User Tag List

View Poll Results: Did IBF make the correct decision in postponing the World Championships?

Voters
63. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes. postponing WC was a good decision

    32 50.79%
  • no. WC should have been held as scheduled.

    31 49.21%
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 35 to 51 of 91
  1. #35
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New York, US
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Re: Re: IBF over reacted

    Originally posted by colin
    I understand your concern about the lack of a cure for SARS, but again I will stick to my initial assertion that this is an over reaction. If the authorities are so concerned about the spread of SARS in UK, then why not cancel the football (soccer) matches where thousands of people gather in very vocal support of their teams? Another point is that the badminton WC is not the Olympics so I doubt if "thousands" of athletes will turn up.

    The doctors and nurses who were infected were in direct and very close contact with confirmed SARS patients in intensive care, and most were infected in the early stages of the outbreak before much was known about the transmission of the virus. There is no comparison of this scenario with attending a sports event in a country where SARS is NOT a major health problem. Again, I say this is an over reaction!
    Soccer event, how many fans from Asia (China, HK, TW, Ma's, etc) or Canada going to travel all the way to UK to attend? However, Badminton WC, u will see huge wave of asian fans coming. U don't need everyone to carry SARS, 1 is good enough.

    About the direct contact to gain SARS, how close u need? Fans are all sitting and screaming together face to face in a stadium. For the "proving patient", well. Just read an ariticle, SARS virus can stay alive outside in the air for 4 days, under certain situation. Also, the 1st several days, most patient won't really notice (not necessary high fever on teh 1st second) about. That's why it could be so dangerous. Also, what about a healthy person left to attend the event, but get virous on the way (say, air plane), etc???

    "Thousands" refer to athletes, coaches, fans, officials, staff, news reporters, etc for a combination. No matter who they are, they are all HUMAN BEING, and have equal chances to be infected...

  2. #36
    Regular Member Bbn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,004
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default -

    -
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  3. #37
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, China
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Re: Re: Re: IBF over reacted

    Originally posted by LazyBuddy
    Soccer event, how many fans from Asia (China, HK, TW, Ma's, etc) or Canada going to travel all the way to UK to attend? However, Badminton WC, u will see huge wave of asian fans coming. U don't need everyone to carry SARS, 1 is good enough.

    About the direct contact to gain SARS, how close u need? Fans are all sitting and screaming together face to face in a stadium. For the "proving patient", well. Just read an ariticle, SARS virus can stay alive outside in the air for 4 days, under certain situation. Also, the 1st several days, most patient won't really notice (not necessary high fever on teh 1st second) about. That's why it could be so dangerous. Also, what about a healthy person left to attend the event, but get virous on the way (say, air plane), etc???

    "Thousands" refer to athletes, coaches, fans, officials, staff, news reporters, etc for a combination. No matter who they are, they are all HUMAN BEING, and have equal chances to be infected...

    I am not suggesting that the people attending the WC should not be screened, e.g. taking their temperature at the entrance, ensuring everyone wears a face mask etc. You could require people from SARS affected countries to submit a doctor's certificate saying he/she has been clear of SARS for the last two weeks before departure for the WC. But to my knowledge not even the UK health authorities (or the WHO, for that matter) have such a requirement at present, so are the IBF better qualified than the relevant health departments on public health issues?

    Sure, there's a theoretical risk, but there is more paranoia and fear than any actual risk in the UK at this stage. Otherwise the only thing to do is to shut down the entire system, i.e. close the borders of all the countries (including western countries like Canada) which have had SARS cases.....

    This fear of SARS is quite understandable - it's just a fear of the unknown. Think of HIV/AIDS when it first appeared in the late '80s and the fear and paranoia that occurred then. People actually believed they could catch it off toilet seats! Hey, since then we've learned to live with AIDS by taking sensible precautions and with good public health education. Well, SARS is not going away anytime soon, so we will have to learn to live with it as well, the sooner the better, IMHO. As I don't fancy ever playing badminton wearing a face mask!

  4. #38
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New York, US
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Colin,

    I can clearly see ur point. However, SARS is very different than HIV/AIDS. HIV/AIDS needs blood contact (yeah, ppl were wrong, but at least u need contact). SARS spread out by air, even the patient might not be here at this moment, but who knows, 5 min ago, there could be one in the room, etc.

    Doctor certificate and temp check surely works for a lot of cases. However, u need to know the following as well:

    1. What about someone has certificate, but get this virus during travel? Say, air plane?

    2. Certain new cases (even though, small percentage) been discovered, that SARS carrier might NOT have high fever for the first several days.

    3. Always remember, even though with ur methods, we can eliminate most chances, but we just need ONE carrier, then, nightmare is there. That's exactly how Taiwan got into trouble. Just one person came back and got it in airplane, now, they have tons of cases everyday now.

    Of course, percentage vise, the chance is not too big. But, do u want to risk thousands of lives (never have to metion when they go back to their own nations) just for a delay of event for say several months???

    Sometimes, we can not deal with problem with pure math, and count for percentage. Before we can find an effective way to deal with such a life related problem, it's really not right to just throw thousands of lives from every corner of the world together.

  5. #39
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, China
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by LazyBuddy
    Colin,

    I can clearly see ur point. However, SARS is very different than HIV/AIDS. HIV/AIDS needs blood contact (yeah, ppl were wrong, but at least u need contact). SARS spread out by air, even the patient might not be here at this moment, but who knows, 5 min ago, there could be one in the room, etc.

    Doctor certificate and temp check surely works for a lot of cases. However, u need to know the following as well:

    1. What about someone has certificate, but get this virus during travel? Say, air plane?

    2. Certain new cases (even though, small percentage) been discovered, that SARS carrier might NOT have high fever for the first several days.

    3. Always remember, even though with ur methods, we can eliminate most chances, but we just need ONE carrier, then, nightmare is there. That's exactly how Taiwan got into trouble. Just one person came back and got it in airplane, now, they have tons of cases everyday now.

    Of course, percentage vise, the chance is not too big. But, do u want to risk thousands of lives (never have to metion when they go back to their own nations) just for a delay of event for say several months???

    Sometimes, we can not deal with problem with pure math, and count for percentage. Before we can find an effective way to deal with such a life related problem, it's really not right to just throw thousands of lives from every corner of the world together.
    LazyBuddy,

    I appreciate and understand your point of view. Believe when I say I also understand the seriousness of a SARS infection - I'm a medic working in HK!!

    Fortunately it looks like SARS is NOT an airborne disease like Ebola, otherwise there would be tens of thousands, if not more, people infected by now. It appears to be spread by close contact with infected patients who cough or sneeze droplets into the air. There is now evidence to suggest that it can be spread by surface contact, i.e. it can survive on surfaces and contaminate your hands which then can infect you when you rub your nose or eyes.

    To respond to your points:

    1. That's why all passengers, including transit passengers, must be screened before being allowed on board. The cases of infection during air travel occurred early in the outbreak when no such screening procedures were in place, and sick passengers were coughing and sneezing in the cabin. Otherwise the air in the cabin is probably cleaner than the air we normally breath (at least here in polluted HK!) as it is filtered, just like the air in an intensive care unit.

    2. Good point. But then they might not be infectious during that period either....

    3. The mess in Taiwan is mainly due to fear and paranoia run amok. If the people there respected and cooperated with the quarantine measures, there would be much less of a problem there now....

    4. I have nothing against postponing the WC for a valid reason, but I reckon the IBF is presumptuous in thinking they know more about the health issues than the WHO or the UK health authorities who have not recommended such a step. I am justifiably concerned that SARS will be used as an excuse to discriminate against people from certain SARS affected regions - itís already happening with a US university cancelling the courses of students and a UK school sending pupils to an island for quarantine even though there is no evidence they have ever been exposed to SARS.....

    I believe in a proportionate and reasonable response to an admittedly serious and difficult health issue. Fear and paranoia will only cloud the issues that need to be aired.

    Thanks for listening.

  6. #40
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    905
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by colin
    LazyBuddy,

    I appreciate and understand your point of view. Believe when I say I also understand the seriousness of a SARS infection - I'm a medic working in HK!!
    A "medic"? You're a medical doctor?

    Originally posted by colin

    Fortunately it looks like SARS is NOT an airborne disease like Ebola, otherwise there would be tens of thousands, if not more, people infected by now. It appears to be spread by close contact with infected patients who cough or sneeze droplets into the air. There is now evidence to suggest that it can be spread by surface contact, i.e. it can survive on surfaces and contaminate your hands which then can infect you when you rub your nose or eyes.
    !!
    Really, it seems to me understanding of this disease is so new that new
    "evidences" are discovered on a moment notice. E.g.

    1. Treatment (with an antiviral drug) that showed promise in H.K. (?) during
    first week of treatment actually didn't work as well as expected. Symptoms
    worsen in the next 2 weeks.
    2. Death rate globally is more like 15% than originally reported 5%. Who
    knows if this rate statistically would grow higher above 15% or lower below
    5%?

    The point being that we're still in the phase of understanding the problem
    and statistics gathering. If one cannot even understand what problem he
    is dealing with, how can he begin to assess its seriousness?

    Originally posted by colin

    To respond to your points:

    1. That's why all passengers, including transit passengers, must be screened before being allowed on board. The cases of infection during air travel occurred early in the outbreak when no such screening procedures were in place, and sick passengers were coughing and sneezing in the cabin. Otherwise the air in the cabin is probably cleaner than the air we normally breath (at least here in polluted HK!) as it is filtered, just like the air in an intensive care unit.
    Perhaps the world needs to do a lot more than it is already doing today.
    Mandatory screening (what type, and how, BTW? Temperature again? We
    probably need more definitive testing, which I think we can already do; with
    result in an hour or so) for all passengers prior to entering any port of entry
    in the world is probably a good way to cope. But this measure, along with
    recently terrorist attacks, would make your trip to airport (or clear the airport)
    more like a whole day event.

    Originally posted by colin

    2. Good point. But then they might not be infectious during that period either....
    Now this would be a loophole. Are you flipping coins?

    Originally posted by colin

    3. The mess in Taiwan is mainly due to fear and paranoia run amok. If the people there respected and cooperated with the quarantine measures, there would be much less of a problem there now....
    But we can't simply blame it on the people. The question is whether
    there's anything we can do to control/change this. This being human
    nature, perhaps quarantine measures as executed in Taiwan is not
    working well. And there'd be no guarantee it would work better anywhere
    else in the world either (given large enough a group of people is infected
    to strain the system resources).

    The key is try to be proactive, try to look ahead and see how you can avoid
    getting into a desparate situation before it even arises.

    Take another look at China. First it's cover-up. Then their Prime Minister
    came out and said they would positively face and fight this disease. WHO,
    on the other hand, announced only a few days ago cases in China (Beijin in
    particular) hasn't peaked yet. Once a certain critical mass is built, it apparently
    takes a lot more than will power to fight off.

    Andrew Grove of Intel had a book "Only the Paranoids survive".
    [/B][/QUOTE]

    Originally posted by colin

    4. I have nothing against postponing the WC for a valid reason, but I reckon the IBF is presumptuous in thinking they know more about the health issues than the WHO or the UK health authorities who have not recommended such a step.
    Your comment really puzzles me. While I don't know what UK health
    authorities said, didn't WHO (and CDC in US BTW) advises people to avoid
    traveling to SARS infected places? Why do you think they gave such an advice?

    Common sense would seem to suggest to me that travelling in the oppositive
    direction (from SARS infected places to places not affected, yet) should also be
    controlled/restricted.

    A lot of companies had taken the measure in restricting/canceling travel to
    the SARS infected countries. And in cases travel must be done, personnels
    need to go through at least 10 days of quarantine before they can go back
    to work.
    [/B][/QUOTE]

    Originally posted by colin
    I am justifiably concerned that SARS will be used as an excuse to discriminate against people from certain SARS affected regions - itís already happening with a US university cancelling the courses of students and a UK school sending pupils to an island for quarantine even though there is no evidence they have ever been exposed to SARS.....
    [/B]
    So you think it's still not justifiable?
    Perhaps the measures that places like H.K. are taking nowaday are already
    enough and effective. But I'd like to see more long term data (from statistical
    sample space standpoint, I want more samples). My view is that, whether
    people today is too paranoid, and whether any of these measures (quarantine,
    surgical masks, washing hands) are actually effective or not, can only be
    judged in hindsight.

    It may be one or two years from now, everyone that survives would all look
    back and laugh at himeself. But if we're complacent today, 1-2 years from
    now, we could all be crying, wondering if we've a second chance to do it right
    again.

    This to me is common sense!
    Last edited by raymond; 05-10-2003 at 12:12 PM.

  7. #41
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    905
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by raymond
    So you think it's still not justifiable?
    Perhaps the measures that places like H.K. are taking nowaday are already
    enough and effective. But I'd like to see more long term data (from statistical
    sample space standpoint, I want more samples). My view is that, whether
    people today is too paranoid, and whether any of these measures (quarantine,
    surgical masks, washing hands) are actually effective or not, can only be
    judged in hindsight.

    It may be one or two years from now, everyone that survives would all look
    back and laugh at himeself. But if we're complacent today, 1-2 years from
    now, we could all be crying, wondering if we've a second chance to do it right
    again.

    This to me is common sense! [/B]
    Let me clarify my last point a bit more. Places like China, H.K., Singapore,
    Taiwan are the first victims of this "acute" disease. They'd be the front line in
    this war. Whatever measures they're taking, they're forced into it. I'm sure
    the rest of the world, for one reason or another, would hope that some of these
    measures turn out to be winning formula.

    But while they're experimenting with all these measures, there's no reason to
    risk importing this virus to anywhere else, and repeat the same experiments
    already underway that may eventually prove in vain!

  8. #42
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    905
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by Cheung
    Exactly, but cancelling the tournament is only one measure. There are other ways in which to tackle the problem.

    If you are going to cancel because of SARS, then other sports meets should follow suit. Like was mentioned before, those larger gatherings at baseball, basketball, soccer are going to be at just as high risk.
    That perhaps is the right response. It seems at this point, governments around
    the world have mostly leave it up to individual organizations to make individual
    decisions. IBF doesn't control other events like baseball, basketball etc. But
    then again, as someone already mentioned, comparing all these sports, you've
    a heavy concentration of Asians in badminton. Perhaps that explains the differences
    in policy.

    Originally posted by Cheung

    The lessons to be learnt should have been taken from the HK, S'porean and Toronto experiences.

    In particular:
    1) information dissemination and education is vitally important. It provides a slight degree of control to an individual (China problem)
    Education would help to some extent... Information dissemination so far in China
    is nothing more than bin counting. Even with all this information, we are still
    debating whether IBF is making the right decision postponing WC
    Frankly, I don't recall the last time massive quarantine was adopted (it's much like
    the 10-year old movie "Outbeark"). Apparently, this still is not strong enough a
    message for some people.

    Originally posted by Cheung
    5) hospital staff coming down with disease occur when there is: i) lack of knowledge, ii) lack of equipment, iii) lack of proper education within hospital staff (e.g. cleaners), iv) tiredness leading to mistakes, v) sudden increase in paitient numbers.
    [/B]
    This shows that not all medical personnels are created equally. In fact, I watched
    one program (a Chinese one?) that interviewed someone apparently in a position
    of responsibility. He made the point that only a small subset of all doctors and
    nurses are well verse in lung diseases, such as pneumonia. Really, not all "experts"
    are experts.

    When you think you're listening to an expert, question his authority in that
    field first.

    Originally posted by Cheung
    6) social responsibilty is important - don't go out if you are feeling ill!!
    [/B]
    Don't count on it! Anyone rational, or already has that sense of responsibility
    would probably not go out anyway, regardless of any public education.


    Originally posted by Cheung
    To be honest, I think the rest of the world is playing a bit of catch up to SARS, maybe 5 weeks ago I was really worried, hence my original posting in the Chitchat forum.
    [/B]
    Maybe having lived in fear for 5 weeks, you're just too tired now. (Sorry Cheung,
    I know this is no laughing matter, but just couldn't resist in this case).

    Originally posted by Cheung
    So what if SARS originated from China. There are plenty of non-chinese in the countries that have been affected and that have returned to their own countries. These people are just as likely to spread to other people.
    [/B]
    This just proves the point that the disease is commutable.

    Originally posted by Cheung
    Sorry, I just don't buy it the the WC has predominately Asian players and supporters that that should be used as justification for cancellation. That's why I recommended the health checks for ALL people. [/B]
    Only if health check is effective (esp. during incubation when no symptoms are shown). Furthermore, if we're on topic, we're talking about IBF's decision. IBF
    cannot control or institute mandatory health check on every travellers to UK for
    badminton (or other reason). It's the job of the UK government. IBF is making a
    decision given the fact not every single move is under its control.

  9. #43
    Regular Member wilfredlgf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    2,579
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Oh well, it will be held at some other time, no worries. This SARS problem will have to end somehow and the world's shuttlers will be marching their way back to the courts.

    I don't believe that it is worth the risk. Postponement is a GOOD idea.

    Then again, SARS or not, we will all still be here in BadmintonForum.com, right?

  10. #44
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    905
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by Cheung
    That's why implementing health questionnaire's
    Questionnaires are just paper work. They really don't work. Think about
    all the stupid questions you were asked when you checked in your luggages at
    the airport.

    You know what the consequence is if you answer "Yes". If you've the conscience,
    you won't be travelling. If you don't, it's unlikely for you to answer "Yes".

    A system that is based on voluntary participation doesn't work well.


    Originally posted by Cheung
    HK situation is bad because WHO has this thing called a travel advisory alert. That's why hotels are underfilled. Wonder if Dr Ho considered that
    [/B]
    I thought you said "information dissemination" is important. Do you think WHO
    should NOT have issued those advisory alerts?

    If Dr Ho's comments were in light of those economic backdrops, then that
    clearly is a conflict of interest. At the end of the day, it all boils down to
    one's value system. What does one value? If his comments is economically
    or financially motivated, then he might have implicitly put a price tag on people's
    health/life. Furthermore, if one only thinks about the tangible/immediate
    impacts on businesses, what about the financial burdens on health care systems.
    Who's paying the medical bills, insurance payment, social security (if the bread
    winner of a family dies), lost of earning?

    The "experts" are just like the stock analysts. They give stock buy/hold/sell
    recommendations. Some of them really mean business. Other means
    manipulation. You as an individual are still left with the responsibility on who
    to believe/trust. How do you influence ones subjective judgement to help cope
    with this case?

    Originally posted by Cheung
    Aparently, the mortality for other types on 'known' pneumonia is 14-15%...... [/B]
    So new statistics had made SARS comparable in mortality rate to the "known"
    pneumonia. But I still haven't gotten the answer on how preventable that
    "known" pneumonia is.

  11. #45
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, China
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by raymond
    A "medic"? You're a medical doctor?

    Yes. Are you one, too?

    Really, it seems to me understanding of this disease is so new that new
    "evidences" are discovered on a moment notice. E.g.

    1. Treatment (with an antiviral drug) that showed promise in H.K. (?) during
    first week of treatment actually didn't work as well as expected. Symptoms
    worsen in the next 2 weeks.
    2. Death rate globally is more like 15% than originally reported 5%. Who
    knows if this rate statistically would grow higher above 15% or lower below
    5%?

    The death rate for ĒnormalĒ typical pneumonia is actually even higher than 15%, so I am not sure about the point youíre making. There will always be morbidity and mortality related to any disease process.


