Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VIII *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

FintanMcluskey

Miccoli wrote: »

I’ve no idea how the same 3 or 4 posters here have the patience to deal with the ones who have just accepted lockdown as the only solution to this problem. Hopefully boards.ie isn’t an accurate representation of the people of Ireland or I’d fear we could be in and out of lockdown every time a few cases emerge in 2025.

I’ll take that as a compliment

Lundstram

Miccoli wrote: »

I’ve no idea how the same 3 or 4 posters here have the patience to deal with the ones who have just accepted lockdown as the only solution to this problem. Hopefully boards.ie isn’t an accurate representation of the people of Ireland or I’d fear we could be in and out of lockdown every time a few cases emerge in 2025.

Unfortunately it is. The media have scared the hell out of people. People like McConkey have free rein to spout any old sh1te and people believe them.

Then you have the folks better off financially WFH, they're delighted with this. The PUP'ers are happy too, most of them anyway.

This hysterical reaction has mainly affected the youth and those in the hospitality industry. The young don't have a voice.

I was and still am genuinely disgusted with how easliy we gave up our freedom.

Too many nodding dogs in this country. I'm glad there's some people that are not accepting this without question.

Penfailed

Lundstram wrote: »

To be quite honest with you, Kunta, I couldn't care less if you believe me or not. Posting an image of my head won't change that. Sure I could Google an image of that and post if I wanted to.

If you don't believe this sort of stuff is happening then you're very naive.

I totally agree.

Miccoli

Miccoli wrote: »

I’ve no idea how the same 3 or 4 posters here have the patience to deal with the ones who have just accepted lockdown as the only solution to this problem. Hopefully boards.ie isn’t an accurate representation of the people of Ireland or I’d fear we could be in and out of lockdown every time a few cases emerge in 2025.

I doubt anyone is in the same sphere of influence to make a difference. It's just an opinion at the end of the day. Like assh*les. Everyone has one.

Penfailed

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

No that’s total bolix.

The argument is to weather the fact Ireland was in lockdown for almost twice as long as other European countries last year was actually cost effective?

And that we are now on track to follow last years pattern, the question is even more relevant.

But it doesn’t sound like you have any interest in contributing to the discussion as you have already made up claims

That's your new argument. All this talk of 'sunk cost' and 'cost effective' has only started in the past couple of weeks.

froog

froog wrote: »

interesting. was there a "harshest lockdown in europe for most of the year" in 2018?

interesting how some posters completely ignore certain posts when it destroys their entire argument. i've noticed this quite a bit recently.

Arghus

Arghus wrote: »

Optimistically I'd want cases to come down to at the very least 100 a day, while you're still trying to vaccinate as many people as you can and then hopefully you'd have the double buffer of relatively low case numbers and the warmer sunnier time of the year to give you a bit of breathing space as you vaccinate first those most at risk of death or hospitalisation - once that cohort is vaccinated the need for level five type restrictions diminishes.

Ideally if we get cases down in the immediate, keep vaccinating all the while and picking up the pace as more availability comes on stream, then we might have a lucky Summer where we don't have to go heavily on the restrictions and by the time Autumn and Winter comes along we'll have enough people jabbed across the population to get on with life.

We're in a shtty time of it at the moment, probably the pits to be honest: crap weather, high cases, high numbers in hospitals, high deaths, massive restrictions, question marks about what's happening with the vaccine - but I think that things will become a lot clearer from March onwards.

That’s my optimistic prediction. I have a middling and a negative one too, but, fck it - it's a Saturday night.

I don’t think we’ll ever agree on the Covid front.
But I appreciate the effort you put into your posts.
There are things I agree and disagree with.
But it’s getting late/early so hopefully can come back to this tomorrow

Miccoli

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I doubt anyone is in the same sphere of influence to make a difference. It's just an opinion at the end of the day. Like assh*les. Everyone has one.

To be honest I disagree completely. If the popular opinions turns against restrictions I think they’ll go away rather quickly, for example Italy which suffered the most coverage etc in the early days of Covid has now reduced restrictions due to the restaurants opening up and public opinion turning against restrictions.

Arghus

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Why have you picked a figure of 100 cases a day?

Ideally you'd want as low as possible. Zero if you could!

But we aren't pursuing an elimintion strategy so that isn't going to happen

There's a lot of people here that would argue 100 is too high - and I wouldn't entirely disagree with them - but it's going to take a while to get to 100 in and of itself, but you'd hope that roughly around that figure would be enough with level 3ish restrictions and a warmer environment to try to maintain it

But that's a big question that no-one knows the answer too, I wouldn't quibble with anyone who thinks 100 is too high. But if I say 50,or 10, or 5 - people will become fixated on that number and disregard everything else I write. Whatever way you cut it we need to get the numbers down pretty fckin' low.

Also, I'm not an epidemiologist or a member of the government or NPHET, I'm just spitballin' here.

How does vaccination of vulnerable remove need for level 5 restrictions?

Let's say if you broadly use the criteria of the over 65's and their carers and medical professionals and people with serious illness as the "vulnerable" and co if you can remove the risk of serious illness and death in a large proportion of those from Covid through vaccinations then the likelihood of hospitals quickly becoming overwhelmed and all the resultant chaos that causes diminishes substantially - to the point where you might be able to manage a certain amount of cases you otherwise wouldn't.

Restrictions of some sort will remain for a good proportion of the year, perhaps the whole year - we may catch a break - but I would hope that we vaccinate more and more people they can be gradually unwound and we can live again.

PTH2009

When this dies down (hopefully sooner rather than later) we will see 'government resignations' left right and center and then the 'tell all books and LLS interviews' will come once again painting them as heros

FintanMcluskey

froog wrote: »

interesting how some posters completely ignore certain posts when it destroys their entire argument. i've noticed this quite a bit recently.

You repeatedly talk to yourself, do you realise that?

froog

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

You repeatedly talk to yourself, do you realise that?

would you care to respond to the comment? or just ignore it?

Lundstram

froog wrote: »

would you care to respond to the comment? or just ignore it?

You respond to comments with ":pac:" "lol " and "haha".

Why should anyone respond to you in a meaningful way?

Arghus

Deleted User wrote: »

I don’t think we’ll ever agree on the Covid front.
But I appreciate the effort you put into your posts.
There are things I agree and disagree with.
But it’s getting late/early so hopefully can come back to this tomorrow

Yeah, it's fair to say we disagree a lot.

But, at the end of the day we all want to get through it one way or the other.

Unless you are mad in the fckin head you want this crap to go away. We all miss our old lives.

Lundstram

Arghus wrote: »

Yeah, it's fair to say we disagree a lot.

But, at the end of the day we all want to get through it one way or the other.

Unless you are mad in the fckin head you want this crap to go away. We all miss our old lives.

This. I really hope this situation we are in right no is as bad as it gets and life will gradually return to normal by 2022.

And hopefully never see anything like it again.

FintanMcluskey

Arghus wrote: »

Ideally you'd want as low as possible. Zero if you could!

But we aren't pursuing an elimintion strategy so that isn't going to happen

There's a lot of people here that would argue 100 is too high - and I wouldn't entirely disagree with them - but it's going to take a while to get to 100 in and of itself, but you'd hope that roughly around that figure would be enough with level 3ish restrictions and a warmer environment to try to maintain it

But that's a big question that no-one knows the answer too, I wouldn't quibble with anyone who thinks 100 is too high. But if I say 50,or 10, or 5 - people will become fixated on that number and disregard everything else I write. Whatever way you cut it we need to get the numbers down pretty fckin' low.

Also, I'm not an epidemiologist or a member of the government or NPHET, I'm just spitballin' here.



Let's say if you broadly use the criteria of the over 65's and their carers and medical professionals and people with serious illness as the "vulnerable" and co if you can remove the risk of serious illness and death in a large proportion of those from Covid through vaccinations then the likelihood of hospitals quickly becoming overwhelmed and all the resultant chaos that causes diminishes substantially - to the point where you might be able to manage a certain amount of cases you otherwise wouldn't.

Restrictions of some sort will remain for a good proportion of the year, perhaps the whole year - we may catch a break - but I would hope that we vaccinate more and more people they can be gradually unwound and we can live again.

That’s all fair enough Argus.

But at some point this year or next year we need to quantify the numbers that will allow some restrictions to be lifted.

How many deaths or hospital cases are acceptable?

Community transmission is a different metric

Before anyone suggests, I’ve accepted masks and socials distancing for a long time, I’m referring to level 2 restrictions in Ireland

I’m not asking to let it rip

FintanMcluskey

Arghus wrote: »

Yeah, it's fair to say we disagree a lot.

But, at the end of the day we all want to get through it one way or the other.

Unless you are mad in the fckin head you want this crap to go away. We all miss our old lives.

But this isn’t what you were saying up to now Argus?

You accused people of wanting normality as being a mess?

Now you weren’t the only one, but longing for normality became a crime for many posters

Arghus

Lundstram wrote: »

This. I really hope this situation we are in right no is as bad as it gets and life will gradually return to normal by 2022.

And hopefully never see anything like it again.

