Huntergonzo wrote: » I think we're heading towards a critical juncture come May 5th. I think one way or another they're going to have to start easing the restrictions because this lockdown is starting to really negatively effect some people's mental health. Now naturally we can't just go straight back to normal in 3 weeks time and stopping the virus must take ultimate priority. However the psychological effects of lockdown are going to have to be considered as well.
Gael23 wrote: » I’m part of a social grouping which involves ~200 people gathering twice a year. We can do certain things remotely for a while but it’s not a sustainable long term solution
KiKi III wrote: » Hopefully they’ll mostly be cancelled for good. Vast majority of them are just pointless jollies for executives. In the immediate term, probably a rise in digital alternatives.
robinph wrote: » A thing of the past. Unlikely to happen again within a couple of years, possibly ever, as why would you fly people in from around the world to sit in the same room with a bunch of other people when you can just do it from home.
Jenbach110 wrote: » Its so alarming that people enjoying themselves has completely stopped, and posters are welcoming that accordingly.
alwald wrote: » Make of my post what you want but I don't make C-19 decisions based on dreams/wishes but rather reality and scientific advice. End of this point for me.
KiKi III wrote: » Hopefully they’ll mostly be cancelled for good. Vast majority of them are just pointless jollies for executives.
Gael23 wrote: » What is likely to be the position on things like business conferences?
robinph wrote: » But at the same time it is also far easier to get information out across the globe or just a country or even city to shut certain things down at a moments notice. If we are prepared to then we can respond far quicker than it was possible to 100 years ago.
Cupatae wrote: » Very good points infairness, i think our biggest Achilles heel is how connected the world is now a days, with travel so readily available to everyone as we have all seen a virus can cross the globe at the drop of a hat.
Cupatae wrote: » Apologies that came across abit more blunt than intended.
alwald wrote: » Well don't be snarky yourself then asking me not to make my own decisions on C-19.
iamwhoiam wrote: » Nobody is asking you or anybody else make decisions on wanting something . I want normality , I know I can’t have it but I still want it
iamwhoiam wrote: » God , i said it twice in reply to another poster . No need to be snarky . I know its bloody tough, and its not any easier when people are narky
Cupatae wrote: » Yeah we know you do, saying it over and over again isnt gonna get you it, we all want normal but its tough **** at the min.
Lord Trollington wrote: » There is anecdotal evidence of scores and scores of people throughout the country being referred for testing by their GP only to never having a test carried out .There was a backlog of 40,000+ people awaiting tests and they changed the testing requirements . This isnt chatter on boards. This is fact. We have no grasp on the true number of cases in the country currently . We wont have a true grasp on how many have had it and are now immune until there is a test for that also. These figures needing to be as accurate as possible will help us in fighting this thing without a vaccine available . Its not boards chatter.
Xertz wrote: » Travel certainly sped it up, but when you look at how widespread and rapid the 1918 flu was, without mass aviation being available, it still was extremely high impact.
Xertz wrote: » It's actually something that we forget was a bit part of life in the old days too. If you consider some of the stuffiness of older generations i.e. not hugging / not kissing / stand offishness about physical contact generally, a lot of that may well have come from the pre-vaccine / pre-antibiotic era when polio (a virus) and TB (a bacterial infection) ran riot through the population causing massive numbers of deaths and disabilities. Have a look back at the 1918 flu for example, and you'll see the precautions were not all that different to what we're doing today and the polio and TB measures were very similar. A lot of our our early 20th century social housing drives, the clearing of slums and also the general push towards 'garden city suburbs' i.e. individual houses and green spaces, was also directly linked to measure around what amounted to clean living / social distancing type public hygiene measures. These things were part of life until the 1950s/60s.
Xertz wrote: » It's actually something that we forget was a bit part of life in the old days too. If you consider some of the stuffiness of older generations, a lot of that may well have come from the pre-vaccine / pre-antibiotic era when polio (a virus) and TB (a bacterial infection) ran riot through the population causing massive numbers of deaths and disabilities. A lot of our our early 20th century social housing drives, the clearing of slums and also the general push towards 'garden city suburbs' i.e. individual houses and green spaces, was also directly linked to measure around what amounted to clean living / social distancing type public hygiene measures. These things were part of life until the 1950s/60s.
Deleted User wrote: » No one is saying we should go back to normal in May. No one. It is just a strawman that you and others keep throwing out What I and many others do expect in May is a broad outline of a roadmap of how we start to get back to some kind of normality. Which industries open first. When the 2km restriction gets withdrawn (which probably goes hand in hand with retail starting to open up) etc. A setting of realistic expectations should also mean that people will do what is being asked of them. You only have to read this thread to see that if there is a further lockdown after May, with no beginnings of a relaxation, then there will be widespread disobedience, which will probably be worse for the spread of the virus than a good level of adherence to a slightly relaxed set of rules It will be especially dangerous for vulnerable and elderly people, for sure. And ICU admittance will rise. But as long as this is within ICU capacity, then it is part of the re-opening balancing act. Which might involve such vulnerable people being subject to other measures to try to protect them
alwald wrote: » This is from RTE: The Minister for Health has said that the more progress that is made over the next three weeks, the more likely it is that Government can begin to tweak some of the restrictions that are currently in place. He said that social distancing is going to remain a "very big part of life", until an effective treatment or vaccine can be found. The part in bold is quite interesting as to what we can expect in the near future.
the kelt wrote: » You see this sensationalist rhetoric is part of the problem. Basically saying the odds of getting back to normality is akin to the odds of winning the euro millions when that isn't the case. And again even if it was, theres absolutely nothing wrong with wanting that. Nothing at all.
alwald wrote: » The point is to survive, protect and help the nation/society go through these tough and unprecedented events. Wanting normality without the virus is a wish just like wishing to win the Euromillion. Accepting life with the virus as well as the unknown next steps, which will be based on data/figures/"new normality", is like playing the Euromillion knowing that there is 1 chance out of X to win...it's reality VS fantasy/dream.
