Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

harvardpublichealthreview.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 213 posts

Re: Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

#101

Post by ChicagoBoy11 »

maxerickson wrote: post #54
ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #45

This article is idiotic if the main reason for cancelling the game is actually some "global spread" of Zika. Rio is not some city in the middle of nowhere from which no flights are coming in and out of, and now suddenly this massive international influx of visitors will come in -- it is a world-class city, a financial hub of the largest country in the continent. If we take London 2012 as a benchmark, estimates there…

I would expect the differences you mention to result in a higher delta for Rio, they would contribute to a lower base rate of travel making the event travel relatively larger.

When I wrote my original comment I certainly had a model that the base rate of travel was pretty comparable to LDN, but I looked at actual figures from a few years ago and saw that it is in fact 5x smaller.

Nevertheless, the 500,000 figure cited would represent a ~25% bump in the number of visitors (if we use 2012 figures). If you consider the area in Brazil most affected by Zika (which would include São Paulo), then this drops to 10%. You then also have to realize that a lot of those visitors displaced people who did not travel to Rio because of the olympics, which is an effect that is widely documented. Taken into account, I think it is plausible to suggest that the real impact of travel that we'd be seeing would be in the low teens or single digits.

But I think it is certainly debatable, and I guess this is the only point I really wanted to make in my comment -- that THIS is really the focus if you wanted to argue that the games ought to be suspended, but that the article doesn't address it in the least.

Re: Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

#102

Post by ramon »

bitL wrote: post #42
cven714 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=if6GLohPq8k Not that incidents like this don't occur in other cities in the world, but it shows that avoiding dodgy areas at night might not be enough.

Copacabana is a dodgy area already and Zona Norte is a warzone.

Imagine further out like Nova Iguaçu, I must have to go there with War Tanks at least so I can comeback alive!

Re: Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

#103

Post by ramon »

fllr wrote: post #43
blowski wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a middle-income tourist who has had multiple holidays in Rio, the closest I've come to being robbed was by a taxi driver that wanted $200 to travel from Corcovado to Pao de Acucar. Seriously, it's like any other city in the world. If you walk around a dodgy area talking on an iPhone, by yourself, especially late at night, then you're asking for trouble. Be sensible and cautious, and Rio is a lovely place to go on…

Not that I don't agree with you... I do. But, being brazilian, the idea of walking around at any time with my iphone out makes me cringe. I love my country, and I think everyone should visit it, but just keep away your iphones and anything of value while walking about, and you'll be fine!

I keep on walking around with my iPhone everywhere in Rio, so has my wife. Never been stolen! I use it everywhere, it's my only phone. Maybe it's because I'm a big guy, the thiefs might be afraid to steal a big guy? but what about my wife, she's tiny.

Re: Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

#104

Post by return0 »

roel_v wrote: post #59
15charlimit wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's an objective unit of measurement. You can't objectively measure (or assign a value to) human suffering.

Except that we do. We assign monetary values to human lives in actuarial models every day. The statistical value of a human live in the Netherlands when considering traffic safety was E700k in the last project I worked on, but this varies by purpose and over time. Furthermore, there are several international standard methods of quantifying the burden of disease, like the DALY and QALY. So yes, we can and we do 'objec…

You mean, assign FINANCIAL value.

Re: Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

#105

Post by dasil003 »

askyourmother wrote: post #5

Come to Rio - watch the Olympians swim in the very dirty water they promised to clean but didn't! Catch zika, then fill out the police and insurance forms after you get robbed! Seriously though, Rio is a very very dangerous place to visit even for brasileros, let alone tourists, and the zika and chinkungya virus outbreaks are not helping either. Watch it on TV, from far away.

Given that you don't know how to spell brasileiro I'm guessing you are not a local and don't even speak portuguese, so I'll take your opinion with a grain of salt.

Re: Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

#106

Post by blowski »

mootothemax wrote: post #95
blowski wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, I'll rephrase to "a lot of other cities in the world" - London, New York, Paris, Warsaw, Berlin, Rome. All of them have their fair share of dodgy places that you should approach cautiously. What city do you live in, by the way? The only city I know of deservedly with this reputation is Singapore.

> Warsaw I'm deliberately singling this one out as a point of pride: Where in Warsaw can't you walk down the street reading your iPhone? I'll concede pickpocketing can be an issue on buses, and racism is very much an issue in present times. Issues with muggings, though?

I didn't get mugged, but I was getting a coach to Radom, and the bus station didn't feel like a crime-free paradise. That said, I've spent quite a bit of time in Poland as well (mostly in Kaszubia), and the only trouble I had was in Krakow (and it was me being stupid that led to it). So no complaints about Warsaw at all, just pointing out that most of the time, I didn't feel any more or less safe in Warsaw than Rio.

Re: Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

#107

Post by ramon »

askyourmother wrote: post #5

Come to Rio - watch the Olympians swim in the very dirty water they promised to clean but didn't! Catch zika, then fill out the police and insurance forms after you get robbed! Seriously though, Rio is a very very dangerous place to visit even for brasileros, let alone tourists, and the zika and chinkungya virus outbreaks are not helping either. Watch it on TV, from far away.

I agree, the waters are dirty! Specially in Lagoa.. it's awful, cannot imagine water sports there!

Re: Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

#108

Post by afarrell »

potatolicious wrote: post #46
EGreg wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is the FINANCIAL impact the biggest one to be considered?

'Tis a good question, and one I keep noticing on HN in particular. It feels like there is a small trend that primarily views world issues via an economic lens. It's pretty common thing around here to see "the business case for doing [ethical thing]", as if being good business is a prerequisite to ethical behavior. It's particular disconcerting when it's applied to widespread problems. Basic workplace safety is good..…

Because we like to assume that the people we talk with are basically good people who aren't just looking for an excuse to twirl their moustaches. So you assume that you're arguing against "I would like to do this, but that threatens my ability to maintain my business and the jobs that depend on it. This evil act is the least-bad option."

Re: Concerns for global spread of Zika mean Rio de Janeiro Olympics must not proceed

#110

Post by nkrisc »

deanCommie wrote: post #23
fhsdfgdv wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

talking on an iPhone, by yourself, especially late at night, then you're asking for trouble. Please don't apply your standards other cities of the world. What you described does not happen in my (capital) city. In fact if you drop something, you will likely get it back.

He said in a dodgy area . Pray tell what is this magical city you live in that does not have a single dodgy area.

Singapore, probably.
Post reply on HN