Gael23 wrote: » As said already, this will cause civil unrest. There is only so far you can push people. Look at what’s happening in Italy when people were forbidden to leave their homes. They have nothing, no money, no food. Nothing,
Deleted User wrote: » Right now, the Irish public as whole, are behaving far better and have done, to date, than, I'd argue, most other countries, but especially the UK.In fairness to UK citizens, they didn't receive the clarity and direction from either their government or public service broadcaster until a lot of damage was done. I see the lockdown continuing for a good number of weeks yet, but I'd be very surprised if Ireland when "hardball' on this as the population is extremely compliant.
easypazz wrote: » All the petrol stations were to close yesterday too, somebody on here said they knew somebody "in the know"
rusty the athlete wrote: » Very debatable whether it is the best strategy. If I am out on a remote strand with nobody around I am unable to infect anyone else and nobody else is able to infect me. The virus is not carried on the wind so house arrest is totally unnecessary.
Logan Roy wrote: » Where did I use the phrase “in the know” or say all petrol stations would close yesterday? I said was told some would and I didn’t give any timeline. Get your facts straight easyspaz.
6% become critically ill - lung failure, septic shock, organ failure and risk of death 14% develop severe symptoms - difficulty breathing and shortness of breath80% develop mild symptoms - fever and cough and some may have pneumonia
gozunda wrote: » For the eejits proposing the debunked theory of 'herd' immunity and of the majority with 'mild' or no symptoms. Get a grip and do some actual research In terms of Covid-19 - the term 'mild' is relative and may include disability, fever, pneumonia and up to 2 - 3 weeks recovery and full quarantine from others. Additionally those lucklily enough to be totally asymptomatic have been found to exhibit organ damage including the presence of 'ground glass type opacities' to the lungs. So with even 'mild' covid19 - there is no guarantees. More importantly you also risk infecting others who may not be so lucky ...
TheCitizen wrote: » The UK citizens voted for the buffoon Johnson to be their Prime Minister, they voted for him on the vacuous promise that he'd "get Brexit done". They have only themselves to blame for the stupidity of politics and politicians generally in that country.
polesheep wrote: » Your reference to asymptomatic people is either astounding ignorance or else you forgot to quantify the percentage.
gozunda wrote: » Your own ignorance in that comment is only surpassed by you inability to do your own research. Asymptomatic patients have been found to have organ damage - that is undisputed. Afaik- the totals have not been finalised. The following Lancet paper details a study of a family group (5 of whom were diagnosed with the coronavirus) including two children aged 7 and 10 years - found that that the two asymptomatic children had ground-glass lung opacities identified by CT scan (compatible with changes seen in viral pneumonia)https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30154-9/fulltext Plenty of other research which show similar case studies. But go ahead - stick your head in the sand, your fingers in your ears and believe whatever you like.
TheCitizen wrote: » Have to laugh at the above conspiracy mongering about the media and the government being complicit in "shutting down the country at the behest of a minority etc.", by the resident panic merchants on here and then when they are called out with a straight question from a poster (the last one in the sequence above) they scarper and are nowhere to be seen on it. :pac:
irishgeo wrote: » wow a study of 5 , lets just jump to huge conclusions and extrapolate that everyone is going to get it. Nowhere does it say its permanent and also i read that it can be reversible with breathing exercises to increase lung capacity again.
ITman88 wrote: » Never have I had to deal with such explicit attention from an admirer as yourself. You watch my every move and post accordingly, only addressing myself, and it appears your only activity on boards. I am flattered, and I should pay you more attention, my ignoring your posts seems to rile up your responses
gozunda wrote: » You want everyone to do your research for you? Yes indeed - that is one study - plenty of other research which shows similar if you can be bothered taking your finger out. No one is 'jumping to conclusions ...that everyone is going to get it" btw The purpose of the above is to point out to the eejits who seem to believe mild or asymptomatic automatically means a walk in the park. Nope but at least you are correct once there. The medical professionals have no idea if such damage is permanent or otherwise. Thats why I detailed there are no guarantees. So whats your odds of infecting someone else who may not be so lucky? And you can provide a link for your unsupported assertion about "breathing exercises" ...
gozunda wrote: » For the eejits proposing the debunked theory of 'herd' immunity and of the majority with 'mild' or no symptoms. Get a grip and do some actual research A World Health Organization examination of data from 56,000 patients suggests: In terms of Covid-19 - the term 'mild' is relative and may include disability, fever, pneumonia and up to 2 - 3 weeks recovery and full quarantine from others. Additionally (at least some)* of those lucklily enough to be totally asymptomatic have been found to exhibit considerable organ damage including the presence of 'ground glass type opacities' to the lungs. So with even 'mild' covid19 - there is no guarantees. More importantly you also risk infecting others who may not be so lucky ...
BanditLuke wrote: » UK looking at possibly going further. Think we'll have to do likewise unfortunatelyhttps://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-follow-lockdown-rules-or-we-will-ban-outdoor-exercise-health-secretary-warns-11968783
Asked whether she agreed with Mr Hancock, Labour's newly-elected deputy leader Angela Rayner told Sky's Sophy Ridge: "It's alright for people who have got big houses and huge back gardens to say that. "But actually if you're stuck in inadequate accommodation, you've got no back garden, you've got nowhere to go and you're all on top of each other, quite literally, then I think people should do social distancing and should keep their distance but also be reasonable and proportionate about that."
TheCitizen wrote: » Another alarmist post. I don't know exactly the position in Italy, I doubt you do either but that doesn't stop you pretending you do. even if that was the case in Italy, it isn't the case in the UK; they are not without food or money etc.. So no, it's highly unlikely there'll be "civil unrest" in the UK.
ITman88 wrote: » The name calling from posters because others don’t share similar agendas is shocking. What you have quoted doesn’t account for the large number that are symptomless. Accurate figures will not be available until the end of the year. So valid arguments exist for many different approaches in the mean time, it’s called risk assessment. That risk assessment will unfortunately place life vs economy.
gozunda wrote: » Your own ignorance in that comment is only surpassed by your inability to do your own research. Asymptomatic patients* have been found to have organ damage - that is undisputed. Afaik- the totals have not been finalised. The following Lancet paper details a study of a family group (5 of whom were diagnosed with the coronavirus) including two children aged 7 and 10 years - found that that the two asymptomatic children had ground-glass lung opacities identified by CT scan (compatible with changes seen in viral pneumonia) Ground glass opacity has not been shown to be present in all asymptomatic people, therefore your scaremongering statement was factually incorrect and ignorant. Plenty of other research which show similar case studies. But go ahead - stick your head in the sand, your fingers in your ears and believe whatever you like.
lainey_d_123 wrote: » A good quote from this: This is exactly the point. We now have a situation where poor people are being shamed by people living in nice, big houses with private gardens and fully stocked fridges. The vast, vast majority of people are complying, but obviously on a day like today, 20 degrees and sunny, people want to get out of the house. I was just out for a jog and sat down for a few minutes' breather on a bench, and some absolute middle aged wagon carrying oh-so-essential bags from the posh deli had the audacity to shout over to tell me I shouldn't be 'sitting around'. I was on a bench, miles away from anyone, in exercise gear getting one single hour of sun and exercise before going back to my tiny box room in a tower block, and this woman is trying to shame me for being outside? Fcuk this ****, and this is why there are going to be social issues and unrest here in London. You think people aren't without food or money? Huge numbers of people have just lost their jobs, and are facing weeks of waiting to even get universal credit, let alone the money the government promised to replace their salary. You are being very naive if you think there won't soon be huge problems in London if people are not able to return to work soon. Selective quoting there. What do you propose we do then? Just sit in the house for 18 months?
easypazz wrote: » People in vulnerable groups can go out for exercise.
never_mind wrote: » To be fair, what’s the point of living if we had to live like this long term. A very vocal minority of boardsies dismiss mental health constantly.
Blueshoe wrote: » Do you not realise that people are dying. If hospitals become over run many many more will also die. Talk about selfishness ffs
Logan Roy wrote: » The tone of this thread has really changed, the frustration is creeping in!