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

[satanoperca]

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

Go and read my post about my past, I am one of those people who has a depressed immune system, I am in the higher risk category and under 50 years old.

So I would say it is those the live in glass towers, should go down to ground level and see what is happening on the ground and the massive impact these restrictions are having on good people's lives.

 

[satanoperca]

Temporary restriction of freedoms

Can you assist me in understanding how you perceive this situation?

What is temporary?
1 Month
6 Months
12 Months
3 years

I am all for temporary disruption of 1-3 months but not 6 months >

 

[SirRumpole]

What is temporary?

If people obey the rules, it will be less than if they don't.

 

[satanoperca]

If people obey the rules, it will be less than if they don't.

Can you please just answer a simple question, define temporary?

 

[SirRumpole]

Can you please just answer a simple question, define temporary?

There are standards available for pandemic treatment regarding restrictions versus an acceptable number of cases. I suggest you contact an epidemiologist for full details, I'm certainly not qualified to answer your question.

 

[satanoperca]

There are standards available for pandemic treatment regarding restrictions versus an acceptable number of cases. I suggest you contact an epidemiologist for full details, I'm certainly not qualified to answer your question.

How hard is it! I will ask again, what is your personal definition of temporary?

I can ask an epidemiologist, a psychologist, an economist and a 1000 business owners that cannot operate, they will all give me different answers, but I was not asking them, I was asking you.

I will help you out a little :
Temporary shut down of society <3months to see if we can reduce and if possible eliminate a virus, after that the effects of the shutdown are worse than the disease.

 

[SirRumpole]

How hard is it! I will ask again, what is your personal definition of temporary?

It's very hard actually because it depends on the assumption that people observe the rules.

If people do the right thing then the time period will be less than if they don't.

 

[satanoperca]

It's very hard actually because it depends on the assumption that people observe the rules.

If people do the right thing then the time period will be less than if they don't.

So you cannot answer a simple question?

 

[moXJO]

Anyone mentioned the Russian vaccine yet?

So... who's going to be first in line?

 

[qldfrog]

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?

eradication is smallpox eradication otherwise it is useless=> worldwide or it is not eradication, just attempt at
so until the world eradicates it : Africa ?or the slums of India, nearer Indonesia?, it is not eradication, it is living in a bubble waiting for the next breach with no solution...ahhh yes the vaccine ROL
; and no, a disease where 80% do not have any symptom and a death rate <1% does not warranty destruction of a country whether, me, my mum or my neighbour dies...

So before building scenario about real serious pandemic, let's deal properly with a relatively benign one.
Any faith left over in the ability of our rulers fully now destroyed so expect more Boris and Trump and the end of democracy;
incompetent leech:

 

[SirRumpole]

So you cannot answer a simple question?

That's because it's not a simple question.

However start off with three months and see how it goes. That's been the case in all States except Victoria, so it's not "one size fits all".

 

[wayneL]

If people obey the rules, it will be less than if they don't.

Not necessarily, Horace.

The rules have to make sense on a number of different levels. The rules as they exist in most of the world don't make sense whatsoever as it is basically delaying the inevitable while at the same time destroying our economies... Ironically weakening our economies for when the inevitable does come.

This serves nobody except the "great reset” conspiracists of The World Economic Forum.

If course if the rules are sensible, people will have no trouble in embracing them. This is why the Swedish experiment has worked so well (and in the fullness of time this will be proved to be so).

Bulshit rules such as are in most of the rest of the world rely on either Stasi state type enforcement or a fear narrative.... Or both such as is the case in Australia.

 

[satanoperca]

That's because it's not a simple question.

However start off with three months and see how it goes. That's been the case in all States except Victoria, so it's not "one size fits all".

Oh so it is easy to make a stupid comment, but to clarify it is too hard.

People who live in glass towers! bla bla bla

 

[Knobby22]

Oh so it is easy to make a stupid comment, but to clarify it is too hard.

People who live in glass towers! bla bla bla

It's meant to be 6 weeks only, 5weeks left.
That should be adequate. Depends how many nuffys are out there though.

The more there are, the more everyone especially business suffers.

I have to say though, 99% are trying their best. The streets are empty. Just about everyone is keeping their distance.We all know it's the local pub owner that will go broke if don't do it. And for me it's personal as we are friends with the local pub owner. She is doing it tough.

 

[satanoperca]

It's meant to be 6 weeks only, 5weeks left.
That should be adequate. Depends how many nuffys are out there though.

The more there are, the more everyone especially business suffers.

I have to say though, 99% are trying their best. The streets are empty. Just about everyone is keeping their distance.We all know it's the local pub owner that will go broke if don't do it. And for me it's personal as we are friends with the local pub owner. She is doing it tough.

It is a virus, it doesn't care about what percentage do the right thing, only takes one to start the spread again.

If people complied, we would have not need for police, locks on our cars and houses.

People be real, instead of believing in fantasies.

 

[Knobby22]

It is a virus, it doesn't care about what percentage do the right thing, only takes one to start the spread again.

If people complied, we would have not need for police, locks on our cars and houses.

People be real, instead of believing in fantasies.

We don't. If we had mass resistance then it would fail. Only a few nuffys and even they can't spread it if no one goes near them.

The nuffys need to careful also. My sister in law would punch them in the face if they tried. She works at on erdely persons home.

Its worked before. Basic maths.
Which state are you in santoperca?

 

[qldfrog]

It's meant to be 6 weeks only, 5weeks left.
That should be adequate. Depends how many nuffys are out there though.

The more there are, the more everyone especially business suffers.

I have to say though, 99% are trying their best. The streets are empty. Just about everyone is keeping their distance.We all know it's the local pub owner that will go broke if don't do it. And for me it's personal as we are friends with the local pub owner. She is doing it tough.

If you really appreciate her, you are aware as well that this will be repeated again and again unless a vaccine is found..not a chance but this is the part where i may be wrong,
or a face saving fake vaccine is released.the earlier the better as long as I am not obliged to get it.
Already articles in sheeple press to say it should be mandatory ..so avoiding the obviously awkward possibility of figures comparing...

 

[Knobby22]

If you really appreciate her, you are aware as well that this will be repeated again and again unless a vaccine is found..not a chance but this is the part where i may be wrong,
or a face saving fake vaccine is released.the earlier the better as long as I am not obliged to get it.
Already articles in sheeple press to say it should be mandatory ..so avoiding the obviously awkward possibility of figures comparing...

The fact is whether you agree with it or not, this is the course taken by the government.
So we should all do our best.

Politically long term it can't be repeated.

And I don't call it sheepie everyone working to do their best. I call it civil society. You only need to look to the USA to see what the opposite is.

 

[qldfrog]

I think everything hang to:
Do you believe a vaccine is possible in a short term aka 2y?
If this is a case, i can ..not always but mostly, believe some of the opinions here from @Smurf1976 ,@Knobby22 @SirRumpole and basically the lockdown etc option taken here.
On the other hand,. If this will not happen..my view but i do not hold a crystal ball..
- ihope we will all agree that the current decisions are madness just postponing the inevitable.

 

[satanoperca]

We don't. If we had mass resistance then it would fail. Only a few nuffys and even they can't spread it if no one goes near them.

The nuffys need to careful also. My sister in law would punch them in the face if they tried. She works at on erdely persons home.

Its worked before. Basic maths.
Which state are you in santoperca?

VIC.
I only unerstand 2 things. Numbers and nature.