I'm reasonably optimistic that right now is the absolute worst period of this.

It’s not going to be plain sailing, there'll be bumps in the road, but I do think - I hope - that vaccination will play a bigger part of our way out as the year goes on.

I honestly don't think next late Autumn and Winter is going to be like this.

froog

Lundstram wrote: »

You respond to comments with ":pac:" "lol " and "haha".

Why should anyone respond to you in a meaningful way?

do you still think a third of all covid cases are caught in hospitals?

Arghus

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

But this isn’t what you were saying up to now Argus?

You accused people of wanting normality as being a mess?

Now you weren’t the only one, but longing for normality became a crime for many posters

Yes, normality when there's no risk of the disease surging up again and thousands of people dying from it and ICU'S being full up.

I don't think people are a mess for wanting normality - it's a completely understandable thing - but I take issue with people demanding normality that disregard or ignore the inevitable implications of normality currently - referred to in my first paragraph - in the context of a highly infectious pandemic.

Penfailed

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

You must base your limited opinion on something?

I have based my opinion on the metrics indicated for schools to return

Have the metrics been published?

Kunta Kinte

PTH2009 wrote: »

When this dies down (hopefully sooner rather than later) we will see 'government resignations' left right and center and then the 'tell all books and LLS interviews' will come once again painting them as heros

Why do you think there will be "government resignations left, right and centre"?

Bumpstop

I am like a usually good in a crisis person.
I am not emotional and try to make level headed decisions on the available evidence.
I can see more restrictions lower the numbers, and was surprised by the Christmas spike.
But Four more weeks of this, at least.

Now, the no1 engine fire just got worse, the rudder is shot to hell, the crew are bailing out as I speak.
I am starting to stall, pushing the stick into the firewall, full right aileron, rudder pedal jammed into the floor.
But she's rolling to the left.
She's rolling over on to her back, pressed into the seat, I can hear the wing spar creaking.
The altimeter is unwinding and I can see the ocean.

The dives are getting harder to pull out of.

FintanMcluskey

Arghus wrote: »

Yes, normality when there's no risk of the disease surging up again and thousands of people dying from it and ICU'S being full up.

I don't think people are a mess for wanting normality - it's a completely understandable thing - but I take issue with people demanding normality that disregard or ignore the inevitable implications of normality currently - referred to in my first paragraph - in the context of a highly infectious pandemic.

But you still haven’t quantified an acceptable level of hospital cases and deaths.

Is it 0?

If it’s not, wouldn’t this highly transmissible disease become rampant in a short amount of time?

Edit: I’m not asking to let it rip

FintanMcluskey

Penfailed wrote: »

Have the metrics been published?

Yeah . Last year’s metrics

Edit: I’m not asking to let it rip

copeyhagen

Arghus wrote: »

Yes, normality when there's no risk of the disease surging up again and thousands of people dying from it and ICU'S being full up.

I don't think people are a mess for wanting normality - it's a completely understandable thing - but I take issue with people demanding normality that disregard or ignore the inevitable implications of normality currently - referred to in my first paragraph - in the context of a highly infectious pandemic.

thousands dead.. im sorry, but more or less 3k 82 year olds in nursing homes have died.

yes its tragic, but there arent healthy people dropping dead in the streets...

we didnt protect the vulnerable, which is awful, but here we are, a year later, its no more dangerous to the 99% of us now than it was then, despite what RTE news and their 58 new varients might tell you.

FintanMcluskey

copeyhagen wrote: »

thousands dead.. im sorry, but more or less 3k 82 year olds in nursing homes have died.

yes its tragic, but there arent healthy people dropping dead in the streets...

we didnt protect the vulnerable, which is awful, but here we are, a year later, its no more dangerous to the 99% of us now than it was then, despite what RTE news and their 58 new varients might tell you.

But this argument has became the PC equivalent of boiling kittens in a saucepan

When can we have an adult conversation about deaths occurring above the age of life expectancy?

Edit:I’m not asking to let it rip

froog

froog wrote: »

do you still think a third of all covid cases are caught in hospitals?

No? Thought so. Lads if you come out with outlandish nonsense at least have the balls to defend your statements.

copeyhagen

froog wrote: »

No? Thought so. Lads if you come out with outlandish nonsense at least have the balls to defend your statements.

so it was 50% per govt/nphet...then 30%.

what are we saying it is now then? im serious

cheezums

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

But this argument has became the PC equivalent of boiling kittens in a saucepan

When can we have an adult conversation about deaths occurring above the age of life expectancy?

Edit:I’m not asking to let it rip

what does boiling kittens in a saucepan mean?