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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Covid 19 Part XXIV-37,063 ROI (1,801 deaths) 12,886 NI (582 deaths) (02/10) Read OP

1…8384868889…331

Comments

  • #2552
    Zebra3
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,145 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    WoollyRedHat wrote: »
    Just in relation to 1918 vs 2020, it is certainly more difficult to contain it today then it was 100 years ago. Plus there's more people so more people to infect

    The American Flu kicked off during WWI as huge numbers of American troops were sent to Europe.

    All covered up by the US.

    Then spread around the world as troops went home in vast numbers when the war ended.

    Arguably far greater movements than pre-covid.


  • #2553
    brooke 2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,472 ✭✭✭brooke 2


    Dcully wrote: »
    My priority was to get out of there and report to the relevant authourity, ive done both.
    I posted my concerns in here like many have about public places, i fail to see whats wrong with that.

    I believe you were right to do so. As long as there are individuals like the owners of the business you attended today in Kildare, and that publican gob****e in Elphin, there is little chance of the Covid numbers going down. Those selfish individuals and their ilk should be called out wherever they are....they are potentially risking people's lives, FFS!! :mad:


  • #2554
    Gradius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭Gradius


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    The American Flu kicked off during WWI as huge numbers of American troops were sent to Europe.

    All covered up by the US.

    Then spread around the world as troops went home in vast numbers when the war ended.

    Arguably far greater movements than pre-covid.

    Really?


  • #2555
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    The American Flu kicked off during WWI as huge numbers of American troops were sent to Europe.

    All covered up by the US.

    Then spread around the world as troops went home in vast numbers when the war ended.

    Arguably far greater movements than pre-covid.

    That's on them, world leaders who decided to hide severity of the problem and led to millions dying as a result. But my point still stands, it is harder to contain now than it was back then from a pure objective standpoint. Obviously movements of people were greater back then vs population on planet than they are currently, but I'm not arguing against that.


  • #2556
    igCorcaigh
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 12,678 Mod ✭✭✭✭igCorcaigh


    On polio...

    My god!

    In the outbreak of 1916, health workers in New York City would physically remove children from their homes or playgrounds if they suspected they might be infected. Kids, who seemed to be targeted by the disease, were taken from their families and isolated in sanitariums.

    https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-03-deadly-polio-epidemic-coronavirus.html

    But:


    (Jonas Salk, inventor of the vaccine) refused a patent for his work, saying the vaccine belonged to the people and that to patent it would be like "patenting the Sun."

    If only we had such noble pioneers now.


  • Advertisement
  • #2557
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    WoollyRedHat wrote: »
    That's on them, world leaders who decided to hide severity of the problem and led to millions dying as a result. But my point still stands, it is harder to contain now than it was back then from a pure objective standpoint. Obviously movements of people were greater back then vs population on planet than they are currently, but I'm not arguing against that.

    We have shown we can contain it. You just have to get everyone to stay at home and pay them €350 a week.
    I don't think the SW system was that great here or further afield in 1918.


  • #2558
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    We have shown we can contain it. You just have to get everyone to stay at home and pay them €350 a week.
    I don't think the SW system was that great here or further afield in 1918.

    If only. Try further afield. You could try contain it in certain continents but good luck in others. If you can't get rid of it in in all countries it remains a threat.

    In 1918, they could of stopped it from becoming a pandemic if they halted the war or even lessen the impact by making mandatory for soldiers who developed onset of symptoms isolate.But they chose not to. Not so many people traveling back in 1918 in large numbers besides the troops who brought in a deadlier strain and let it spread.

    Today we are a globalized planet, billions of us live here, air travel exists and is affordable and there are many asymptomatics spreading it.


  • #2559
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Gradius wrote: »
    Fake news

    Yes that's the usual reply nowadays when somebody makes a statement that is wrong but won't admit to it when proven incorrect. Much easier to just accept you were wrong, you know.


