2019 Novel Coronavirus Covid-19 Discussion

Forums › Health and fitness › 2019 Novel Coronavirus Covid-19 Discussion

1 | ... | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | ... | 2429

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2432367 4-Mar-2020 12:58

Mahon:

As it spreads we all need to be more vigilant as we cant expect to be able to visit our GP and our hospitals will be full. This virus will only be an issue for the next 12 months or so....

Panic wont ease in the coming months as it will get much worse especially with the winter woes on us as well. Expect some real harsh government measures in the coming weeks (if this government does its job properly).

Isnt the Govt following WHO? Does Jacinda know more than WHO? We also have a MoH pandemic document created in 2010, which I assume we are also following, do we rip that up as well and get Jac to write another?

Its a bi partisan issue, the guidelines were already in place, there is probably not a lot of wiggle room unless we decide WHO and MoH 2010 are wrong.

dogstar001

74 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 39

#2432396 4-Mar-2020 13:07

MikeB4:

A working treatment will be found long before a vaccine is found, tested, approved, manufactured, distributed and administered.

Yes but convincing people to take it who are asymptomatic or only have mild symptoms will be problematic. I wouldn't want take

a drug that hasn't been approved if I only had mild symptoms. Happy to isolate myself though. Though a working vaccine will be a saving grace for more serious cases.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2432400 4-Mar-2020 13:19

tdgeek:

I realise that Italy was only recently added as a high level risk. Is the Ministry of Health Pandemic document that I assume governs this, mean that if you come in from China, you must self isolate but if you come in from any other infected country, don't bother?

I think it's reasonable to ask people to self-isolate if they've been somewhere where the virus is loose in the community. But it's unreasonable to require self-isolation from every "infected" country. If other countries applied this rule, every person who had been to NZ would have to self-isolate. And (before 26th Feb or whenever this second case arrived) we had only one case, who was isolated. In which case, there's ZERO chance of becoming infected in NZ, and therefore ZERO chance of introducing it into their own country. Once this second woman's contacts have been identified and isolated, people in NZ will be back to zero chance of infection again.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2432409 4-Mar-2020 13:29

frankv:

tdgeek:

I realise that Italy was only recently added as a high level risk. Is the Ministry of Health Pandemic document that I assume governs this, mean that if you come in from China, you must self isolate but if you come in from any other infected country, don't bother?

I think it's reasonable to ask people to self-isolate if they've been somewhere where the virus is loose in the community. But it's unreasonable to require self-isolation from every "infected" country. If other countries applied this rule, every person who had been to NZ would have to self-isolate. And (before 26th Feb or whenever this second case arrived) we had only one case, who was isolated. In which case, there's ZERO chance of becoming infected in NZ, and therefore ZERO chance of introducing it into their own country. Once this second woman's contacts have been identified and isolated, people in NZ will be back to zero chance of infection again.

You are comparing Italy, a week ago with NZ. Thats a bad comparison. There are a number of countries with just 1 or 2 cases, but there are a few hotbeds, which we ignore. This virus doesn't recognise borders in the EU. It just seems to me that we can contain it but the first priority is convenience. The next one is the economy. Then lives. Each step we allow to take place just exposes so many more people to risk. Which is bizarre. We dont wbat short term pain but we are ok with medium term pain

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2432413 4-Mar-2020 13:37

frankv:

Once this second woman's contacts have been identified and isolated, people in NZ will be back to zero chance of infection again.

How many people have come into NZ from destinations that have a number of infections, say like Japan and others. Over the last x number of weeks? Are you certain there has never been a case here? Thats quite possibly true but given the numbera and our lack of interest, you seem 100% certain that the 60yo and this 30yo are tfhe ONLY ones that entered NZ with the virus. Before the orther day there was zero chance of the virus being here, now its 2 , and will be 3, after a few Tiki Tours around NZ

You mentioned community infections. If its not here you wont have any community infections, but when you freely import it from countries that have a number of existing infections, and are growing, you will, thats just math.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2432470 4-Mar-2020 14:05

tdgeek:

You are comparing Italy, a week ago with NZ. Thats a bad comparison. There are a number of countries with just 1 or 2 cases, but there are a few hotbeds, which we ignore. This virus doesn't recognise borders in the EU. It just seems to me that we can contain it but the first priority is convenience. The next one is the economy. Then lives. Each step we allow to take place just exposes so many more people to risk. Which is bizarre. We dont wbat short term pain but we are ok with medium term pain

The point is that when you said

if you come in from China, you must self isolate but if you come in from any other infected country, don't bother?

