adrian522 wrote: » That guideline is about not having large events above those numbers. It doesn't say events below those numbers should go ahead. The guidelines also state very clearly what I posted, you can't just ignore the bits you don't like. If what you say is true why are so many events cancelled? Why are training sessions cancelled? Why are people being advised to stay home? Also can you point me to the post where there was an "Internet Lynching" please since you introduced that phrase?
adrian522 wrote: » Where was the Internet Lynching? Please link to that. What I called stupid was the initial post about the following: "Sending home teenagers from school is a far greater threat than races" That is patently nonsense. "The witch-burnings and other national pastimes won't kick in for another two months" Seriously, wtf? "by which stage people will have ceased to operate the self-isolate strictures and so will be looking for human sacrifice to please their superstitions." Human sacrifice? Really? How anyone can defend that post is beyond me.
SuspectZero wrote: » I'm not going down this pointless road with you, I can see where this is going and it won't be fruitful for anyone.
robinph wrote: » Running a race or parkrun isn't making any difference to the likelihood of infections and its not putting any strain on the health services this week.
Burkie1203 wrote: » Can you back this up with any evidence as community transmissions grow?
robinph wrote: » Well I can't prove a negative, but if running a race is such a dangerous activity then presumably there would be a load of cases of people who are now infected from having run races a couple of weeks ago, or even who had gone to football/rugby matches. Scotland played in Italy three weeks ago, not aware of any cases in Scotland being attributed to that match. As far as I'm aware the community transmissions have been between people hanging out together in indoors situations or on planes. As for the health service not yet being overwhelmed, I haven't seen any clusters in the UK or Ireland being reported as overwhelming the local hospitals. They will be, but not yet and are just preparing for it at the moment. Italy is overwhelmed because they had a very concentrated cluster in one area, that needs dealing with differently than what we have which is widespread and the population knows about it better, hence we are all taking different actions which hopefully won't result in the same kind of extreme measures needed in China and Italy. Probably will, but it might be avoidable and might be for a shorter time.
Burkie1203 wrote: » Footballers in UK and Italy. A member of DFB Multiple frontline health service staff
Burkie1203 wrote: » Darkness into light, women's mini Marathon both postponed. Multiple marathons and halfs around europe postponed
Burkie1203 wrote: » Parkrun is not necessary because it adds to the potential.
Cartman78 wrote: » Just seen on Sky Sports News there that a half marathon took place in Liverpool today with over 6,000 people taking part (!)
DM_7 wrote: » They want the virus to spread to the 'stronger' people in the UK. Here we are trying to delay the rate of infection, the uk are trying to increase it to a certain level before slowing it down in the hope that it will leave them stronger in 6 months time when the second wave could hit (less people getting and less who can pass it on). Meanwhile telling those at high risk of complications to stay at home now. I think it shows a country can have its own ideas but it is important citizens act in the way that meets the needs of their country.
sideswipe wrote: » Bath half went ahead too. Think Paul Pollock one, isn’t he a doctor? I think people saying small races, park runs etc don’t make a difference are missing the point, it’s about civic action to stop meeting in groups to give this threat a smaller chance of exacerbating exponentially. It’s about people working together and in unison. Let’s all just do what we can take the inconvenience of not having races and hopefully get back to normal and do so with a new appreciation for our sport, health and loved ones. I’ve been reading some disturbing info on recovered cases that is only starting to come through now as this thing is so new. The headline grabber is the deaths which of course in the older generation but there is increasing info on young, formerly healthy people that are coming out of this with permanent lung damage. We’re talking compromised lung capacity by 30-40% decrease. We need to stop thinking of this as an old people’s problem.
plodder wrote: » Do you have a link to that? Because, I listened to an Italian doctor on RTE Radio 1 today who (I'm fairly sure) said the complete opposite - that it was notable that people who recovered from the virus didn't show evidence of fibrosis (scarring) of the lungs
sideswipe wrote: » Can’t find the main article, it was linked on Twitter, here’s another one I read-https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-recovery-damage-lung-function-gasping-air-hong-kong-doctors-2020-3?r=US&IR=T I’ll see if I can find the other in the morning
plodder wrote: » The article seems to be referring to elderly patients rather than younger ones.
sideswipe wrote: » That wasn’t my reading of it. Either way it’s still too early to fully comprehend lasting effects post recovery therefore, especially as runners to whom lung capacity is important, we should not be thinking of this as an old person’s disease. I’ll post up that other piece when I find it.
average_runner wrote: » Here we are focused on saving lives. We are trying to keep the graph below our max ICU number of beds so we can give the best treatment we can. UK seems to want to blow that, hence more will die than necessary. Italy blew it , now are at a level where they wont save a certain age group as lower priority
SuspectZero wrote: » It's not as simple as that, It would be great if it was but people need to keep open minds in this situation. Alot of people are looking at this as a COVID-19 problem, it's much more than that, it's a pandemic problem and that needs to be considered too. Let me give you an example, A country over-reacts and goes into lockdown which then cripples the economy, homelessness spirals out of control, people with other illnesses dont get treatment, supply lines collapse and this is before you see an explosion in suicide rates and mental health issues further down the road. An over reaction could cause more damage, death and suffering than the disease itself. An underreaction which most people are talking about could cause the disease to explode and cause widespread death and destruction and many possible side effects and outcomes been mentioned around that could have been prevented had they acted earlier and stronger. So while it's easy to say things like the curve needs to flattened at all costs and that is the stricter countries are more focused on saving lives, that may not be true because nobody knows whats going to happen or what is the best approach so people need to be open minded. These are the tough questions been asked in every government the world over, what is the right level of reaction? and I sure as heck don't envy any of them because an over reaction could be as costly as an under-reaction
Snodge wrote: » Does anyone think/know if IMC meets will go ahead? Or has it been suggested when races may start up again. Firstly, I admit that in the grand scheme of things races are not not important so please refrain from any nasty comments or critisim
robinph wrote: » It's a risky move with timing it right. But if they time it wrong they just end up in the same position as every other country will be when their lockdowns fail.