  • #2560
    Widdensushi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,654 ✭✭✭Widdensushi


    WoollyRedHat wrote: »
    Just in relation to 1918 vs 2020, it is certainly more difficult to contain it today then it was 100 years ago. Plus there's more people so more people to infect

    50 to 100 million died, we have 5 times the population now so if the same percentage died we would be looking at up 500 million, we haven't got to 1 million deaths yet


  • #2561
    brooke 2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,472 ✭✭✭brooke 2


    caveat emptor wrote: »
    Imagine someone knew that the publican in Roscommon was awaiting a test and told people to watch out. Could have prevented some of the infection.


    Just imagine that! Maybe some concerned person rang him to complain? ;)

    From what I've read about him, I'd say he would have given them short shrift!!:(


  • Advertisement
  • #2562
    Gradius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭Gradius


    Jim_Hodge wrote: »
    Yes that's the usual reply nowadays when somebody makes a statement that is wrong but won't admit to it when proven incorrect. Much easier to just accept you were wrong, you know.

    That's the joke, bloke.


  • #2563
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Gradius wrote: »
    That's the joke, bloke.

    Ha ha, lad. You're hilarious!

    1/10: Stick to the cod piece jokes.


  • #2564
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    Gradius wrote: »
    Really?

    Relative to Earth's population at the time and and the fact it was a mass movement of people at one time and then localization of the movement, then yes.
    But much harder to restrict movement of people today which would of reduced spread. Back in 1918 it would of been relatively simple to do if the war had stopped.


  • #2565
    Gradius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭Gradius


    Widdensushi wrote: »
    50 to 100 million died, we have 5 times the population now so if the same percentage died we would be looking at up 500 million, we haven't got to 1 million deaths yet

    Yeah, but the point wasn't about the fatality rate of a disease, it was about the spread of an infectious disease.

    If someone says it would have been easier to spread a disease in 1918 versus 2020, they need to be stripped, shaved and sterilised.

    The virus is just like you. It can't go anywhere without you.

    Would it have been easier for you, as a person, to travel the world in record time in 1918 or 2020?

    Phileas Fogg notwithstanding


  • #2566
    Gradius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭Gradius


    Jim_Hodge wrote: »
    Ha ha, lad. You're hilarious!

    1/10: Stick to the cod piece jokes.

    If you think a person believes automobiles weren't around in 2018, then I doubt you'd understand a joke, bloke.


  • #2567
    mcburns07
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,443 ✭✭✭mcburns07


    Gradius is throwing a hail mary tonight. Won't be long for this world.


  • #2568
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    Widdensushi wrote: »
    50 to 100 million died, we have 5 times the population now so if the same percentage died we would be looking at up 500 million, we haven't got to 1 million deaths yet

    I didn't say anything about deaths though? I'm talking about spread of disease. If it was as lethal as Spanish Flu we would of been ****ed.


  • #2569
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Gradius wrote: »
    Yeah, but the point wasn't about the fatality rate of a disease, it was about the spread of an infectious disease.

    If someone says it would have been easier to spread a disease in 1918 versus 2020, they need to be stripped, shaved and sterilised.

    The virus is just like you. It can't go anywhere without you.

    Would it have been easier for you, as a person, to travel the world in record time in 1918 or 2020?

    Phileas Fogg notwithstanding

    Actually you didn't say what the point of the virus was only what time period was best to spread it.


  • #2570
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Gradius wrote: »
    If you think a person believes automobiles weren't around in 2018, then I doubt you'd understand a joke, bloke.

    Hiding behind the typo now, lad.

    Give up you're on a hiding to nothing. The joke excuse didn't work.


  • #2571
    Gradius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭Gradius


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Actually you didn't say what the point of the virus was only what time period was best to spread it.

    Yes. And it's easier to spread this century as opposed to last century.


  • Advertisement
  • #2572
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Actually you didn't say what the point of the virus was only what time period was best to spread it.

