Coronavirus (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2) outbreak discussion

[basilio]

Satanopera your resilience in the face of those illnesses is .. something else.
And certainly it gives you a perspective on life and living that few others could have.

But i suggest the conversation is at cross purposes with teasing out how we respond to COVID 19.
The discussion about the longer term effects of the disease are legitimate because as many posters point out we all pay for the poor health of people after this event. It's a factor that is in the equation.

I said it before but lets repeat it. COVID 19 is a wicked problem. There are no good answers. Everything we do will have negative consequences. There are only a few certainties. One that does come to mind is the following.

Consider 200 people come together for a wedding, funeral, party, celebration. Imagine a few boisterous people there infected with COVID 19. By the end of the night you could see most of the party people also infected.

On current projections at least one will die and a dozen others will be seriously ill - many hospitalised.
Probably another 30-40 will be crook for anyhing from a few days to many weeks.

Scores of others will also be infected but might not notice it. Nevertheless they will pass the disease on to family, friends, fellow workers.

Is this scenario compatible with running our society the way we currently want to ?

 

[macca]

This is one website that gives a more positive outlook by suggesting things people can do to improve there resistance to Covid.

We need a lot more positive news of successful treatments and recoveries to give people a sense of direction.

A lot of the resistance to the lockdown is that the Govt is not really achieving anything, just kicking the can down the road and the public know that

https://www.stopcovidcold.com/

 

[IFocus]

Basilo, Wayne is correct. There are thousands of Australians that have to deal with the aftermath of diseases and viruses after they recover, that IS LIFE.

I will give you a short run down so you understand my stance on the current situation

1. encephalitis herpes - 3months in a coma, age 19, body weight before hand 80kg (exercise kept me alive), coming out of the coma 47kg. _ Yes it sucks, no child hood memories (think about that, you cannot remember the pets you had as a child or even your own name), cannot walk or talk, but hey, I survived better than most that get it (well they die).
2. Myasthenia Gravis (Myasthenia gravis is a chronic autoimmune, neuromuscular disease that causes weakness in the skeletal muscles that worsens after periods of activity and improves after periods of rest. These muscles are responsible for functions involving breathing and moving parts of the body, including the arms and legs.)- age 28, read about this one, nasty, diagnosis, 12months to live. F-k that sucked, back into a wheel chair, cannot talk or walk correctly.
Outcome : 18hours operation, remove 6kg of thymus mass gland from body, wake up sore but can see again and over the next few days can walk again.
3. Meningitis, here we go again, back into a coma, this time only a couple of months, might have been a complication from point 1.

Aside from that I have been totally devoid of hair since I was 13 years old :
Alopecia areata occurs when the immune system attacks hair follicles and may be brought on by severe stress.

Try growing up as a teenager without hair, people look at you strange, think you have cancer or believe you are skin head.
Outcome 30 years later : saved a pile of money on haircuts

So what is long term consequences :
Lots, have to deal with a huge range of complications, from working environments to accepting I might not ever get to 50 years old, but again such is life. I am still alive
Benefits, I see the world different to others, I have empathy, understand and conviction and the willingness to fight for life, but accept death (been there several times, and before anyone askes there is no white light at the end of the tunnel, sort of).

That is my life in short, so can we all stop trying to save everyone and just appreciate life while we have it.

Also like to ad, I have to deal with cronic depression and mania every day after what happened above, it drives me nuts, but I am still alive and thankful to my parents and the doctors that have kept me alive.

It is only the due respect of them, that my depression does not overwhelm me and suicide is the easy option.

Life is complicated

Thats huge Sat very inspiring, courageous effort to keep fighting, good on you and long may it
continue. Always feel free to reach out if you would like to talk to some one.

As you say disease and death is all around us at any time I guess the problem with Covid is its all at once in massive numbers if you don't act.
On top of that the reinfection rate appears quite high should you have immediate exposure soon after recovery.
What that infection rate looks like next year for survivors is still an unknown but present testing of anti bodies is not looking good.
So anyone with longer term problems coming out of recovery would likely go into the group most likely to die next year and so on it goes.

 

[satanoperca]

Satanopera your resilience in the face of those illnesses is .. something else.
And certainly it gives you a perspective on life and living that few others could have.

But i suggest the conversation is at cross purposes with teasing out how we respond to COVID 19.
The discussion about the longer term effects of the disease are legitimate because as many posters point out we all pay for the poor health of people after this event. It's a factor that is in the equation.

I said it before but lets repeat it. COVID 19 is a wicked problem. There are no good answers. Everything we do will have negative consequences. There are only a few certainties. One that does come to mind is the following.

Consider 200 people come together for a wedding, funeral, party, celebration. Imagine a few boisterous people there infected with COVID 19. By the end of the night you could see most of the party people also infected.

On current projections at least one will die and a dozen others will be seriously ill - many hospitalised.
Probably another 30-40 will be crook for anyhing from a few days to many weeks.

Scores of others will also be infected but might not notice it. Nevertheless they will pass the disease on to family, friends, fellow workers.

Is this scenario compatible with running our society the way we currently want to ?

But that is life. We have as a society to choose 2 options :
1. Live in isolation and not get infected easily
2. Live with the virus, but live, havd freedom to go down the beach and catch up with friends, which may result in getting sick and maybe dying.

As someone who has died (revived), survived multiple illnesses that should have resulted in death, I am telling anyone who will listen that the actions taken by govnuts are worse than the illness.

If you want to live alone and keep isolated from society so you can live an isolated and lonely life (humans are communal creatures) , but live forever, go for it.

I will not submit to this craziness. F--k all unreasonable rules, I want to live with freedoms

 

[wayneL]

Enough of the BS denial Wayne..
I'm not making any of this up.
It isn't some macho bravado or "she'll be right mate" rubbish.
There is plenty of evidence from doctors and hospitals who are treating COVID patients of substantial long term consequences of the disease amongst people who have been hospitalised.
Recognising that fact is a critical part of deciding how much effort should be put into preventing the spread of the disease.
Ignoring it is BS denial.

English comprehension, basilio.

I didn't deny that there may be some enduring consequences for people that have been severely affected, if you have the ability to read you will see and also by other posts that I have put forth that other respiratory diseases such as influenza, also have such long-term consequences.

What you should really try to do basilio is to understand what people are saying rather than creating a amateurish strawman argument which makes you look like a fool with no understanding of the debate.

 

[satanoperca]

Satanopera your resilience in the face of those illnesses is .. something else.
And certainly it gives you a perspective on life and living that few others could have.

But i suggest the conversation is at cross purposes with teasing out how we respond to COVID 19.
The discussion about the longer term effects of the disease are legitimate because as many posters point out we all pay for the poor health of people after this event. It's a factor that is in the equation.

I said it before but lets repeat it. COVID 19 is a wicked problem. There are no good answers. Everything we do will have negative consequences. There are only a few certainties. One that does come to mind is the following.

Consider 200 people come together for a wedding, funeral, party, celebration. Imagine a few boisterous people there infected with COVID 19. By the end of the night you could see most of the party people also infected.

On current projections at least one will die and a dozen others will be seriously ill - many hospitalised.
Probably another 30-40 will be crook for anyhing from a few days to many weeks.

Scores of others will also be infected but might not notice it. Nevertheless they will pass the disease on to family, friends, fellow workers.

Is this scenario compatible with running our society the way we currently want to ?

I agree with what you say, but that is life, don't expect you can change it, accept it, make the best possible outcome for family and friends, but birth, death, disease is part of the cycle.

 

[Smurf1976]

We have as a society to choose 2 options :
1. Live in isolation and not get infected easily
2. Live with the virus, but live, havd freedom to go down the beach and catch up with friends, which may result in getting sick and maybe dying.

3. Eradicate it if that is indeed possible.

For those saying it can't be eradicated, I think that view would be somewhat different if it came with a far higher death rate.

It "can't" be eradicated just as overweight people "can't" lose weight, people of normal intelligence "can't" complete a degree or TAFE course and alcoholics "can't" give up the booze. If you don't really want something then sure, you won't achieve it.

I'm yet to see real, hard evidence that eradication is not possible and, more to the point, couldn't have been achieved by now if we'd stop messing about with halfway measures and just give it one proper go.

I could well be completely wrong there but thus far I'm yet to see a proper, scientific approach which says that is the case.

Keep the humans away from other humans for a few weeks and it dies out. Done. To the extent they really must be in groups, put them in one group and keep them in that group for the duration.

 

[SirRumpole]

I'm yet to see real, hard evidence that eradication is not possible and, more to the point, couldn't have been achieved by now if we'd stop messing about with halfway measures and just give it one proper go.

I could well be completely wrong there but thus far I'm yet to see a proper, scientific approach which says that is the case.

I'm sure it could be eradicated, except for the people including some on this forum that take a "stuff everyone else" attitude and wander around possibly infecting people without knowing or caring in the name of "freedom" .

Sure freedom is important, but is it as important as life ? The majority of victims maybe elderly but there are some quite young people in there as well. The after effects are being reported including chronic fatigue lasting possibly months. And sure people say that we could die of anything, true but we don't necessarily pass it on to others on the way.

To sum up , I think eradication is unlikely unless the authorities are prepared to take a China like approach and lock people up, which let's face it is what we used to do in quarantine centres here.

That probably also means compulsory testing, because it's unlikely that people will come forward voluntarily if they know they could be carted off to a quarantine centre for two weeks.

So as hard as people think they have it, it could be a lot worse and people could actually be being arrested and forced into isolation instead of being expected to obey the rules voluntarily.

 

[cynic]

Idiocy, obesity and alcoholism are not contagious whereas covid19 is!

Eradication may well be a possibility (in theory at least) but the benefits of the pursuit of same, ideally need to be carefully weighed against, the impact on society (arising from the implementation of such extreme and burdensome measures).

I can already tell, just from what I am witnessing in my local area, that what is currently being done, is literally, costing more lives than are being saved.

 

[basilio]

Keeping up spirits

 

[wayneL]

How's yer New Zealand envy going?

Sweden wins again.

 

[IFocus]

3. Eradicate it if that is indeed possible.

For those saying it can't be eradicated, I think that view would be somewhat different if it came with a far higher death rate.

It "can't" be eradicated just as overweight people "can't" lose weight, people of normal intelligence "can't" complete a degree or TAFE course and alcoholics "can't" give up the booze. If you don't really want something then sure, you won't achieve it.

I'm yet to see real, hard evidence that eradication is not possible and, more to the point, couldn't have been achieved by now if we'd stop messing about with halfway measures and just give it one proper go.

I could well be completely wrong there but thus far I'm yet to see a proper, scientific approach which says that is the case.

Keep the humans away from other humans for a few weeks and it dies out. Done. To the extent they really must be in groups, put them in one group and keep them in that group for the duration.

Yep, People + movement + contact = Virus transmission, I am with you Smurf

 

[IFocus]

How's yer New Zealand envy going?

Taiwan wins again.

Just to help you out

 

[satanoperca]

I'm sure it could be eradicated, except for the people including some on this forum that take a "stuff everyone else" attitude and wander around possibly infecting people without knowing or caring in the name of "freedom" .

Are you a child, what sort of stupid, idiotic statement is that.

Show me one person let alone persons on this forum that have advocated let it rip attitude and f-kk everyone else.

It is your type of statements that causes confusion and make people disobey the rules.

Your Sir are part of the problem.

 

[satanoperca]

How's yer New Zealand envy going?

Sweden wins again.

Wayne they are doing great with the exception that they did not eradicate a virus that cannot be eradicated.
Apart from that small hiccup, everything is Hunkie Dorie in NZ

 

[Smurf1976]

Eradication may well be a possibility (in theory at least) but the benefits of the pursuit of same, ideally need to be carefully weighed against, the impact on society (arising from the implementation of such extreme and burdensome measures).

Some random thoughts. Not saying I necessarily agree with them, they're just thoughts.

Legal - If someone breaches the lockdown requirements etc then that's attempted manslaughter is it not? Charge them accordingly and note their liability for economic costs incurred by others from whatever's needed to contain any outbreak to which they've contributed.

In principle I'm not overly keen on the whole "legal" approach but it might be effective. It is in similar situations eg workplace safety it's imperfect but gives a decent push to it that otherwise wouldn't exist.

Quarantine - At some future time there will be another pandemic that's a given and it may well be more (or less) serious than this one.

If we can't eradicate this pandemic then should we not be taking that as a huge warning sign that we're sitting ducks for another, far more serious, one to occur?

Can we ever go back to the idea of someone flying from Melbourne to Doha to London and simply walking straight off the plane and less than an hour later they're sitting on the Heathrow Express (train) next to someone who just arrived from China and across from someone who just arrived from the US all heading to Paddington (central London) from where they'll simply get of the train and walk straight out of the station?

Can we ever sensibly return to that knowing that we can't contain a pandemic if one starts? If we can't contain this one, then it seems foolish to think we'll contain a more serious one in future.

Cities - Put simply, is Australia having 40% of its population in just two cities an unacceptably large risk that we'd be foolish to continue?

Melbourne's in crisis already, we're in even more pain if Sydney goes as well.

Should we be enacting policies to outright stop any further growth in population in those two locations and indeed intentionally shrink them?

Should we cap any one city to, say, 10% of national population?

Those are just thoughts, I'm not claiming to have calculated anything etc, but I think there's some real issues here since sooner or later there will be another pandemic and the next one may well be far more deadly than this one. If we conclude that we can't contain this one, then we'd be wise to change our ways before the next one would we not?

 

[wayneL]

Manslaughter?

Now we are getting extremely silly. We are not sleepwalking into a totalitarian police state, we are actively encouraging it!

Stop making me a Sweden cheerleader all the time, woulda thunk they would have been the last bastion of liberty in the world?

 

[qldfrog]

An unsurprising story in NZ which should be but will not a lesson for the whole country inc qld wa
You can delay, you can not suppress a world pandemic.
So act accordingly

 

[SirRumpole]

Are you a child, what sort of stupid, idiotic statement is that.

Show me one person let alone persons on this forum that have advocated let it rip attitude and f-kk everyone else.

It is your type of statements that causes confusion and make people disobey the rules.

Your Sir are part of the problem.

You may want to read your own comments again.

I will not submit to this craziness. F--k all unreasonable rules, I want to live with freedoms

Temporary restriction of freedoms can suppress the virus to the extent that we can go about our normal lives again , as in virtually all states except Victoria at the moment.

So I would say that your stated attitude if multiplied in the population is the problem.

 

[satanoperca]

Temporary restriction of freedoms can suppress the virus to the extent that we can go about our normal lives again , as in virtually all states except Victoria at the moment.

Worked well in NZ, NOT!

You can reduce the transfer/infection rate of this virus, but the economy and peoples lives will be destroyed if govnuts keep pushing these restrictions every time the infection rate increases.

I don't live in a glass tower, so reducing my freedoms to see my elderly parents, is just bull...it.

But SIR, time will tell, who is right and who is wrong.