I've inferred that you wish that people who "come in from any other infected country" were also required to self-isolate. In which case you are equating NZ (an "infected" country) with other "infected" countries, including Italy, Iran, and South Korea. Or are you saying that there should be different requirements for people who've been to those countries than to countries like NZ? In which case, where do you draw the line? Is Japan "safe enough" with about 300 cases? Canada with 30? Phillippines with 3? NZ with 2? Or maybe we should have a graduated system, whereby the risk is measured not only by the number or density of infectees, but also the effectiveness of the public health systems in isolating infectees from the general population?Oh, wait, isn't that what the government is actually doing?

NB that we don't ignore the hotbeds; we evaluate the risk and calculate the appropriate response.

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2432493 4-Mar-2020 14:22

frankv:

]

I've inferred that you wish that people who "come in from any other infected country" were also required to self-isolate. In which case you are equating NZ (an "infected" country) with other "infected" countries, including Italy, Iran, and South Korea. Or are you saying that there should be different requirements for people who've been to those countries than to countries like NZ? In which case, where do you draw the line? Is Japan "safe enough" with about 300 cases? Canada with 30? Phillippines with 3? NZ with 2? Or maybe we should have a graduated system, whereby the risk is measured not only by the number or density of infectees, but also the effectiveness of the public health systems in isolating infectees from the general population?Oh, wait, isn't that what the government is actually doing?

NB that we don't ignore the hotbeds; we evaluate the risk and calculate the appropriate response.

Fair enough, when I said from any infected country I wasnt bothered with those many that are 1 or 2 cases. Im looking at the Japan type, where they have a clear outbreak.

We ignore Japan, for one example, that's a hotbed, many cases, not under control, so how many more are there, etc. Ignored.

We have to accept that priority 1 is inconveneince, 2, is The Economy and 3, is lives. Evaluated the risk

FineWine

3115 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2447

Trusted

Nurse (R)

Lifetime subscriber

#2432511 4-Mar-2020 14:30

Sidestep:

Iran's not looking good, the spread of COVID-19 appears to be out of control, and Government actions there suggests what would happen in NZ if Brian Tamaki were in charge of its coronavirus response.

State media's reported that 23 MP's, the Vice President Masoumeh Ebtekar, and the head of Iran's emergency medical services, Pirhossein Kolivand, have been infected. Mohammad Mirmohammadi, advisor to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei died of a COVID-19 infection on Monday.

Group prayer appears to be one of the approved public responses to the crisis, along with flocking to holy sites in Qom, where Isfahan general surgeon Behrouz Kalidari has warned as many as 12,000 are infected. The Health Ministry advised pilgrims not to visit Qom but was over-ridden by religious leaders. Videos online show pilgrims licking the windows that surround Qom’s holy tomb in the belief that the sacred site will cure the virus.

.........

So bloody dumb ❗️❗️

I'm sorry - but that is just DARWINISM working.

Whilst the difficult we can do immediately, the impossible takes a bit longer. However, miracles you will have to wait for.

kingdragonfly

11993 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12891

Subscriber

#2432527 4-Mar-2020 14:55

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the W.H.O. - in his media briefing today - asked the public to stop buying and hoarding surgical masks and N95 respirators.

I guess his parents didn't read him this book as a child

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2432532 4-Mar-2020 15:06

tdgeek:

We ignore Japan, for one example, that's a hotbed, many cases, not under control, so how many more are there, etc. Ignored.

We have to accept that priority 1 is inconveneince, 2, is The Economy and 3, is lives. Evaluated the risk

Ignore? Or have looked at it, decided that 90% of the 300 cases in Japan are now effectively isolated, so it's actually no more risky than (say) Canada? I expect that our public health officials have better information about the Japanese situation than we do. But if you look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_outbreak_in_Japan it appears that over the last week or so there is approximately linear, certainly not exponential, growth in case numbers. To me, that's an indication that the outbreak is being controlled. Quite different from South Korea or Iran or Italy, for example.

Hence a low risk => low reaction is the right level of response.

kingdragonfly

11993 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12891

Subscriber

#2432533 4-Mar-2020 15:07

Hey banks

Want to keep your customerd healthy, and get some good PR?