    Correct. It had time to run rife through large groups who where then shipped home to spread it. The speed the individuals travelled at is immaterial. What did the damage was the huge base of carriers.


  • #2573
    growleaves
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,037 ✭✭✭growleaves


    Gradius wrote: »
    If someone says it would have been easier to spread a disease in 1918 versus 2020, they need to be stripped, shaved and sterilised.

    Er or you could just say "I think you've made a mistake there pal"

    After all you're the guy who told us there were no cars in 2018.


  • #2574
    Gradius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭Gradius


    Jim_Hodge wrote: »
    Hiding behind the typo now, lad.

    Give up you're on a hiding to nothing. The joke excuse didn't work.

    Yes it was a typo. And I leaned into the typo by stating cars didn't exist in 2018.

    I leaned into it so much that I was practically horizontal. Like you missing the point of an Egyptian pyramid balanced upside down on your head.


  • #2575
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    Jim_Hodge wrote: »
    Correct. It had time to run rife through large groups who where then shipped home to spread it. The speed the individuals travelled at is immaterial. What did the damage was the huge base of carriers.

    But surely you are in agreement that objectively, it would of been easier to contain if the willpower existed back then, than it is today? People can hop on a plane and travel across the world in record time. That wasn't possible back in 1918. Speed is actually very relevant.


  • #2576
    Gradius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭Gradius


    Jim_Hodge wrote: »
    Correct. It had time to run rife through large groups who where then shipped home to spread it. The speed the individuals travelled at is immaterial. What did the damage was the huge base of carriers.

    Speed is of the utmost importance.

    If you were set alight, do you think the speed at which you'd roll around on the ground has no bearing in putting out the flames?

    Or would you just lie down and go asleep?

    Spread is directly correlated with speed.

    And how do you reckon "a huge base of carriers" gets to be a huge base of carriers?


  • #2577
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    WoollyRedHat wrote: »
    But surely you are in agreement that objectively, it would of been easier to contain if the willpower existed back then, than it is today? People can hop on a plane and travel across the world in record time. That wasn't possible back in 1918.

    The willpower to contain it back then? People had no option back then but to earn a living to provide for themselves and their family even if sick.
    For several months here we had people stay at home recieving in many cases more than they worked for just to watch Netflix and order food online.


  • #2578
    mountgomery burns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,148 ✭✭✭mountgomery burns


    https://twitter.com/StefPreissner/status/1309865496158896133?s=20

    This really annoyed me. Because I can't see anything wrong with what's in this video, yet 500 people seem to think this woman is correct in shaming people doing absolutely nothing wrong.


  • #2579
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    mountgomery burns wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/StefPreissner/status/1309865496158896133?s=20

    This really annoyed me. Because I can't see anything wrong with what's in this video, yet 500 people seem to think this woman is correct in shaming people doing absolutely nothing wrong.

    They should all be at home wearing a mask cowering under their duvets. ;-)


  • #2580
    stephenjmcd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,472 ✭✭✭✭stephenjmcd


    mountgomery burns wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/StefPreissner/status/1309865496158896133?s=20

    This really annoyed me. Because I can't see anything wrong with what's in this video, yet 500 people seem to think this woman is correct in shaming people doing absolutely nothing wrong.

    To be honest most of the commentary I've seen about it on social media is giving out to her. There's not much wrong in that video


  • Advertisement
  • #2581
    giveitholly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,379 ✭✭✭giveitholly


    mountgomery burns wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/StefPreissner/status/1309865496158896133?s=20

    This really annoyed me. Because I can't see anything wrong with what's in this video, yet 500 people seem to think this woman is correct in shaming people doing absolutely nothing wrong.

    Seen that earlier and plenty of people calling her out as a curtain twitcher and rightly so. Because the car is moving fairly fast it gives the impression people are closer together. She is a sad yoke putting that up



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement