Ask A Broadsheet Reader

at

“Most of the transmission that is actually happening in many countries now is happening in the household at a family level. In some senses, the transmission has actually been taken off the streets and pushed back into family units… now we need to go into families and find those people who are sick and remove them and isolate them…”

Michael Ryan (@1.15), Executive Director of the World Health Organization’s Health Emergencies Programme earlier this week.

Owen writes:

Under the new Garda powers, can they actually do this snatch and grab here in Ireland?

Anyone?

Yesterday: New Garda Powers And Your Movement

Meanwhile…

46 thoughts on “Ask A Broadsheet Reader

  1. Finnster

    Apart from the ludicrousness of that statement, I cannot see how would it make any sense to force-isolate somebody who has already been living with their family members. The potential psychological damage and trauma doesn’t bear thinking about. The media seem to adore making a drama out of a crisis. This is an autocrat’s wet dream.

    1. george

      He didn’t say anyone should be moved against their will. When the outbreak began the approach was to hospitalise people regardless of level of symptoms. That has changed now due to numbers and people with the virus are advised to stay home. He is saying people should be provided accommodation outside their home to recover but their is not suggestion that they would be forced to go.

      1. Finnster

        The statement is there above in bold black letters. Correct me if I’m wrong, but are you just adding your own interpretation?

          1. Finnster

            Just think about that for a moment. They’ll all have contracted the virus anyway, if it’s as potent and easily caught as we’re lead to believe. It isn’t the case that the majority of people are dropping dead from this. There wasn’t this level of hysteria and hype over previous epidemics.

          2. Hansel

            This notion that “they’ll all have contracted the virus anyway, if it’s as potent and easily caught as we’re lead [sic] to believe” is where you’re mistaken.
            There’s a 20% transmission rate within the household.

            “It isn’t the case that the majority of people are dropping dead from this. There wasn’t this level of hysteria and hype over previous epidemics.” is another place you’re going wrong.
            Previous epidemics may or may not have had this level of hysteria. But they saw more preventable deaths as a result of lack of good quality information.

            The high levels of pseudo science by the conspiracy theorist wing of Broadheet is very irritating. There is a need for questioning authority. There is a need for questioning scientific evidence. There is no need for ignoring scientific evidence and attempting a “call to arms” of the ignorant.

        1. Rob_G

          If a person in a household of 6 has COVID, and they live with 3 or 4 essential workers who go to work everyday in hospitals, public transport, or supermarkets, than yes, they should be forced to leave their family home* to protect the public.

          *it’s only for a couple of weeks – it’s not like they are being sent to Devil’s Island for a 5-year stint

          1. Hansel

            What if it was your dog’s sister’s friend?

            There is currently literally ONE tool available to prevent the spread of the virus. That one tool is what you guys are trying to find fault in. By all means, go ahead an infect your granmother/sister/child/etc under the misty-eyed call for FREEEEDOM. Personally, I’ll be doing everything I can to help the weaker members of society to survive.

            Conspiracysheet.ie delivers its trump card.

          2. Rob_G

            “Sorry Granny – I know this is a bit of a hassle but it is only for a couple of weeks, and it is to keep everyone safe”

            To flip your question on your head – what if one of your loved ones contracted COVID and died, because they contracted it from someone who lived with someone who was showing symptoms but who refused to go and isolate somewhere else?

          3. f_lawless

            But have you considered that according to different scientific studies, a large percentage of those with the virus may exhibit no symptoms but be transmitting it regardless and also that infected people can transmit days before they show symptoms?

            https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238473-you-could-be-spreading-the-coronavirus-without-realising-youve-got-it/

            “A project in Italy has also found many symptomless cases. When everybody was tested in a town called Vò, one of the hardest-hit in the country, 60 per cent of people who tested positive were found to have no symptoms.

            We know that coughs and sneezes spread the virus, so how is it possible for asymptomatic people to spread the infection?

            People with mild or no symptoms can have a very high viral load in their upper respiratory tracts, meaning they can shed the virus through spitting, touching their mouths or noses and then a surface, or possibly talking. Even people who don’t feel ill occasionally cough or sneeze.”

            “Even people who develop symptoms are at risk of unwittingly spreading the virus. A study in China suggests that infectiousness starts about 2.5 days before the onset of symptoms, and peaks 15 hours before”

            Doesn’t that cast serious doubt over the idea that “going into families and removing those people who are sick” will be a viable solution?

          4. Rob_G

            No, I haven’t. But tbh it wouldn’t really be my area of expertise anyway, so I would probably go with whatever recommendations the WHO makes.

          5. f_lawless

            The thing is though the WHO don’t have a monopoly over expert opinion. There’s plenty distinguished epidemiologists, virologists, etc out there who don’t necessarily agree with the different approaches they’re advocating. I think it’s wise to give consideration to the alternative viewpoints of those with the expertise to hold the WHO’s policies up to scrutiny -all the more so since the WHO’s own track record has been marred in controversy and corruption.

            https://www.forbes.com/2010/02/05/world-health-organization-swine-flu-pandemic-opinions-contributors-michael-fumento.html#55192c3848e8

          1. steve white

            Then we need to open up unused hotels for people who don’t want live with murderers

  2. steve white

    Owen is taking a very negative connotation from Dr Mike Ryan’s words, if you started getting symptoms would you not want to leave your house and isolate elsewhere if you could? if it decreased the chance your family/household would get the virus? That’s what City West is for, although when asked about this last night Tony Holohan said they wouldn’t be recommending it. (wholesale).

    1. george

      Exactly that, the advice is currently to isolate at home and are not provided a bed elsewhere. He is suggesting that should change and people should be given somewhere to isolate.

    2. f_lawless

      Surely it’s not about decreasing the risk of your family/household getting the virus as everyone who’s been living in lockdown together would have at some point already exposed each other to infection. He’s advocating for the removal of those who are exhibiting symptoms from society – in the context of lifting the lockdown. measures.I would say, what’s implicit is that the lockdown measures were never going to be a viable solution for eradicating the virus

      1. Hansel

        This notion that “everyone who’s been living in lockdown together would have at some point already exposed each other to infection” is where you’re mistaken.

        There’s a 20% transmission rate within the household.

        They want to reduce that further.

        1. f_lawless

          “20% transmission rate within the household”
          Maybe in the fairy tale land of households built from cakes that statement makes some sense but in the real world not so much

          1. Rob_G

            It should be no bother to you to show your own stat for a 100% transmission rate between members of a household, so.

          2. Hansel

            “I don’t understand stastics, therefore anyone using using them can’t be trusted”.

            Good for you, f_lawless, you show those “experts”!

          3. f_lawless

            Ok geniuses can you please explain to me in layman’s terms what it means to express “transmission rate” as a standalone percentage? Don’t I need something else to compare it with for it to make sense?

            The onus isn’t on me to provide stats, but to the person making the initial claim – can they please provide a link to what they’re referring to for the sake of greater clarity?

  3. Clampers Outside

    From…

    “remove them and isolate them”

    to…

    “snatch and grab”

    In one step.

    1. Hansel

      You’re part of the conspiracy.

      I bet you even believe in evidence. You’re one of THEM, aren’t you.

  4. broadbag

    Keep the comedy coming ‘snatch and grab’ ffs!

    If you’re sick would you not want to be tested and isolated so you can do the least possible damage to your family and life can get back to normal quicker? There’s plenty of gombeens flouting the rules and guidelines, how many are out there with symptoms going around the shops and communities spreading it because they don’t want to go to self isolate or go to hospital because they won’t be able to drink their cans every night, or quaff their prosecco or hang out with their mates?

    If people aren’t willing to be responsible and act to safeguard the public they should be ‘encouraged’ to do so where possible.

  5. Madam X

    My household is self isolating. Two of us are looking after each other. One is sick for over a week . How the hell can you take the sick one away when the other will potentially get sick . Makes no sense The transmission has been done already.

    1. Finnster

      Spot on. It’s a ludicrous suggestion, but some seem to be relishing in the drama instead of actually thinking things through.

    2. Hansel

      “The transmission has been done already.”
      No.
      20% transmission rate within the household.
      Bear that in mind while you look after each other – you can still potentially prevent transmission to the other person. Alternatively if the symptoms were very benign, the sick person could isolate.

      I hope you are both back in the best of health soon.

  6. Harry Robertson

    Get a grip, judging by the traffic yesterday, they can’t even stop people going to their holiday homes.. let alone go into said homes to ‘Snatch and Grab’

    Maybe the simple explanation is people who want to, will see conspiracies everywhere… one of which, I’m beginning to believe, is bodger himself.

      1. Harry Robertson

        Well yes, but also Bodger, some of his replies on this thread and on other stories previously…

  7. Hansel

    IT’S A CONSPIRACY!!!!
    THE LIZARD PEOPLE ARE COMING TO BREAK UP FAMILIES!!!!!!111!!!

    Lads, it’s not that difficult to understand.
    The majority of infections are in the home now.
    You can either leave those people become infected, or segregate them.

  8. Cian

    Can someone provide evidence that the transmission rate in households is only 20%? That sounds ridiculously low.

  9. A Person

    What is wrong with you people. If someone in your house is ill, no matter what the illness, surely you want them to get better and receive the best care possible. But no, our human rights may be affected…. bs . I won’t leave until my children or other flatmates dies? Do you honestly thing that I would want to infect my loved ones for the sake of human rights. Get a grip. I bet you all go for a walk on the beach with hundreds of others because it is your human right. Poo right off.

Comments are closed.