Drop the fees on paywave, so fewer people will touch the keypads

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

mattwnz

20520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4798

#2432536 4-Mar-2020 15:09

tdgeek:

frankv:

]

I've inferred that you wish that people who "come in from any other infected country" were also required to self-isolate. In which case you are equating NZ (an "infected" country) with other "infected" countries, including Italy, Iran, and South Korea. Or are you saying that there should be different requirements for people who've been to those countries than to countries like NZ? In which case, where do you draw the line? Is Japan "safe enough" with about 300 cases? Canada with 30? Phillippines with 3? NZ with 2? Or maybe we should have a graduated system, whereby the risk is measured not only by the number or density of infectees, but also the effectiveness of the public health systems in isolating infectees from the general population?Oh, wait, isn't that what the government is actually doing?

NB that we don't ignore the hotbeds; we evaluate the risk and calculate the appropriate response.

Fair enough, when I said from any infected country I wasnt bothered with those many that are 1 or 2 cases. Im looking at the Japan type, where they have a clear outbreak. I would expect South Korea would be similar. I wonder if it is in North Korea.

We ignore Japan, for one example, that's a hotbed, many cases, not under control, so how many more are there, etc. Ignored.

We have to accept that priority 1 is inconveneince, 2, is The Economy and 3, is lives. Evaluated the risk

I am surprised Japan is having a problem with it as they are ultra strict with hygiene and many wear masks during cold and flu season. Maybe it is the time of the year and weather.

If people aren't being tested, then they aren't confirmed cases, so the numbers are going to be lower than the actual cases. . The WHO has already said it is unlike any other virus, such as SARS, MERS or Flu, partly because of the long incubation period. Whereas I suspect these processes countries are following have been following have been written based off these other types of illness. So it is likely they are going to need to adapt them.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2432539 4-Mar-2020 15:18

frankv:

tdgeek:

We ignore Japan, for one example, that's a hotbed, many cases, not under control, so how many more are there, etc. Ignored.

We have to accept that priority 1 is inconveneince, 2, is The Economy and 3, is lives. Evaluated the risk

Ignore? Or have looked at it, decided that 90% of the 300 cases in Japan are now effectively isolated, so it's actually no more risky than (say) Canada? I expect that our public health officials have better information about the Japanese situation than we do. But if you look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_outbreak_in_Japan it appears that over the last week or so there is approximately linear, certainly not exponential, growth in case numbers. To me, that's an indication that the outbreak is being controlled. Quite different from South Korea or Iran or Italy, for example.

Hence a low risk => low reaction is the right level of response.

What was Japan like a couple of weeks ago, when there was a clear outbreak, and I had a friend coming back from a failed ski holiday? I guess no risk as well, not knowing what will happen. Same as Iran and Italy, thats not brand new, but now we have a case it suddenly is? What you are saying is that the WHO policy is that we are quite happy to import infections unless its really bad, as we seemingly dont wnat to put anyone out too much. We were quite happy to place a ban on China, which still applies even though they are reducing cases, its well contained there. If its ok to travel ban China, which I agree with, it doenst sem a huge drama to take a conservative approach and travel ban SK, Iran, Japan etc when they had their initial outburst. But we wait, no bans, while they are blowing out, then we act. Thats my issue. We are not acting for containment we are acting for avoiding any economic impact that we can. Should that fail, rthen it will cost us a lot more, and we will be feeding the global spread as well

As you infer, a risk worth taking.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2432544 4-Mar-2020 15:27

mattwnz:

I am surprised Japan is having a problem with it as they are ultra strict with hygiene and many wear masks during cold and flu season. Maybe it is the time of the year and weather.

If people aren't being tested, then they aren't confirmed cases, so the numbers are going to be lower than the actual cases. . The WHO has already said it is unlike any other virus, such as SARS, MERS or Flu, partly because of the long incubation period. Whereas I suspect these processes countries are following have been following have been written based off these other types of illness. So it is likely they are going to need to adapt them.

Right.

But WHO says facemasks are ineffective.

A bit of thought would persuade public health officials that not testing people to reduce "confirmed" cases is a false economy. You would have a week or so of looking relatively good, while actual numbers would grow exponentially, as the disease was rapidly transmitted from one undiagnosed person to another. Pretty soon, huge numbers of "clinically diagnosed" patients would appear in the stats, and a public health disaster to cope with. I suspect this is what happened in Iran.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#2432547 4-Mar-2020 15:32

I wonder how locally-based pilots working for foreign airlines will manage now that airlines are canceling routes into their home countries.

Have a friend in that situation, but overseas just now. Will have to catch up when he returns.

1 | ... | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | ... | 2429