Relaxation of restrictions

easypazz

deandean wrote: »

I heard from a person 'in the know': the lockdown may continue for up to eight weeks total.

Is that person saying maintain current restrictions and then overnight everything back to normal?


I smell bullsh1t here.

ITman88

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

400,000 people in the country have asthma as well.

We're also seeing evidence that Covid-19 is impacting healthy young people as well who have no underlying health issues.

Do we really want to play Russian Roulette with people's lives?

It’s arguments like this that have desensitised a lot of people to the current measures in place.

Those people are at risk every day of every year of a seasonal illness.

Are we going to lockdown every Winter and Spring from now on to prevent those groups you mentioned coming to any harm?

Ethereal Cereal

Beasty wrote: »

Interesting commentary from Spain this morning where they seem to be suggesting allowing more "freedom" based on age - allowing the younger generation a bit more flexibility, and gradually increasing the age, presumably in something like 10 year bands.

Hope if we do anything like that it's not dragging on to October:eek:

Alas there does seem some sense in such an approach

<sarcasm>

balls to that Teenagers let lose to roam the streets first, followed by people in their 20's :eek: that cohort do not have a lick of sense between them....

People in the 30's??? eh, maybe, but only after all us in our (early) 40's have been out and about for a couple of weeks, making sure the streets and shops are prepared for the other demographics getting day release. It should be in this order....

40's
30's
20's
teenagers...

</sarcasm>

odyssey06

easypazz wrote: »

The harsh reality is older people and vulnerable groups need to be locked down for their welfare and thus enable the rest of us can get on with things so we can provide for them.

But also, there is only so longer you can lock such groups down for without it having appreciable effects on their welfare - physical and mental health.
They need exercise, social interactions, routine medical and other care etc etc

Otherwise we'll be finding people dead in their homes not because of coronavirus but because of their restrictions.

Pete_Cavan

KiKi III wrote: »

Have you seen any government or health official suggest it will go on for months?

That’s highly unlikely.

The fact is the better people adhere to these measures, the shorter the period we’ll have to deal with them will be.

People who are already calling for easing of restrictions don’t seem to understand that will mean a flare up in the numbers and potentially much more severe restrictions after that.

I don't think anyone is calling for the restrictions to end now, we pointing out that it can't continue for too long. There are practical and economic reasons why things will have to ease. Again, saying "it's been a week" is addressing a point nobody has made.

MadYaker

Simon Harris’ comments suggest the current restrictions won’t last very long. I still expect the current measures to be extended on the 12th though. If we are going to slowly begin resuming some type of normalcy we have to really bulk up our testing and contact tracing abilities so we can keep on top of the virus and keep the number of cases within health system capacity while also allowing more people back to work.

KiKi III

ITman88 wrote: »

It’s arguments like this that have desensitised a lot of people to the current measures in place.

Those people are at risk every day of every year of a seasonal illness.

Are we going to lockdown every Winter and Spring from now on to prevent those groups you mentioned coming to any harm?

This is so disingenuous.

Ethereal Cereal

deandean wrote: »

I heard from a person 'in the know': the lockdown may continue for up to eight weeks total.

And without divulging the safety and identity of your source, how are they 'in the know'.

Or is it, as I suspect, just BS?

ITman88

KiKi III wrote: »

People who are already calling for easing of restrictions don’t seem to understand that will mean a flare up in the numbers and potentially much more severe restrictions after that.

You don’t seem to understand what the restrictions are for.

It’s a temporary measure to prevent overwhelming the health service.

Covid is here to stay, we will need to adapt to life as usual with this disease part of it

timmy_mallet

odyssey06 wrote: »

But also, there is only so longer you can lock such groups down for without it having appreciable effects on their welfare - physical and mental health.
They need exercise, social interactions, routine medical and other care etc etc

Otherwise we'll be finding people dead in their homes not because of coronavirus but because of their restrictions.

Was a Dr. On the radio tother day saying as much as your last sentence. People not coming to A and E for emergencies because they've been terrified by the media/covid

DSN

I know the vulnerable need to be protected but I really feel sorry for older ones living on their own including my own mother, I just drop shopping at her door, she cant even go for a walk, see friends or grandchildren go to church & there by herself all day every day. Phone calls not the same & she never got the hang of facetime. Also tough on families stuck in apartments, & those who've lost income & in fear of losing their business. I cant believe people with their 'sure whats your problem it's grand just stick on netflix & hibernate for 6 months' attitude - lucky for some they can do that & fair play to ye but most humans thrive on social interactions to some level (& need an income to live!) Hope everyone behaves & stays home so we can get these restrictions lifted asap! (& am talking being able to just to out & about locally - not talking holidays or such like have written those off for this year!)

Ulysses Gaze

ITman88 wrote: »

It’s arguments like this that have desensitised a lot of people to the current measures in place.

Those people are at risk every day of every year of a seasonal illness.

Are we going to lockdown every Winter and Spring from now on to prevent those groups you mentioned coming to any harm?

A significant number at risk of ending up in an ICU hooked up to a ventilator?
All at the same time thus choking up the health system?

Ethereal Cereal

MadYaker wrote: »

Simon Harris’ comments suggest the current restrictions won’t last very long. I still expect the current measures to be extended on the 12th though. If we are going to slowly begin resuming some type of normalcy we have to really bulk up our testing and contact tracing abilities so we can keep on top of the virus and keep the number of cases within health system capacity while also allowing more people back to work.

Yea, me too. The most logical progression I can see is these current measure continuing until the end of April, and the lesser restrictions as we saw previously through the summer. Pubs\Bars and nightclubs eventually being the last services to reopen.

shocksy

Ethereal Cereal wrote: »

And without divulging the safety and identity of your source, how are they 'in the know'.

Or is it, as I suspect, just BS?

Exactly, pure BS, and these posts are a waste of bandwidth with these f*ckwits claiming to have a source "in the know".

Loafing Oaf

Ethereal Cereal wrote: »

And without divulging the safety and identity of your source, how are they 'in the know'.

Even those 'in the know' don't know how long this will last...

easypazz

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Problem is Timmy, we don't know the impact on the health system if we relax all restrictions since a significant number of people will require hospitalisation if they catch this thing.

We could overwhelm it easily if we go too far.

Its not about providing adequate healthcare, its about providing adequate supports for them to cocoon and make it as comfortable as possible.

For example, test the children and grandchildren of grandparents, then we know its safe for them to spend a weekend together etc.

iguana

Beasty wrote: »

Interesting commentary from Spain this morning where they seem to be suggesting allowing more "freedom" based on age - allowing the younger generation a bit more flexibility, and gradually increasing the age, presumably in something like 10 year bands.

But you can't allow freedom to children if their parents aren't free to facilitate it. It's normal to have children in your 30s now so lots of kids under 10 have parents in their 40s, for example.

easypazz

odyssey06 wrote: »

But also, there is only so longer you can lock such groups down for without it having appreciable effects on their welfare - physical and mental health.
They need exercise, social interactions, routine medical and other care etc etc

Otherwise we'll be finding people dead in their homes not because of coronavirus but because of their restrictions.

Lots of people are going to die here no matter how its done. If the economic situation is allowed to persist there may be no money for cancer treatment, heart operations, smear tests etc. so in the long run loads of extra people will die anyway.

dsmythy

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

400,000 people in the country have asthma as well.

We're also seeing evidence that Covid-19 is impacting healthy young people as well who have no underlying health issues.

Do we really want to play Russian Roulette with people's lives?

Healthy young deaths, while tragic, are tiny numbers and possible regardless.

I think it's significant that Leo mentioned Influenza death rates a few days back. I've a feeling both governments and their citizens will settle for a virus which can't "outperform" the Flu in either cases or deaths. Eventually that is. After a long period of lockdown then restrictions and presumably the ICU situation becoming more normalised.

TheCitizen

timmy_mallet wrote: »

I think the continued lockdown isnt pragmatic.

Really? Do you think the powers that be will continue with a lockdown that isn't necessary? Do you think they're making these decisions lightly?

MOH

AdamD wrote: »

A week for some perhaps. The old restrictions and the new haven't really been much different for me (and I don't mean that as a positive). Working from home all day, then out for a walk and go to the supermarket. I'm nearing the end of week 4 of that and its not enjoyable.

This.

All the people going "it's only been a week" are part of the reason we needed official restrictions.
Most people I know have been effectively following the current rules for weeks now out of common sense. I don't think I've been more than 1k from home for the past 3 weeks, only time I'm out are for shopping and trying to force myself to get out for some exercise at least every couple of days so I don't end up a heart attack risk.

Feels like a lot longer though, and a lot of people seem to have a very blase attitude towards the effects of long term restrictions on physical and mental health.

yourdeadwright

Why not just keep as we are for another 2 weeks, Then see where the lands lie,

easypazz

ITman88 wrote: »

You don’t seem to understand what the restrictions are for.

It’s a temporary measure to prevent overwhelming the health service.

Covid is here to stay, we will need to adapt to life as usual with this disease part of it

Sadly this is all about managing the death rate, who dies, and how many deaths per day is tolerable and in the long run how many more will die in years to come due to the HSE not having the money to provide for heart operations, cancer treatment, suicide prevention services etc.

This is why some restrictions need to be lifted soon, so that people can start paying taxes that will pay for a health service in 3, 6 and 12 months.

KiKi III

easypazz wrote: »

Lots of people are going to die here no matter how its done. If the economic situation is allowed to persist there may be no money for cancer treatment, heart operations, smear tests etc. so in the long run loads of extra people will die anyway.

Fake news.

easypazz

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Why not just keep as we are for another 2 weeks, Then see where the lands lie,

Nobody expects restrictions to be eased in the next 2 weeks.

Once a faster testing regime is in place it will help a lot.

donaghs

easypazz wrote: »

People scoff at that notion around here.

The harsh reality is older people and vulnerable groups need to be locked down for their welfare and thus enable the rest of us can get on with things so we can provide for them.

Agree. Hopefully Germany makes progress with their "antibody passport" idea. Allowing people who've had it get out working again. Given that up to half of infected people may show NO symptoms, this could actually be huge number of people who've got it and recovered.

easypazz

KiKi III wrote: »

Fake news.

Well done. Great inputs.

yourdeadwright

MOH wrote: »

This.

All the people going "it's only been a week" are part of the reason we needed official restrictions.
Most people I know have been effectively following the current rules for weeks now out of common sense. I don't think I've been more than 1k from home for the past 3 weeks, only time I'm out are for shopping and trying to force myself to get out for some exercise at least every couple of days so I don't end up a heart attack risk.

Feels like a lot longer though, and a lot of people seem to have a very blase attitude towards the effects of long term restrictions on physical and mental health.

And if the restriction are lessened how will you act differently ?

You say your only out to do shopping or exercise , what other reason have you for going out ? restaurants and pubs wont open any time soon

If you really worried about physical health, You can go for a 16 k walk/ run and still stay within 2 k of your home if you go by a 2k radius of your house

CtevenSrowder

ITman88 wrote: »

Most are ignoring this.

It is exactly the elephant!

Officials in the UK did a study last week on the effects of the restrictions and determined a shrink in the economy of 6% is the equilibrium where the economic contraction will cause more deaths.

It’s forbidden however from being mentioned by many posters, you will be accused of immaturity/lack of empathy/not understanding the effects of the virus etc.

Don't forget selfish, self-absorbed, an economic fetishist etc. etc. for even merely dare think of any long term impacts to the economy and its affects. We can only think of now problems, no longer term thinking allowed.

ITman88

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Don't forget selfish, self-absorbed, an economic fetishist etc. etc. for even merely dare think of any long term impacts to the economy and its affects. We can only think of now problems, no longer term thinking allowed.

To many poster were reading Eckhart Tolle!