    Perhaps the world needs to do a lot more than it is already doing today.
    Mandatory screening (what type, and how, BTW? Temperature again? We
    probably need more definitive testing, which I think we can already do; with
    result in an hour or so) for all passengers prior to entering any port of entry
    in the world is probably a good way to cope. But this measure, along with
    recently terrorist attacks, would make your trip to airport (or clear the airport)
    more like a whole day event.

    Well, thatís the way it will have to be from now on. We will have to learn to live with it.


    Now this would be a loophole. Are you flipping coins?

    Not at all, I am suggesting that all reasonable screening measures be taken, but no one in the world can guarantee perfection. So what are we supposed to do, close all the borders?? If itís 100% shut out you want then thatís the only way to go. But this is not happening, so why selectively go after a specific group of people??

    But we can't simply blame it on the people. The question is whether
    there's anything we can do to control/change this. This being human
    nature, perhaps quarantine measures as executed in Taiwan is not
    working well. And there'd be no guarantee it would work better anywhere
    else in the world either (given large enough a group of people is infected
    to strain the system resources).

    Well, I would have to disagree with you there. The numbers infected in Taiwan are far lower than that in HK and HK has managed to get the SARS numbers down despite all the fear of the unknown.

    The key is try to be proactive, try to look ahead and see how you can avoid
    getting into a desparate situation before it even arises.

    Agree 100% with you there. But thatís easier said than done.



    Your comment really puzzles me. While I don't know what UK health
    authorities said, didn't WHO (and CDC in US BTW) advises people to avoid
    traveling to SARS infected places? Why do you think they gave such an advice?
    Common sense would seem to suggest to me that travelling in the oppositive
    direction (from SARS infected places to places not affected, yet) should also be
    controlled/restricted.

    No, common sense would suggest that you screen the people who are travelling in the opposite direction before letting them in. Otherwise go for closed international borders and hide under the covers in fear!


    [/B][/QUOTE]

    So you think it's still not justifiable?
    Perhaps the measures that places like H.K. are taking nowaday are already
    enough and effective. But I'd like to see more long term data (from statistical
    sample space standpoint, I want more samples). My view is that, whether
    people today is too paranoid, and whether any of these measures (quarantine,
    surgical masks, washing hands) are actually effective or not, can only be
    judged in hindsight.

    It may be one or two years from now, everyone that survives would all look
    back and laugh at himeself. But if we're complacent today, 1-2 years from
    now, we could all be crying, wondering if we've a second chance to do it right
    again.

    This to me is common sense! [/B][/QUOTE]

    Washing hands and good personal hygiene is not paranoid behaviour, but banning innocent students from continuing their studies certainly is.

    OK, enough of SARS. Iím off to play badminton!

  12. #46
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    905
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by Cheung
    Sigh, it's not a case of 'will be exposed to virus'. It has already happened!! Other countries have had open travel policy and do not have the widespread situation occuring. Please be rational.
    I might like to add that there are many people travelling around, and yet, we have not seen the widespread snowballing effect as initially first feared.
    Which countries are you talking about? Outside of Asia, Toronto in Canada is
    another place with serious SARS situation. Ever thought about why Toronto?
    In case you don't know, there's a large population of Asians from H.K. One can
    reasonably expect people there commute back and forth between H.K. and T.O.
    often. And look at the statistics.

    Apparently, not all travelings are the same! The statistics you quoted ought to
    look into which parts of the world those travelings take place. Countries like U.S.
    have already come to senses; company traveling to Asians were restricted and
    postponed, again and again, replacing in person traveling with video conferencing.

    Originally posted by Cheung
    As I recommended before, health and temperature checks should be instituted if the WC had gone ahead. It could have taken place, if reasonable precuations had been instituted - [/B]
    As I said on another post, IBF can only decide whether WC should be run;
    it doesn't run the travel/health inspection organization.

