant damage to your lungs, best avoid getting it at all.

That's not our current strategy!
The current strategy is to slow down the infection rate so as not to overwhelm the healthcare system.

Pretty much everyone is going to get it.


In response to the OP, if you do get it you need to ensure that you are not spreading it to someone who is more vulnerable.

sadie1502

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Now that we have cleared that up I think we can all admit there is a lot of unanswered questions around this whole mess.

I will admit my opinion is not fact.

This whole situation is like a waking nightmare.

It is like a waking nightmare. Can't stop thinking of the people in Italy and the medical teams. Jesus there will be a lot of those people I'm sure suffering for the rest of their existence.

Buying time I hope they find medications that successfully treat this virus. Hope we are not heading down that road. Very scary times.

smelly sock

Cork Boy 53 wrote: »

I very much doubt it. What were your symptoms?

Dry cough. Burning larynx. Tired for aboout 4 or 5 days. Around 2 months ago.

Imreoir2

paleoperson wrote: »

The social distancing will help slow the spread of the virus. The first phase is "containment", the next is the "delay" phase. We're in the delay phase at present.

A large percentage of the population will get it eventually over the next 18 months, but hopefully the most at risk people will avoid it and the virus will die out due to herd protection.

There is no specific treatment for it, but proper care at the right time leads to extremely good outcomes while the immune system fights off the virus. A lot less people will die.

Don't worry - the delay phase is if anything more restrictive of movement than the containment phase. The only difference is that we expect a large percentage of the population will get it.

And for the slow-mo science deniers that believe it doesn't effect the young think again:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8124901/Young-people-dying-coronavirus-despite-elderly-people-worst-affected.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline

DM I know, but there are many young people under 30 and especially under 40 with no underlying conditions dying or having their lungs ruined. These are Chinese scientists who appear to have been through the worst of it, not Italian statistics where lots of elderly were allowed to die without treatment to prioritize the young.

And let me just emphasize again how I find it horrifying that certain people consider it "scaremongering" if I say anything about their precious generation can die while it seems to be like ah who cares if it's elderly people. Seriously, cop on.

Where are you getting this from? What makes you think that this is the strategy we are following or that it is a good idea to allow it to spread through the population?

The mortalty rate for this virus depends on the health service, it is much higher if the health service is not able to handle the case load. If the virus spreads through the population over 18 months, the health service will be overrun for 18 months and we will have well over 100,000 dead as a result. This is not a strategy, it is failure.

The only viable strategy available is to suppress the spread of the virus, we need to get to where China and South Korea are, stop the spread of the virus before it infects the vast majority of the population.

padjocollins

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...643357696.html -- summary of imperial college report on covid-19 and why the various governments are reacting the way they are.

Imreoir2

threeball wrote: »

Have you being paying attention at all. Flatten the curve. I'm sorry to break it to you but you are part of that curve, probably towards the end of it as you are more observant of the measures introduced but still part of it.

The key is keeping the old and vulnerable out of it which unfortunately is not possible for everyone, hence a certain level of deaths.

Did you bother to look at the research I posted? Letting the virus spread through the population is not an effective strategy for flattening the curve, in the best case scenario the health services is still overrun with more than 8 times the cases than it can handle even with the extra capacity that is being added. That is why mitigation while the virus spreads through the population is not a viable strategy, essentially the same number of people die, just over a more prologed period.

Suppression is the only choice, it would be nice if you would try to understand that.

threeball

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Where are you getting this from? What makes you think that this is the strategy we are following or that it is a good idea to allow it to spread through the population?

The mortalty rate for this virus depends on the health service, it is much higher if the health service is not able to handle the case load. If the virus spreads through the population over 18 months, the health service will be overrun for 18 months and we will have well over 100,000 dead as a result. This is not a strategy, it is failure.

The only viable strategy available is to suppress the spread of the virus, we need to get to where China and South Korea are, stop the spread of the virus before it infects the vast majority of the population.

I'm sorry but nothing we are doing suggests suppression. If it were we'd all be in total lockdown. It's not a long term strategy. As for your stats on 100,000 deaths, that's pure bunkum unless we all decide to go have a big coronavirus party in the Phoenix park in a weeks time and put all the vulnerable in the middle.

Imreoir2

threeball wrote: »

I'm sorry but nothing we are doing suggests suppression. If it were we'd all be in total lockdown. It's not a long term strategy. As for your stats on 100,000 deaths, that's pure bunkum unless we all decide to go have a big coronavirus party in the Phoenix park in a weeks time and put all the vulnerable in the middle.

We are following the same path as France and Italy, both of which are in full lockdown. We will be in lockdown very soon, that is why the government is passing emergency legislation to give it the power to put the country in lockdown. Currently the government does not have the legal power to do that, hence the emergency legislation.

The country has about 250 ventilators, lets just say they get that up to 1000 (unlikely) as they do everything they can to increase capasity. Then lets assume that each patient treated on a ventilator only needs one for a week before they are sufficiently recoverd and someone else can be put on it. That means that in the space of a year a max of 52,000 people can be put on a ventilator.

We know that roughly 20% of those that get the disease need hospitalisation and 6% need ICU treatment. On those figures, that means that the maximum capasity of the health service is 16,000 cases in a week. Without stringent suppression measures, we will have blown past that figure in 20 days time. It also means that over a year the total cases that can be handeled before the health service is overrun, in the best case scenario, is 830,000. That means that it would take over 4 years to get through the population.

If you go through the population in the space of 18 months, there is no way to do it without the health service being overrun for the full 18 months. Mortality rates from the disease depends, as you might expect, on if the health service is overrun or not. Under your proposed strategy, the health services will be overrun and we can expect a mortality rate of something like 3.5% or higher. That means that we will have over 100,000 deaths from Covid-19 in that time if it goes through the population.

This is not a viable strategy.

Ireland will go into full lockdown, suppression of the disease is the only viable strategy available.

ILoveYourVibes

RiseAbove4 wrote: »

As long as you’re under 55 with no major medical issues of course.

If we get it now it’s before the wheels fall off the HSE in a month in a system that wasn’t great to begin with. We’re 18 months away from a vaccine by which time I don’t even want to think about how high the numbers are.

Take the hit on it now and hope it builds immunity?

I’m not saying to go out of your way to get it of course. I just don’t think this is going away in a few months.

France's 'LOCKDOWN' is actually what we are doing now. People are still going to work etc ..and to the shops or out to get exercise.

Its pubs etc or cafes that are closing.

They do need a travel pass though.

Captcha

krissovo wrote: »

I said to my wife 3 weeks ago, if we get it now then we would have the best facilities available to us if we needed it. Now its a lottery what is available depending on the infection rate and how many Irish need serious attention. Ireland would never able to build hospitals in a week like the Chinese.

The Chinese government knew about this since November 2019 and covered it up, brought doctor whistle-blowers (look up Li Wenliang) into police for "tea". They knew about this and hid it from the world, brutally silencing anyone who tried to warn people. China had months before publically acknowledging this. The hospitals being built in some days is propaganda by a brutal authoritarian police state to their people and the world. Chinese government are to blame for this and we must get justice or at least decouple from CCP.

https://www.axios.com/china-coronavirus-cover-up-wuhan-robert-obrien-7febd3fb-533c-4df6-bd39-ac5c0ae1c284.html

National security adviser Robert O’Brien claimed Wednesday that an initial cover-up of the coronavirus in China “cost the world community two months” and exacerbated the global outbreak.

Why it matters: In the face of a global crisis, the world’s two most powerful countries are pointing fingers at one another.

What he’s saying: Asked about China’s initial response, as well as spurious claims from some Chinese officials and media that the outbreak may not have started in China, O’Brien emphasized that “this virus did not originate in the United States, it originated in Wuhan.”

“Unfortunately, rather than using best practices, this outbreak in Wuhan was covered up,” O’Brien said, citing instances of doctors who were “silenced."
“It probably cost the world community two months to respond,” he continued, adding that if teams from the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had been invited in early on, “I think we could have dramatically curtailed what happened in China and what’s now happening across the world.”
Speaking at the Heritage Foundation, O’Brien echoed other administration officials in saying President Trump’s “courageous decision” in late January to block air travel from China “bought the United States six to eight weeks to prepare for the virus.”
The flipside: As China begins to get its coronavirus outbreak under control, authorities are going on the offensive to rewrite the narrative that the global epidemic is Beijing's fault, Axios' Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian writes.

"The [Chinese Communist Party] is masterful at rewriting history and we’re watching them do it in real time," Bill Bishop, author of the Sinocism newsletter, told Axios.
Worth noting: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and others have been criticized for using the term “Wuhan virus,” with critics claiming it adds unnecessary stigma and is needlessly antagonistic toward China.

virginmediapls

sadie1502 wrote: »

That's reported case. Who's to say it wasn't there before. Yes I know that plenty of other things floating about. But that was my experience I am allowed to share it and my opinion.

Your opinion is wrong.

shesty

I find it curious that Leo specifically mentioned the concept of "cocooning" for elderly people the other night.I wonder when you suppress the curve (which we are actually doing, despite people's opinions), you basically lengthen the time period (x axis) that the virus is around for, which is simple enough maths.But does there come a point on the graph where you ask older people to stay indoors and possibly loosen restrictions for all else??or do you request they AND children must stay fairly isolated?I think I saw 60% of the population to get it for "herd immunity" to work, but I can't remember where I saw that.

CramCycle

We also have no concept if herd immunity will occur as we don't know enough about the virus and its long term effects. Do people get mild or strong immunity. Vaccines are determined on how strong an immunity they give, so they might give a stronger immunity than the actual disease would. We simply don't know this yet so at the minute, all the talk of herd immunity as an option is rubbish until we know more. Anything else is guesswork.