McCrack wrote: » Stop scaremongering, the vast majority 94 to 98 percent of contracted cases are not fatal, and that includes young, immunosuppressed and elderly people
DeVore wrote: » This is very serious for everyone. Some more than others but if you watch the stuff coming out of Italy (and now other locations) its quite clear that this is a danger to all. Young people recover but some require critical care or even ventilation. When those things arent available (because they are all already gone to other young people for example) the mortality rate sky rockets for the young. This isnt just about "old people" and "sick people". It will impact everyone. And that shouldnt matter to you anyway....
Sam the Sham wrote: » Even if that’s true, it’s irrelevant. The median lie expectancy of someone 80 years old is not 84.
Skyfloater wrote: » Good for her, but it doesn't change the fact the median lifespan in Ireland 84 and 80.5.
martingriff wrote: » Well for my grandmother another 23 years and all but last 5 years was in better shape then me at times. My mother did not reach 80 she died of a tumour and watching her die over the last few months was torture so EXCUSE ME AND OTHERS who do not want to see there loved ones die so you can go out and about and go on your fabulous holiday. If you show you can follow the advice given then we can all get through this and no lockdown would be needed. But unfortunately some lockdown will be needed because of people who don't want to see short term pain for health for everyone. Also are you forgetting those who are not old but have underlying health issue f£$% them also I suppose
nthclare wrote: » I could for the greater good in solidarity with my fellow human beings. As I have all the time in the world to get back out there. Id do it if it helps for everyone, because there's no point in being a sanctimonious pr1cK boasting about my freedom while others are held inside for weeks. So I'm accepting this could happen.
Skyfloater wrote: » The people who are calling for a lockdown "for however long it takes" should reacquaint themselves with the devastation caused by the Great Depression of the 1930's, the millions of lives foreshortened by malnutrition, hypothermia and lack of basic healthcare. Far, far more than covid 19 will ever claim. On another point, the median age of the deceased in Italy is 80.5! That's a fine age to last for. What do some people here think happens when you hit your eighty's? What happens is, you get sick and then you die. Why is that such a shock for some people.
CaoinDory wrote: » This post intrigues me. What about the people who have such severe immun deficincys that they live their lives in a buuble within a house? Those people who have such severe conditions that they are forced to live their lives in a hospital bed and never go outside? People can stay indoors indefinitely if they have to. I think that statement is unfair to some.
Larbre34 wrote: » Come off it, its as damaging to their mental health as it is for anyone else that would be subjected to it now. Anyone with an elderly parent or whatever, whose health has deteriorated and they have become home or bed bound will tell you the damage it has done to their sense of self and desire for life. In fact it often hastens death.
Lollipops23 wrote: » People can't stay indoors indefinitely.
Kivaro wrote: » I love this little chart, because it is so simple. It shows what happened over 100 years ago when one city (St. Louis) decided to implement social distancing correctly during the Spanish flu and one city (Philadelphia) did not:
Dohnjoe wrote: » If we were all simultaneously capable of being responsible, sure. But we aren't. This is a pandemic, it's a highly contagious disease that spreads rapidly through human contact. The fatality rate is at least 10 times higher than seasonal flu. There are selfish people and ignorant people who don't grasp this notion. They put others at risk through their own self-interested behavior. These types of people make comments like yours. If pig-headed people are going to put me or my family or my friends or colleagues at risk due to their own illogical selfish behavior, I have zero issue with national guidelines being enforced by the law if necessary.
First off you do realise you are talking to 2 different people dont you? I was the one who was talking about "civil rights" and the post I was referring to was this nonsense!
Lollipops23 wrote: » Most medical folks are saying going for a walk is fine as long as you practice social distancing etc. We went up to the Phoenix Park yesterday and there were plenty of people around, but all staying at a good distance from each other. People can't stay indoors indefinitely.
growleaves wrote: » You're showing how confused you are here. A person posting about concern for civil liberties may be acting more responsibly in not spreading germs that you. So the 'lockdown' has no direct relevance to stopping such people in any way. Its not going to be a lockdown on opinions you don't like.
Lesnar Defender wrote: » I for one, do not want my civil liberties removed.
Nermal wrote: » Nobody's forcing you to go out. You are free to shutdown by yourself. The rest of us may have a different risk tolerance to you, and can make our own decisions.
It is precisely for knobheads with that kind of viewpoint that a lockdown is required!
If you need evidence just look at the comments about "civil rights" and being part of the low risk group.
rossie1977 wrote: » A full lockdown is inevitable once our ICUs reach full capacity
is_that_so wrote: » Oh I've been through it and it's really poorly laid out and broken up every few sentences by larger text or a graph. And with respect to the effort he put in he never expands much beyond that summary anyway. In short, it's not a great piece of writing.
