Relaxation of Restrictions, Part III - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

SusieBlue

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That's the name of the virus. How is that in anyway patronising?

Well firstly, 99.9% of people both here, elsewhere online, in the media and on the news are referring to it as covid-19/coronavirus, so there isn’t really a need for you to establish your dominance by correcting someone for not calling it the full clinical name.

And referring to someone who clearly isn’t your mate as ‘mate’ is self explanatory. It isn’t isn’t the first time you’ve done it on this thread either, ‘old chum’, etc.
It’s beyond patronising and condescending.

polesheep

road_high wrote: »

Can see a pattern with this angry little poster alright...I was in their heads apparently "jealous" of them a few days when I took them to task for bragging about all the extra overtime they were creaming off the taxpayers out of this shambles.
Sussed they were a Pharmacist alright, in the ex TD Kate O'Connell tradition some tend to be self-appointed authorities on all things medical, despite not being Medical Doctors.

I refuse to believe that anyone with such a poor grasp of English as that poster could become a pharmacist.

LiquidZeb

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hmmm. Were they still claiming the 350 euro a week whilst serving beer? Seems a bit.... fraudulent.

How do you know they were claiming anything? Bit unfair to accuse them of fraud. Next you'll start frothing at the mouth if they took your precious masks like you did Friday.

road_high

road_high wrote: »

Can see a pattern with this angry little poster alright...I was in their heads apparently "jealous" of them a few days when I took them to task for bragging about all the extra overtime they were creaming off the taxpayers out of this shambles.
Sussed they were a Pharmacist alright, in the ex TD Kate O'Connell tradition some tend to be self-appointed authorities on all things medical, despite not being Medical Doctors.

I'm in no way angry, a bit frustrated maybe. So only doctors can have opinions on medication/treatment. Sure, why do we have pharmacists at all?

Curious why you think the HSE would consider hiring pharmacists in that case? We would be an awful expensive waste of money.

SusieBlue

SusieBlue wrote: »

Well firstly, 99.9% of people both here, elsewhere online, in the media and on the news are referring to it as covid-19/coronavirus, so there isn’t really a need for you to establish your dominance by correcting someone for not calling it the full clinical name.

And referring to someone who clearly isn’t your mate as ‘mate’ is self explanatory. It isn’t isn’t the first time you’ve done it on this thread either, ‘old chum’, etc.
It’s beyond patronising and condescending.

You don't test positive for COVID-19, that's a disease. You test positive for the virus, SARS-CoV-2. It's in no way belittling to refer to it correctly. Awwh, I feel that poster and I have a bit of camaraderie at this stage. I'll refrain from anything that could be construed as endearing going forward.

Beasty

Right - warning to everyone - if you cannot be civil don't post. If any of you continue being uncivil you can expect to lose posting privileges

stephenjmcd

niallo27 wrote: »

By few pints do you mean a few cans, genuine question.

Nope, actual pints in proper pint glasses none of that plastic cup rubbish. Collect the food from the off licence door, they've full off licence available and then pints of Heineken or Guinness available.

robbiezero

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You don't test positive for COVID-19, that's a disease. You test positive for the virus, SARS-CoV-2. It's in no way belittling to refer to it correctly. Awwh, I feel that poster and I have a bit of camaraderie at this stage. I'll refrain from anything that could be construed as endearing going forward.

What county is the 300% increase in today?

Beasty

robbiezero wrote: »

What county is the 300% increase in today?

You do realise there's a delay in reporting all these figures due to the checks being undertaken? Indeed there are regularly dips in weekend figures due to delays in reporting

KrustyUCC

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Nope, actual pints in proper pint glasses none of that plastic cup rubbish. Collect the food from the off licence door, they've full off licence available and then pints of Heineken or Guinness available.

Pints in plastic glasses just isn't the same

Great to support local businesses

mcsean2163

macnug wrote: »

Like a normal summers Friday evening out there with kids playing etc. Getting very hard to convince the kids to stay in now. Cars out everywhere lockdown is faltering imo.

I agree, my wife is frontline and we've been adhering to the rules but it's starting to feel like the only ones who are doing it are the families of frontline staff. Really worried for our kids at this stage.

robbiezero

Beasty wrote: »

You do realise there's a delay in reporting all these figures due to the checks being undertaken? Indeed there are regularly dips in weekend figures due to delays in reporting

Yep. Still interested to know. I am fully aware the figures may not be in todays report.

statesaver

mcsean2163 wrote: »

I agree, my wife is frontline and we've been adhering to the rules but it's starting to feel like the only ones who are doing it are the families of frontline staff. Really worried for our kids at this stage.

Why, no kids have died ? Schools are opening in other countries.

ArmaniJeanss

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Plenty of pubs doing it so not sure what exactly is illegal.

Terms of the license would probably specify a premises that the sales must take place from. Paying via card from home and getting it delivered would likely contravene that.
It could also be a stipulation of the license that the drink must be consumed on the premises, to prevent street drinking when the weather is nice.

So it probably is technically illegal, but also definitely something that you'd have thought a blind eye could be turned towards.

I'd guess that, for whatever reason, the pub in question was probably not on good terms with the gardai even before the pandemic.

JoeExotic81

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You don't test positive for COVID-19, that's a disease. You test positive for the virus, SARS-CoV-2. It's in no way belittling to refer to it correctly. Awwh, I feel that poster and I have a bit of camaraderie at this stage. I'll refrain from anything that could be construed as endearing going forward.

You're having a bad day on here chum. Careful, you are reaching "hairdressers are killing people" levels buddy. Maybe give the aul internet a rest pal. You're seemingly wrecked after doing all those big calculations mate.

GocRh

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

There are suspicions that the 14 day quarantine "law" is easily reversed should you end up in court. Similar rulings have had already happened.

PS there is EU law as well that grants you, as an EU citizen, good few powers then you move around EU, I think EU law could supersede but i am not solicitor

"BERLIN — A court in one German state has suspended rules requiring people arriving in the country after a stay abroad to self-quarantine for 14 days.

The decision announced Monday night by the upper administrative court in Lower Saxony applies only to that northern region. Judges acted on a complaint by a man who owns a holiday house in southern Sweden.

The court found there were no grounds for a blanket requirement for all people arriving from all countries to go into quarantine.
"

No such thing as a quarantine law in Ireland. There's no legislation to support quarantine and as a result all that the government can do is request a voluntary 14 day self isolation.

I've myself recently returned back home, and I have followed the self isolation recommendation. Formal 'enforcement' consisted of a follow up call 2 days after my arrival to ask if I was following the HSE self isolation recommendation. That was the exact wording from the Gardai officer that called - HSE recommendation. Not a law or rule.

It seems that 1/3 of passengers arriving in Dublin airport simply refused to provide any contact information, and there's nothing that the government can do about it.

stephenjmcd

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Terms of the license would probably specify a premises that the sales must take place from. Paying via card from home and getting it delivered would likely contravene that.
It could also be a stipulation of the license that the drink must be consumed on the premises, to prevent street drinking when the weather is nice.

So it probably is technically illegal, but also definitely something that you'd have thought a blind eye could be turned towards.

I'd guess that, for whatever reason, the pub in question was probably not on good terms with the gardai even before the pandemic.

Could well be the case. I know of 2 near me doing it. One for the last 2 weeks without issue anyway, one doing delivery and the other not doing delivery.

But like you say blind eye probably being turned.

ZX7R

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hmmm. Nice misconstruing of my messages. The hospital I work in had 300% increase in SARS-CoV-2 + cases.
Why would I hear it from anybody else, I was in work at the weekend. It was discussed at bronze command.

My hospital doesn't have transplant facilities (bone marrow excluded) but there isn't any Chinese whispers as in my relstion to my hospital, I seen the data about SARS-CoV-2 + and the person looking after the transplant patient, I spoke directly to. It came up as aside to clinical query I was contacted about.

Hope that's clears up your confusion.

It does not clear up the confusion.
Of the 3 specialized units used for transplants located in 3 different hospitals
None reported an increase to the percentage you are state according to any figures I can find official or none official

Beasty

ZX7R wrote: »

It does not clear up the confusion.
Of the 3 specialized units used for transplants located in 3 different hospitals
None reported an increase to the percentage you are state according to any figures I can find official or none official

Drop the point. I've already explained above why those figures are almost certainly not in the figures yet

Del Griffith

Strumms wrote: »

Natural in some people but not acceptable, complacency and carelessness as well as selfishness are the things that can fûck this up... so let’s not run with the ‘natural’ attitude, no excuses, for anyone.

You come across as one of these people that lives in the fantasy that we will have zero cases before restrictions can be lifted but thats not the case. All the curtain twitching and loud tutting in the world won't change the fact that as per the plan, people are supposed to get this virus.

Selfish is expecting to continue an indefinite lockdown that the next several generations will pay for through debt slavery. As long as the vulnerable remain cucooned and the likes of nursing homes are protected then I'm glad to see people starting to get back to normal, the sooner and swifter the better imo.

Beasty

The topic is "Relaxation of Restrictions" - now back on it

SusieBlue

SusieBlue wrote: »

Are posts disappearing or am I imagining things?

Some I'm submitting aren't even showing up now.

I imagine OT posts are being removed, fine, but there's someone in here strawmanning the f**k out of this thread and it's hard not to reply to such.

prunudo

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Is the list of outdoor professions that can work from Tomorrow available anywhere?

The only thing I found on the government website was a false link purporting to lead to the list.

Yes, I'd like to know this too, can't find a proper link on gov.ie

Beasty

JoeExotic81 wrote: »

Kinda hilarious it's so blatantly obvious, right chum?

Threadbanned

Beasty

And yes posts that are off topic, questioning mod instructions or ignoring such instructions are being deleted

Any questions PM me

I do think that wearing masks in public is essential to relaxing the restrictions. But that can't be done until we can guarantee a supply to health care professionals. Realistically, we need to have that sorted in next couple of weeks or phase 2 will be risky.

ceadaoin.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I do think that wearing masks in public is essential to relaxing the restrictions. But that can't be done until we can guarantee a supply to health care professionals. Realistically, we need to have that sorted in next couple of weeks or phase 2 will be risky.

How long have the HSE had to sort this out though? If people can buy their own masks either online or in pharmacies as per the mask thread, then why the heck haven't the hse been able to source enough at this stage? Thats not the fault of the general public and they shouldn't have to stay under restrictions for even longer just because the hse can't pull their finger out

ceadaoin.

ceadaoin. wrote: »

How long have the HSE had to sort this out though? If people can buy their own masks either online or in pharmacies as per the mask thread, then why the heck haven't the hse been able to source enough at this stage? Thats not the fault of the general public and they shouldn't have to stay under restrictions for even longer just because the hse can't pull their finger out

Like I said, I know very little.of procurement outside medications but we are finding it difficult to source PPE. I don't care about myself really, it's the patients I'm.concerned for. Maybe it is the Hoses fault but people.bulk ordering PPE for a hair cut months in advance of opening makes it difficult to treat patients safely now

SusieBlue

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Like I said, I know very little.of procurement outside medications but we are finding it difficult to source PPE. I don't care about myself really, it's the patients I'm.concerned for. Maybe it is the Hoses fault but people.bulk ordering PPE for a hair cut months in advance of opening makes it difficult to treat patients safely now

As was explained the other night, hairdressers thought they would be allowed reopen after the 5th of May and planned accordingly.
When they sourced these supplies over the last 6 weeks, they had no idea that the government was planning to prevent them from opening till the 20th of July.
They were taking appointments and getting their salons ready to reopen this month.

They did what any sensible business owners would do and made provisions so that they could operate safely, as per government recommendations.
They did absolutely nothing wrong by procuring these supplies and equipment. They were obviously blindsided by the governments decision to include them in phase 4 of the roadmap and that isn’t their fault either.

LessOutragePlz

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Like I said, I know very little.of procurement outside medications but we are finding it difficult to source PPE. I don't care about myself really, it's the patients I'm.concerned for. Maybe it is the Hoses fault but people.bulk ordering PPE for a hair cut months in advance of opening makes it difficult to treat patients safely now

Are you really that deluded?

You do realise that we were competing with nearly every other European country that also had PPE shortages as well as many other countries outside the EU.

The impact of some hairdressers ordering some PPE equipment would be minuscule in the grand scheme of things. They wouldn't even need more than 50 to 100 sets of PPE. That's a drop in the ocean compared to the millions of euro of worth PPE that was delivered here.

Do you really think some hairdressers ordering some PPE had a significant and noticable negative impact on the HSE's ability to acquire an adequate amount of PPE?