  13. #47
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    905
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by colin
    The death rate for ĒnormalĒ typical pneumonia is actually even higher than 15%, so I am not sure about the point youíre making. There will always be morbidity and mortality related to any disease process.
    So which one of you is an expert in pneumonia? Cheung or you? This death
    rate has jumped from originally reported 5% to 15% today in a matter of 1 month.
    I hope this's as high as it'd ever go, but then again, you never know. Furthermore,
    to even begin to comprehend its seriousness, you need to know the rate is
    a conditional probability (i.e. given you get SARS, your chance of survival is 85%).
    But it says nothing about the probability (or controllability) of getting SARS to
    begin with. So how do you contrast the two types of pneumonia?

    Originally posted by colin
    No, common sense would suggest that you screen the people who are travelling in the opposite direction before letting them in. Otherwise go for closed international borders and hide under the covers in fear!
    Yes, screening should be put in place. But again not all screening methods
    are effective.

    Originally posted by colin
    Otherwise go for closed international borders and hide under the covers in fear!
    [/B]
    That may well be what would happen if things get out of hands. You never know

    Originally posted by colin

    OK, enough of SARS. Iím off to play badminton!
    Good for you

    Coming back to the topic. So far most governments in the world leave the travel
    decisions or whehter certain events should take place in the hands of individual
    organizations. Screening for SARS/healths or not are not what these organizations
    can control. They'd have to make their best judgement appropriate to their own
    sandboxes.

  14. #48
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    905
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by wilfredlgf
    Then again, SARS or not, we will all still be here in BadmintonForum.com, right?
    What if some day people discovered that SARS can also be transmitted via the
    internet? Just a silly thought

  15. #49
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    905
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by colin
    Not at all, I am suggesting that all reasonable screening measures be taken, but no one in the world can guarantee perfection. So what are we supposed to do, close all the borders??
    How long do you think it would take to screen all travellers in a busy airport?
    For weapons, and for SARS? Even if there's any means to definitively screen
    passengers, unless the results is instantaneous, we would probably getting
    a rather unmanageable congestion issue.

    So an alternative is to not attract that same magnitue of travellers to begin with.
    Like companies cutting back on travels, IBF canceling major events. This would
    certain ease the airport traveller screening systems, don't you think?

    Originally posted by colin
    If itís 100% shut out you want then thatís the only way to go. But this is not happening, so why selectively go after a specific group of people?
    [/B]
    It is precisely that no one is implementing 100% shut out, that selectively going
    after a specific group of people makes sense. Because this's the most effective
    measure giving biggest bang of a buck, so to speak.

  16. #50
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,664
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by raymond
    How long do you think it would take to screen all travellers in a busy airport?
    For weapons, and for SARS? Even if there's any means to definitively screen
    passengers, unless the results is instantaneous, we would probably getting
    a rather unmanageable congestion issue.

    So an alternative is to not attract that same magnitue of travellers to begin with.
    Like companies cutting back on travels, IBF canceling major events. This would
    certain ease the airport traveller screening systems, don't you think?
    Wrong. Every person gets screened for weapons detection. Nobody complained and it was accepted as something necessary. Health checks should be considered in the same category. How long does it take to fill out a health questionnaire and take a temperature? The same time as it would to fill out a boarding card.

    There are also systems that can detect a raised temperature by just walking through an infrared detector. I don't know the sensitivity of such a method but such machines are now being purchased.

    A temperature taken with an ear probe takes less than one minute to detect and record........Not sure if that can be considered instantaneous.

    Originally posted by raymond
    It is precisely that no one is implementing 100% shut out, that selectively going
    after a specific group of people makes sense. Because this's the most effective
    measure giving biggest bang of a buck, so to speak.
    every time I've been on an plane, my luggage has an XR, I go through a detector. Everybody gets this check. Why not go after groups with known links to groups which advocate violence? Because you can never tell. Same with an infectious disease, everybody should get a health check. Even if people came from US to Asia, they would get a health check and temperature taken in some countries. I say we should do this for everybody and in addition, daily checks for those participants in the WC.

  17. #51
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    905
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by Cheung
    Wrong. Every person gets screened for weapons detection. Nobody complained and it was accepted as something necessary. Health checks should be considered in the same category. How long does it take to fill out a health questionnaire and take a temperature? The same time as it would to fill out a boarding card.
    We've got to do what we've got to do. Agree on that. I don't know if incidence
    of 911 changes airport security on other parts of the world, but in U.S. (San Frans-
    cisco airport, e.g.) security is definitely tightened. You can observed noticeably
    longer line up. What's my point? Some countries' airport resources may already
    be strained without putting SARS inspection in place.

    On the other hand, if filling out a health questionnaire and taking a temperature
    is effective (even if it may be overly pessimistic, resulting in too many people
    detained) in making sure all SARS carriers are stopped at port of departure, I'm all
    for it. This may well be our new reality in near future.

    The question is: From the moment one has contracted the disease (and presumably
    becomes a carrier) to the time symptoms such as elevated body temperature
    develop, is the person capable of spreading the disease. And if there's such
    incubation period, how are we supposed to identify them.

    Checking body temperature would pick up the obvious cases, but I'm wondering
    about the not so obvious ones. We'd not have any statistics on this just by its
    nature (you can't count them in your sample space as you can't detect them in the
    first place). If you can't count them accurately, how do you propose to evaluate
    the effectiveness of this measure. If this measure turns out to be ineffective, we
    are just fooling ourselves into a false sense of security.

    When I previously said it took some time and express a concern of whether a
    test result is instantaneous, I was thinking about a definitive test (??) that I'm
    vaguely aware of. The test would give result in an hour or two. And I was thinking
    if everyone goes through this test, you'd be able to pick them all up, including
    those who haven't shown any elevated temperature.

    This measure, while maybe effective in screening SARS patients, would further
    strain already limited airport resources. So why not everyone in the world do
    his part to not put any more unnecessary load on the system, at least for
    the moment?? Is WC a life's or business necessity? Why would anyone want to
    insist that?

    Furthermore, once again, we're talking about implementing something that IBF
    has no control over... I felt like I'm a broken record talking to some broken
    records

    Originally posted by Cheung

    There are also systems that can detect a raised temperature by just walking through an infrared detector. I don't know the sensitivity of such a method but such machines are now being purchased.

    A temperature taken with an ear probe takes less than one minute to detect and record........Not sure if that can be considered instantaneous.
    I believed that's something (IR detector?) China has implemented recently (I thing I
    saw them in evening news?). Ironically, WHO recently said that China still couldn't
    explain how half of the SARS cases originated. My point? We're still trying to figure
    things out now. All these quarantine, IR temperature check, questionaires may not
    be as effective as people think.

    Originally posted by Cheung

    every time I've been on an plane, my luggage has an XR, I go through a detector. Everybody gets this check. Why not go after groups with known links to groups which advocate violence? Because you can never tell. Same with an infectious disease, everybody should get a health check. Even if people came from US to Asia, they would get a health check and temperature taken in some countries. I say we should do this for everybody and in addition, daily checks for those participants in the WC.
    Yes, there're basic checks that everybody should be subjected to (like body temper-
    ature check and questionaires, if implemented at all). But once again
    there'd be resource restrictions. Not everyone can be subjected to same extensive
    checking. If however this extensive measure is required, then something would
    probably have to drop. From resource prioritization standpoint, the likely cases
    would be the likely candidates to be picked on. No offence. But people from
    Middle East are now on the black list after 911. I suspect a higher percentage of
    them would be picked on in security checking (racial profiling?).

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. BWF defend decision to hold world meet annually
    By ixory in forum World Championships 2007
    Replies: 5
    : 08-14-2007, 04:29 AM
  2. 2005 IBF WORLD GRAND PRIX & WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS
    By cxytdn in forum 2005 Tournaments
    Replies: 0
    : 12-18-2005, 02:34 AM
  3. Chong Wei set to make World Championships debut as fifth seed
    By ants in forum World Championships 2005
    Replies: 0
    : 07-15-2005, 07:58 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    : 03-29-2005, 10:29 PM
  5. String prblem.. did I make a right decision?
    By chungg in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 15
    : 01-21-2005, 11:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •