Henry2326
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2017
- Messages
- 10,785
- Reaction score
- 74,775
This is crazy....what a tragedy....
Coronavirus COVID-19 - Global Health Emergency #5
- Thread starter Amonet
- Start date
New Posts
-
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #194
- Latest: imstilla.grandma
- Status
By the way letting passengers out after the 14 day supposed quarantine makes no sense to me whatsoever. Because as soon as a new case is discovered (and sounds like cases were being discovered till the last moment) the 14 day quarantine should start all over again, as far as I am concerned. As it is, sounds to me like they just kept them together for 14 days, while they kept infecting each other, and now let them out? Are they going to use commercial planes to fly home? What a mess.
Last edited:
EstrellaEspectral
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2016
- Messages
- 301
- Reaction score
- 1,855
This post just reminded me of the case in Oregon where they blew up the whale on the beach in the 1970’s because they didn’t know what else they could do. Human ignorance quarantining people on the ship, human ignorance with the whale. At least the stupidity in Oregon really only hurt an already dead whale and caused a pretty nasty mess.
The infamous tale of Oregon's exploding whale: November 12, 1970
I didn't read the whole article, only the quote here that said the child was being kept indoors, not going to play with friends, not going to parties, and not going to school. That part would appear to be reasonable quarantine.
If the child was going from one house, to the car, to the dad's house, and not going anywhere else, then she's not going to be spreading it around in that process (if she comes down with the virus).
I think the concern people are having is that the neighbors who saw the child get into the car didn't know where the car was going, so they called authorities to tell then it needed checking on. They weren't to know the child was only going to the dad's house and staying at home there.
So then the next question, which I don't know if it was answered in the article, is whether or not the dad is still going about his normal business while he's in contact with the child. If he works from home, went shopping for 14 days of food before going to pick up the child and have her come to stay with him, then the family are maintaining the quarantine between then. But as no one knows if the father has effectively placed himself in self-isolation so that they can maintain the shared custody, people are concerned that he might not have done, that the child might have come down with the virus, and could potentially spread that virus to him, and if he goes to work/shops/has a social life during this period then he could unknowingly spread it around.
I think part of the issue here is that it's awkward when you only have part of the story and not the full story, so you don't know if there's something to be concerned about or not, and then people feel that "as I haven't been reassured that the father was also maintaining self-isolation, then I'm going to be concerned".
I think this is one reason why some of the health blurbs that come out from governments/health authorities can sometimes end up leading to more concerns instead of fewer...a one-liner response can lead to so many more questions, and people need those questions answered, too.
D
Deleted member 158085
Guest
Yes, I am absolutely not reassured that he is.
I agree with you, there. I think it should be fine to step out into your own back yard, or even drive to a park that isn't busy and get out and walk around in the fresh air. Especially if it's a small home and more than one person inside, I think that would be of help to have them not breathing the same air constantly.
But I can also agree that it would create worry in neighbors who saw them leaving the house as they don't know where the people are going or how careful they're going to be.
Here is an article about it. They are releasing these people into the public, but if there were an ongoing transmission on the ship (which seems to be the case to me) then it's likely to just spread the virus more. Japan doesn't seem to be very prepared on how to deal with a highly infectious disease.
“If the government is correct and those individuals are not only clear of infection but are not incubating infection, then the decision by the authorities to release them will have proven to be the correct one,” he said. “If indeed transmission was ongoing on the ship, then ultimately I suspect that decision will be proven to be incorrect.”
Hundreds Released From Diamond Princess Cruise Ship in Japan
“If the government is correct and those individuals are not only clear of infection but are not incubating infection, then the decision by the authorities to release them will have proven to be the correct one,” he said. “If indeed transmission was ongoing on the ship, then ultimately I suspect that decision will be proven to be incorrect.”
Hundreds Released From Diamond Princess Cruise Ship in Japan
dixiegirl1035
I will do it, but I won't like it
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2017
- Messages
- 12,887
- Reaction score
- 99,736
You already sent me down a 3 hour rabbit hole this evening... I'm ignoring this post until after I post in the am that I compiled... and may now be outdated due to whatever the heck this above means.
Thanks for nuthin'
dixiegirl1035
I will do it, but I won't like it
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2017
- Messages
- 12,887
- Reaction score
- 99,736
hehehe google translation it was. I didn't fix it. But yeah, ironic isn't it.
From what I've read, it doesn't automatically cause ARDS in every patient, and not every person with ARDS goes on to die.
It's definitely a greater risk of developing ARDS and a fatal outcome in higher-risk groups, but it's not a foregone conclusion how it will end up in any individual.
I would also think that those groups of people would also be more likely to be the ones that limited stocks of any promising antivirals will be saved for, to try and prevent them going into ARDS and help their system fight the virus without so much damage to the body.
Once a vaccine is released, those groups of individuals should also be one of the earlier priority groups as production is ramped up but initially won't be enough for mass vaccination programs.
In the meantime it is concerning, and this is why governments are taking it seriously, and I hope people in that situation will maybe be given more leeway to stay home if it gets into their workplace or anything like that--if it does end up with larger local or national outbreaks or epidemics. I don't suppose the world works like that, but I wish it did!
dixiegirl1035
I will do it, but I won't like it
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2017
- Messages
- 12,887
- Reaction score
- 99,736
OMG! I haven't laughed like that in years reading that article. My sides really do hurt from laughing. Thanks!
D
Deleted member 158085
Guest
Oh, I very much disagree on the park. No, no, no...
gregjrichards
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 12,483
- Reaction score
- 70,525
The coronavirus could cost the global economy more than $1tn in lost output if it turns into a pandemic, according to a leading economic forecaster.
Oxford Economics warned that the spread of the virus to regions outside Asia would knock 1.3% off global growth this year, the equivalent of $1.1tn in lost income.
Coronavirus 'could cost global economy $1.1tn in lost income'
This is secondary to the human loss but I’m very concerned about the impact on the Global economy. The Chinese, Japanese and Australian economies are not doing great and there will be an impact on other economies around the world if this crisis goes on for months.
Oxford Economics warned that the spread of the virus to regions outside Asia would knock 1.3% off global growth this year, the equivalent of $1.1tn in lost income.
Coronavirus 'could cost global economy $1.1tn in lost income'
This is secondary to the human loss but I’m very concerned about the impact on the Global economy. The Chinese, Japanese and Australian economies are not doing great and there will be an impact on other economies around the world if this crisis goes on for months.
I was thinking more of a large park area, like a grass area where people go to to walk dogs, and there are plenty around where you can walk around and not come within 100 feet of another person, and I can't see a risk in that.
I understand that no one would know that's where they're going and how careful they're going to be, so it's best not to do that if you are in self-isolation.
But if there's a small outbreak in a town, I would encourage people who are not in isolation to not be afraid to do something like that, to get out of the house, get fresh air and exercise, which is much healthier for the immune system (imho) than sitting inside with the windows closed and worrying.
I think what it says is that some people were assumed to be positive for the Covid-19 through symptoms/scans of their lungs, but their actual tests for Covid-19 hadn't come back yet. Once the tests came back negative for Covid-19, they were removed from the positive cases and that would be because the evidence now suggests that the symptoms they had were caused by something other than Covid-19. It doesn't mean they've recovered from it and then tested negative, it means that wasn't the cause of their symptoms.
Whether or not you believe the numbers is another matter, I'm just saying why they were removed from the numbers instead of being marked as recovered.
D
Deleted member 158085
Guest
If someone is supposed to be in quarantine then they should stay in quarantine. They can’t guarantee they won’t suddenly come upon a jogger in a park. I don’t understand why this would be hard when quarantined in your own home. I don’t understand why anyone would think of leaving quarantine, gaging how populated a destination might be. It’s just wrong. Those are the people who are going to kill us so they could get a bit of fresh air.
Nope. Quarantine means quarantine. If you can’t/won’t self-quarantine properly, then you should be put somewhere people can keep an eye on you for the remainder of your time.
Hatfield
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 17,014
- Reaction score
- 59,126
ikr
I know the death rate still seems to be relatively low compared to people getting it, but still, who would have thunk by taking what was supposed to be an enjoyable vacation cruise would actually end up dead.
Prayers for ALL that were on and maybe still on that ship (the Infected, the not infected, and now the dead). Good Grief.
LaborDayRN
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2012
- Messages
- 11,502
- Reaction score
- 52,153
Oh no.....how very sad.Awful news
I hate to say it but I was waiting to hear something like this. The environment, the stress, the exposure to other sick individuals. It was a disaster waiting to happen.What if...
Central Indiana
- Joined
- May 3, 2019
- Messages
- 424
- Reaction score
- 4,135
I’m not really sure what “method” they’re using to report these numbers, but I have to say that I’m just not buying it. IMOO, after watching a ship with fewer than 3,000 people, in a quarantine status, report 50 plus new confirmed cases on a daily basis... how could a province with over 50 million people in lockdown, at the epicenter of this pandemic, where people are being rounded up out of their own homes, new hospitals being built in a matter of days, tightening restrictions, and now monitoring individuals that recently purchased fever reducing OTC medicines, report less than 400 new cases????
Yes - I DO REALIZE THAT THE SHIP WAS A QUARANTINE DISASTER - BUT STATISTICALLY SPEAKING.....????? REALLY???
NOPE!!!! I’m not buying it for a minute. I tried to give China the benefit of the doubt regarding the numbers they had been reporting, but after seeing just how fast this thing can spread in group settings and tight quarters, I was ready to call BS at 2000/day!!
Definitely my own opinion, but I’m afraid that we won’t know the true scope of this thing until it completely blows up somewhere in the world other than China!!
- Status