Gransnet forums


Should they change the Olympic game venue?

(29 Posts)
whitewave Sat 28-May-16 19:14:49

Just listening to a professor on the news. Rio has the second highest incidents in Brazil. There is a form of Zika in other countries but not the nasty Brazilan sort.

Synonymous Sat 28-May-16 19:18:25

Yes and they should have done it quite some time ago as soon as they knew all the risks. I wouldn't want any of my family going there! It seems a most efficient way of spreading it around doesn't it! shock

hildajenniJ Sat 28-May-16 19:42:24

I think they should change the venue for the Olympic Games. If I was a female athlete I would seriously consider pulling out, especially if I was planning a family in the near future. Does anybody know the long term effects, and how long the zika virus lies dormant in the body? I'd be cancelling my flight and hotel, if I had tickets for any of the events, and blow the expense.

Welshwife Sat 28-May-16 19:47:29

I think it should be changed too and was surprised they didn't do it when the virus was first found to be such a nasty one. So many fit people they are putting at risk.

willsmadnan Sat 28-May-16 19:49:26

I'm not a sports fan, but..... where could they possibly move it to? I heard on Radoi 4 this morning, it's not without precedence as the Womens' Football World Cup in China (?) a few decades ago was moved because of fears of a pandemic, but with the greatest respect to the girls , the numbers involved in those days were nothing like today's Olympics. ... or even today's women's football in the last few years. It's a real problem, and not just logistically .... The obvious answer, if the risk is so high, would be to cancel the whole event but there will be hundreds of athletes who have devoted so many years of training for these 2 weeks in Rio, what is the answer??

GandTea Sat 28-May-16 20:03:04

I think the WHO is being pressured by the financial investors in the games ,come out in favour of continuing because of political involvment. Smacks of corruption in high places.

jinglbellsfrocks Sat 28-May-16 20:06:52

It would be on cruel on Brazil to change it. Bloke on radio says it can last in bodily fluids for a few months so the men should just make sure they make no one pregnant for six months or so. People are travelling all the time.

jinglbellsfrocks Sat 28-May-16 20:07:06

too cruel

Jane10 Sat 28-May-16 20:44:55

It is a shame for the athletes but I was hearing that AIDS transmission was accelerated around the world after one particular olympics. I don't think it should be risked.

Jane10 Sat 28-May-16 20:45:44

Synonymous is right that a decision should have been made months ago.

Anniebach Sat 28-May-16 21:41:33

It shouldn't been moved , people fly in and out of thst country every day, why has there not been a world wide epidemic ?

As for AIDS transmission caused by the Olympics, the athletes must have been so sexuly active I am amazed they had the energy to compete

Anya Sat 28-May-16 22:21:48

The virus is spreading rapidly throughout south and Central America and as far north as Mexico. It's only a matter of time before reported cases in the southern states of the USA and then there will be an outcry.

the spread of the virus by May 2016

Jane10 Sun 29-May-16 09:24:43

Its not so much the athletes but the thousands of spectators flying in to the country and back to their homes all round the world that is the concern. The massive increase in numbers doing this is far beyond the normal volume of air traffic.

grandMattie Sun 29-May-16 09:31:27

Of course, they should. The whole world will be represented - then they carry it back to their own countries! Imagine an epidemic of micro-cephalic children in the already poor and disadvantaged parts of sub-Saharan Africa, the rest of South America and Mesa-America, the Far East.... It doesn't bear thinking.
Though people who should know better have said that it was carried by the malarial mosquito. It DOES NOT!!! it is a completely different type of mozzie.

Craftycat Sun 29-May-16 11:46:20

I don't understand why - if it is spread by a mosquito- they have advised people not to go if they are pregnant & not to have unprotected sex. I heard on Radio 4 that this was the best way to avoid it. Obviously the pregnant bit but why the sex?

inishowen Sun 29-May-16 12:08:16

Golfer Rory McIlroy says he might not go. He is going to wait on medical advice. The whole scenario is like something biblical. The whole world sends people to the Olympics, and they carry the virus back to their own countries.

Tegan Sun 29-May-16 12:17:58

The virus seems to have been around for a long with Ebola something is only being done about it now that it may affect the richer nations. The only thing I did owner though was that, if it inhibits cell growth might it be harnessed in some way to treat cancer which has happened (I believe but may be totally wrong) with thalidomide. I did warn my son not to go to that part of the world for his honeymoon and he did, thankfully listen to me.

harrigran Sun 29-May-16 12:22:37

I think it would be inadvisable to travel to Rio. Zika virus in a healthy adult is usually mild but can trigger Guillan-Barre syndrome. The advice to avoid mosquito bites sounds sensible but the reality of 100% protection from bites is not realistic.

grandMattie Sun 29-May-16 12:40:30

The sex? for obvious reasons.... What if you get pregnant when you have the virus in your body - so avoid getting pregnant. I understand the virus is also transmitted through bodily fluids wink

Anniebach Sun 29-May-16 12:51:46

Impossible to change the venue , and cancel it and years of training by the athletes gone

Wilks Sun 29-May-16 15:20:53

It's a difficult one. Brazil needs the Olympics now, having spent a fortune on it. It should never have been given to the country in the first place but we are where we are. The Games will either have to go ahead there or be abandoned. If they don't take place in Brazil, the country must be compensated. Don't ask me how.
I'm particularly concerned about my son and his family making their 2 yearly visit next year.

grandMattie Sun 29-May-16 15:35:49

I don't think they were planning on changing the venue. All that was suggested was to hold it in a period that had a LOT FEWER mozzies.

janeainsworth Sun 29-May-16 15:59:40

It's only a risk to pregnant women, and is only transmitted by mosquitoes, not diect human to human contact.
Most people who are infected don't even know they have the virus.

I agree with Annie and jingl

Anya Sun 29-May-16 16:18:23

As I understand it there are a lot of these specific mosquitos (A.aegypti & A. albopictus) around but not all of them are infected with the virus outside of certain areas. But if a human carrier of the virus gets bitten by one of these mosquitos then the virus will take hold in the mosquito who in turn passes it on to the next human it bites.

So it's a two way process and humans who become infected in, for example, Brazil, can carry the virus to their home country where it can then spread into the mosquito population in that country,

Jane10 Sun 29-May-16 16:49:42

Irrespective of whether the games goes ahead or not, many spectators are likely to cancel their plans to attend. Hard luck financially for Brazil. The Olympics are not worth it. The clue is in the title 'games' - they are only games which don't actually need to be played! I have unfortunately seen enough of both Guillaume Barre syndrome and Microcephaly to make me feel strongly about this.