Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Coronavirus Part V - 34 cases in ROI, 16 in NI (as of 10 March) *Read warnings in OP*

Options
1…322323324325327

Comments

  • Options
    #9782
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    ITman88 wrote: »
    But running and hiding from the disease won’t kill it, sorry for being a “screeching you are just hysterical “ type of poster, which btw is a great example to use as a definition of hypocrisy!!!

    Technically blanket isolation would kill it. It needs a host to survive. However, you don't need to isolate individuals from the disease, you can isolate entire healthy communities from the disease.

    While I would usually be more willing to entertain dialog from any side in relation to this, it's also clear that time is of the essence.

    I also feel that people who have tried to minimize the disease have had a vested interest in doing so. Attempting to disregard a particular stance as simply being 'scaremongering' (without actually putting any evidence forward to why it is) I feel has often been motivated by personal feelings concerning disruption to daily life or financial security.

    It would be hypocritical if I were quoting figures that were made up, and that the disease was not dangerous to the public in general, but was only dangerous to myself because I had a relatively rare condition that would leave me susceptible to it (let's say cystic fibrosis).

    However this is not the case. I have been conservative with my estimates and used publicly available, and verified, information to make best-case scenario projections that are backed up by experts. 20,000 deaths in Ireland is a reasonable scenario. I would prefer if people who go on about 'scaremongering' or 'hysterical nonsense' would own this number and say 'yes, I think that is a more reasonable cost than the financial burden that would be involved in halting the spread'.


  • Options
    #9783
    circadian
    Registered Users Posts: 6,902 ✭✭✭circadian


    scamalert wrote: »
    anyone have any stats from when influenza hit and how many deaths it had in say same period as corona, people aww here at few deaths, when we had 100 confirmed from flu alone - easily treatable and preventable, but reality is those at risk can still die,


    and while some think brits taking no action and accounting for deaths, id say its fare, as eventually most will get it, but judging by the symptoms its only severe cases and small % that have highest risk.


    as someone made comparison to road deaths, cancer etc - in many cases it can be stopped or prevented but reality is it still happens on daily basis, and coronavirus would need more then few thousand deaths to compare whats going ww daily

    Cancer and car crashes are not contagious. We have a certain level of herd immunity against flu which is boosted with a vaccine, not to mention the death rate per case is multiples lower than Covid-19.

    Edit: we don't have pandemics of car crashes and cancer crippling the health system and while flu outbreaks can cause a strain at times it'll be nothing like an outbreak with no herd immunity.


  • Options
    #9784
    spookwoman
    Registered Users Posts: 9,922 ✭✭✭spookwoman


    Graces7 wrote: »
    I have amended my post.

    However your response was still unacceptable; you went too far the other way.
    Far too far.
    Over and out from me Bye

    Only after a few people got onto you about it. How is saying Bull unacceptable when what you posted before the change was misinformation?
    :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #9785
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,068 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    These threads are going to be epic to look back on. Some student could write a thesis on them.


  • Options
    #9786
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    It’s not every immunocompromised person that can’t receive vaccines. It depends on the person and the vaccine. Many immunocompromised people are told to get the flu jab for example. I know that because I’m one of those people.

    Agree fully but the reverse applies too; I have amended my post to that effect.
    And I am very glad it works for thee

    The advice to me has been consistent over many years even through GP changes and I trust it especially with the serious and dangerous vaccine damage I suffered

    It was badly handled by spookwoman as she chose to be insulting! REALLY!

    Over and out on this and thank you again; we have sorted that issue!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9787
    05eaftqbrs9jlh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,104 ✭✭✭05eaftqbrs9jlh


    2lazytogetup wrote: »
    i heard that for some viruses, if one person catches it, fights it, and passes it on, the next person doesnt get it as bad because the first person's immune system has weakened the virus. i havent heard this idea come up in discussion.

    anyone know?

    this is different to the herd immunisation, as im not talking about people having had a vaccine.
    Humans have NO KNOWN IMMUNITY to this and there is NO treatment to slow it down once people are infected, it's just a matter of waiting for it to creep into the lungs. There is no value in speculating about this happening until there is any evidence whatsoever that we will be able to fight it or figure out a method of treatment which isn't keeping the ill person breathing using machines, which we have a huge scarcity of.
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    People have been criticising Luke O’Neill. The one thing that left me dissatisfied from his McWilliams podcast, that I thought he was complacent about was that he didn’t acknowledge that some young, healthy people have died from it. The Chinese whistleblower was a young, otherwise healthy (that I know of) guy and he died from it. That has been at the back of my mind since I heard about it. Does that mean you don’t have to be immunocompromised and/or elderly to die from this?
    They are really going hard on "young people can't get affected badly by this" line so as to keep most people going about their business as normal. I even heard a heavily edited interview with a guy who got it in the UK on Seán Ó Rourke earlier. I had read his story, when phase two kicked in he nearly died of pneumonia because he woke up in the middle of the night, couldn't breathe and would have suffocated if his flatmate hadn't called an ambulance.

    Healthy, young people CAN and DO DIE from this and will be doing so in their droves when our health system becomes fully overwhelmed in a fortnight because we don't have the resources or staff to be able to treat them. Look at the Italian surgeons' messages and the young man with his dead sister. The only thing we can do now that it is circulating freely in our communities is to prioritise whether we need to go out at all and minimise interaction. Everyone is being put at risk by government inertia and the economy is going to be much worse hit down the line with the impact from needless death brought about by these unfolding mistakes.


  • Options
    #9788
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ITman88 wrote: »
    Tripe.
    Figures can’t be determined until testing is increased and time has passed so medical science can get an accurate measurement of cases to fatalities.
    South Korea has undertaken intensive testing and uncovered a low fatality rate.
    The inaccurate figures come from low numbers of tests carried out and thus people having the virus and not being tested.
    Numbers will be in accurate for a while.
    On a positive Ireland currently has a 0% fatality rate




    Right, you go and tell the WHO that ITman88.
    They'll be delighted to amend their figures based on your massive experience


  • Options
    #9789
    Kaisr Sose
    Registered Users Posts: 3,096 ✭✭✭Kaisr Sose


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    We already have seen people go off on skiing holidays.. skiing holidays.. when it was already clear that doing so would lead to high chance of picking up the disease.

    Thsts a bizarre statement. What is your source for stating that skiing exposes you to the virus? It just happened people in a ski resort in Northern Italy came into contact with an infected person and it spread from there. Lots of ski resorts in Europe report no cases and are not subject to closure orders. You are as likely to get it on a cruise ship, city or beach.


  • Options
    #9790
    Cilldara_2000
    Registered Users Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭Cilldara_2000


    TheAsYLuMkeY wrote: »
    Your a great help, thank you.

    You're very welcome. :)


  • Options
    #9791
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    RandomViewer wrote: »
    so much as a sniffle and you're in the oven , I suspect
    Agree lol, same goes for Turkey based on their '1 single case' as a grand total, announded just today.


    A huge country, and 80m in a growing hotspot area.
    Perhaps they're pushing them towards Greece along with the 10's of thousands others they don't want to look after.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9792
    facehugger99
    Registered Users Posts: 7,225 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    The big worry is that every hypochondriac with an 'ever so slight sensation' will be down to their GP or A&E, clogging up the system.


  • Options
    #9793
    Stevieluvsye
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,907 ✭✭✭Stevieluvsye


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    These threads are going to be epic to look back on. Some student could write a thesis on them.

    More like a comic book


  • Options
    #9794
    gabeeg
    Registered Users Posts: 1,591 ✭✭✭gabeeg


    Lads, the policy of not doling out amateur medical advice and encouraging them to speak to a GP is absolutely correct.

    It could be handled in a much kinder manner though. We've no idea of their circumstances.


  • Options
    #9795
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    ITman88 wrote: »
    Tripe.
    Figures can’t be determined until testing is increased and time has passed so medical science can get an accurate measurement of cases to fatalities.
    South Korea has undertaken intensive testing and uncovered a low fatality rate.
    The inaccurate figures come from low numbers of tests carried out and thus people having the virus and not being tested.
    Numbers will be in accurate for a while.
    On a positive Ireland currently has a 0% fatality rate

    South Korea has a mortality rate of 0.8%, which is still much more dangerous than flu. The cruise ship has also recorded a death rate of over 1%. It is absolutely, and undoubtedly, a lot more dangerous than the flu. Really anyone who keeps saying this should honestly be banned, it is potentially dangerous misinformation at this stage. Go read that article about the Italian doctor struggling to keep patients in italy alive who has pleaded with the public to stop comparing to the flu.


  • Options
    #9796
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    The big worry is that every hypochondriac with an 'ever so slight sensation' will be down to their GP or A&E, clogging up the system.




    Phone the GP is the advice


  • Options
    #9797
    Cilldara_2000
    Registered Users Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭Cilldara_2000


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Right, you go and tell the WHO that ITman88.
    They'll be delighted to amend their figures based on your massive experience

    Both ITman and the figures are correct. Anyone reporting figures can only do so based on confirmed cases, recoveries and deaths. And it's rather clear that South Korea have been testing far more people per capita than any other country.


  • Options
    #9798
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,691 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    lainey_d_123 wrote: »
    Why, though? It might be easier to discard gloves than have to find somewhere to go and wash your hands, if you're out in public.

    What's the difference between a glove been contaminated and a bare hand been contaminated. Is it not the same thing


  • Options
    #9799
    DrumSteve
    Registered Users Posts: 10,799 ✭✭✭✭DrumSteve


    Eliana Uptight Caterpillar wrote: »
    Humans have NO KNOWN IMMUNITY to this and there is NO treatment to slow it down once people are infected, it's just a matter of waiting for it to creep into the lungs. There is no value in speculating about this happening until there is any evidence whatsoever that we will be able to fight it or figure out a method of treatment which isn't keeping the ill person breathing using machines, which we have a huge scarcity of.


    They are really going hard on "young people can't get affected badly by this" line so as to keep most people going about their business as normal. I even heard a heavily edited interview with a guy who got it in the UK on Seán Ó Rourke earlier. I had read his story, when phase two kicked in he nearly died of pneumonia because he woke up in the middle of the night, couldn't breathe and would have suffocated if his flatmate hadn't called an ambulance.

    Healthy, young people CAN and DO DIE from this and will be doing so in their droves when our health system becomes fully overwhelmed in a fortnight because we don't have the resources or staff to be able to treat them. Look at the Italian surgeons' messages and the young man with his dead sister. The only thing we can do now that it is circulating freely in our communities is to prioritise whether we need to go out at all and minimise interaction. Everyone is being put at risk by government inertia and the economy is going to be much worse hit down the line with the impact from needless death brought about by these unfolding mistakes.

    TBF, his sister was 45 with health issues.

    Young people can and will die from this, but not in their droves. Think you might need to step back a little from this; the stats just don't back up your assertions.


  • Options
    #9800
    Technocentral
    Registered Users Posts: 6,101 ✭✭✭Technocentral


    Stevieluvsye wrote: »
    More like a comic book

    Forums really attract negative people, 80 to 90% of posts on here by doom merchants!


  • Options
    #9801
    Xertz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,069 ✭✭✭Xertz


    I’m just refusing to go to anything like that until I get a sense of this being under control and safe.

    I organise a couple of minor groups myself, just hobby stuff that involves maybe 25-30 people and a lot of time chatting and drinking in the pub, and I’ve just suspended those and will review in a few weeks.

    I don’t really see the point in risking it for the sake of bravado or stoicism.

    I wouldn’t be much of a friend to any of those people by putting them at risk and at the moment I don’t feel in a position to assess the risk and I really want to ensure they’re all ok! So I’m just being cautious and taking a rest.

    It’s the same with work almost all meetings can be done virtually.

    The one thing I would say though is for your own mental health and that of others, keep in touch with people - have the chats on the phone. Interact and help people out too where you can.

    Community spirit is really important and it may have to be done a little more remotely through technology over the weeks ahead but it needs to be done.

    Don’t leave your friends or family members isolated. That waffly chat about nonsense can be a huge deal to a lot of people. Even interaction on boards and social media is important and don’t make it all about politics and Coronavirus - actually have some chats with people, but of craic, engage in the fun stuff too and just be human.

    Also if you are in good health, check with neighbours to see if you can help with groceries. There are a lot of older folks and also people who live on their own who might be very isolated by this. It’s even worse if they have to self isolate. That phone call or willingness to drop stuff to a door, even if you never interact is hugely important.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9802
    scamalert
    Registered Users Posts: 3,739 ✭✭✭scamalert


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    Technically blanket isolation would kill it. It needs a host to survive. However, you don't need to isolate individuals from the disease, you can isolate entire healthy communities from the disease.

    While I would usually be more willing to entertain dialog from any side in relation to this, it's also clear that time is of the essence.

    I also feel that people who have tried to minimize the disease have had a vested interest in doing so. Attempting to disregard a particular stance as simply being 'scaremongering' (without actually putting any evidence forward to why it is) I feel has often been motivated by personal feelings concerning disruption to daily life or financial security.

    It would be hypocritical if I were quoting figures that were made up, and that the disease was not dangerous to the public in general, but was only dangerous to myself because I had a relatively rare condition that would leave me susceptible to it (let's say cystic fibrosis).

    However this is not the case. I have been conservative with my estimates and used publicly available, and verified, information to make best-case scenario projections that are backed up by experts. 20,000 deaths in Ireland is a reasonable scenario. I would prefer if people who go on about 'scaremongering' or 'hysterical nonsense' would own this number and say 'yes, I think that is a more reasonable cost than the financial burden that would be involved in halting the spread'.
    where did you pull the number out off ? few hotspots, any degree in any field related to science or biology. its easy to throw numbers but as been said 0 deaths here, and even 100 would still be small as that doesnt surpass seasonal flu.


  • Options
    #9803
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    These threads are going to be epic to look back on. Some student could write a thesis on them.

    Going on this morning's reading, there is a good argument for that thesis to be prefaced with that famous quote 'Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and to remove all doubt.'


  • Options
    #9804
    gabeeg
    Registered Users Posts: 1,591 ✭✭✭gabeeg


    All we know is that the death rate is significant and the hospitalisation rate is overwhelming.

    And that's enough


  • Options
    #9805
    completedit
    Registered Users Posts: 2,639 ✭✭✭completedit


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    The big worry is that every hypochondriac with an 'ever so slight sensation' will be down to their GP or A&E, clogging up the system.

    This is just mixed information. There is a worldwide virus wreaking havoc in a near European country. People have to be either safe or sorry. What’s the alternative? Just be like ah sure **** it, I’ll get on the bus, go to the shops, go to work and do whatever else and then spread the virus even more.

    We either say that we aren’t bothered containing it and let it play out or we are on top of ALL potential cases.


  • Options
    #9806
    TheAsYLuMkeY
    Registered Users Posts: 634 ✭✭✭TheAsYLuMkeY


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    The big worry is every hypochondriac with an 'ever so slight sensation' will be down to their GP or A&E, clogging up the system.

    Ok,

    I am no hypochondriac, i have probably been to a doctors once in the past ten years, never miss days from work from illness, was only ever in hospital for a broken bone.

    I never have any wheezing in my chest as i do not smoke etc.

    I asked a legitimate question,

    who should i call, GP or Ambulance service for testing, thats all.


  • Options
    #9807
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Cilldara_2000 wrote: »
    Both ITman and the figures are correct. Anyone reporting figures can only do so based on confirmed cases, recoveries and deaths. And it's rather clear that South Korea have been testing far more people per capita than any other country.






    And SK, with all their testing are showing fatality rates multiple that of flu.


    We also do not test for flu, in general


  • Options
    #9808
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    True - also if you're in a house with three or more people, two of them are able to gang up on the virus at the one time which substantially reduces both the infection period and the severity.

    Chuck Norris was 80 years old the other day so I invited him over for cake. Planning to lock him in the kitchen with a plate of Italian food so he will contract Covid19, kill it and save us all.
    RandomViewer wrote: »
    Anyone who attends needs to take a hard look at themselves

    I've been saying that about all Trad Festivals for years.


  • Options
    #9809
    Lord TSC
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 42,416 Mod ✭✭✭✭Lord TSC


    Did a big shop there.

    I find it hilarious that the spaghetti is completely spaghetti is cleared off the shelves, dry and chilled. But there's LOADS of penne, tagliatelle, and loads of other pasta types. As if the shape of pasta is important....


  • Options
    #9810
    khalessi
    Registered Users Posts: 6,215 ✭✭✭khalessi


    martingriff wrote: »
    What's the difference between a glove been contaminated and a bare hand been contaminated. Is it not the same thing

    Could have unseen cuts on hands


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9811
    ITman88
    Registered Users Posts: 876 ✭✭✭ITman88


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    Technically blanket isolation would kill it. It needs a host to survive. However, you don't need to isolate individuals from the disease, you can isolate entire healthy communities from the disease.

    While I would usually be more willing to entertain dialog from any side in relation to this, it's also clear that time is of the essence.

    I also feel that people who have tried to minimize the disease have had a vested interest in doing so. Attempting to disregard a particular stance as simply being 'scaremongering' (without actually putting any evidence forward to why it is) I feel has often been motivated by personal feelings concerning disruption to daily life or financial security.

    It would be hypocritical if I were quoting figures that were made up, and that the disease was not dangerous to the public in general, but was only dangerous to myself because I had a relatively rare condition that would leave me susceptible to it (let's say cystic fibrosis).

    However this is not the case. I have been conservative with my estimates and used publicly available, and verified, information to make best-case scenario projections that are backed up by experts. 20,000 deaths in Ireland is a reasonable scenario. I would prefer if people who go on about 'scaremongering' or 'hysterical nonsense' would own this number and say 'yes, I think that is a more reasonable cost than the financial burden that would be involved in halting the spread'.

    Do you honestly think 20000 extra people are going to die this year, that’s 20000 above the average yearly death rate of circa 30000?
    So in Ireland this year the death rate will be 50000??


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement