nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Relaxation of restrictions

Red Alert

Simon Harris curiously made a comment that there was a limit to how long people could put up with extreme level of restrictions as we currently have. Already we’re seeing in Italy that people are starting to get restless. So two big questions:

1) on Easter Sunday, do you think there will be further restrictions, no change with just an extension or some relaxation?

2) what will be the first thing rolled back?

My own guess would be: extension for at least 1 week. Then to allow some businesses like DIY shops to reopen, perhaps allow gatherings of 2/3 people, maybe a token increase on 2km.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

El_Duderino 09

Augeo wrote: »

There is undoubtedly going to be easing of restrictions. The current regime is unsustainable beyond the 5 week timeline.

Why is this 5 week timeline a magic line in the sand? They can just tweak the restrictions and tweak them back again in a few weeks. Why is this 5 week timeline so important?

Are you suggesting you'd start joining the Travellers and feral inner city children mentioned above, and simply start flouting the laws if they don't change on May 5?

Ace2007

Cyrus wrote: »

if i was over 70 or vulnerable id be making the decision myself to limit my movements, its called self preservation.

easypazz wrote: »

You argument is pure stupid.

Lock everybody down because its not fair to ask the old to wait at home on their own.

Speaking of my own parents they would accept that situation and rather wait at home so their grandkids could have a childhood.

Where did i say we should lock everybody down? I replied to a poster who basically said they want to get back to normal.

Let's look at your parents, what happens if one of those was in a nursing home - and they won't be allowed visitors for the next 6+ months, and you weren't allowed bring your children to visit them until the vaccine comes out - would yo be ok with that? Having say your mother alone in the house with no family contact, and your farther in a nursing home away from his loved ones indefinatly?

El_Duderino 09

Nermal wrote: »

I am simply not willing to accept a life of only 'essential activity' until a vaccine is developed. To accept not travelling, not going to the gym, pub, restaurants, cinema or sporting events. I am quite sure that I am not alone.

But if we do allow those things, suppression will prove impossible. Half the people with the virus don't have any symptoms at all. The tests routinely give false negatives. Contact tracing will not be effective.

Herd immunity is the only option left after suppression is eliminated.

Sure. The options are about how quickly you achieve herd immunity. The quicker you do it the more overrun the health service will be and the more people will die. The slower you do it the longer it takes but the health service can dedicate care to everyone who needs it.

The balance is to have the maximum number of transmissions that the health service can cope with the acute cases. We're probably talking years for that to take place and have at least 2\3 immunity.

If you're not willing to wait that long then you're proposing overrunning the health service and causing lots more people to die as they won't get the medical care they need. Also they will just triage the vulnerable people and give them minimal or no treatment. So they will just refuse a person based on age or pre-existing condition like diabetes and tell them to go home and take their chances. Are you comfortable with choosing that scenario for yourself an your older or otherwise vulnerable family members?

Serious question that I'd really like you to consider and answer.

normanoffside

brick tamland wrote: »

UK possibly due to extend their restrictions for an extra 3weeks apparently. We wont open too much up until the North do too for fear of 1000s of folks coming over the border. Although I suspect the UK government may reduce restriction at a quicker rate when the decide to do so.

The North already extended their restrictions in line with ours yesterday.

Ace2007

KrustyUCC wrote: »

January 1st is only a day too I suppose

Up to Midnight May 4th they will have got 54 days of restrictions or 7 weeks 5 days out of people

The lockdown will have been 38 days or 5 weeks three days

Doing really well folks just not well enough

Flattening the curve but not enough

Sure let's give it another two weeks
Then one more to be sure

Rinse and repeat

Death by a thousand cuts

You can't keep the lockdown going indefinitely

You can't ask doctors and nurses to work indefinitely either - but that's what your proposing, - another poster wants a tent build outside hospitals, lifting restrictions too early could lead us to being worse than Italy and Spain. And the exact same posters would slate the government if that happens.

You look at restrictions abroad and you look at them here - no wonder are rates are rising - you need to be very naive if you think we are in a restrictive state and "lock down". We have posters on here living in Italy and Spain telling us what it's like in real life over there and how lax the restrictions are here.

But in reality - you don't care about that, you just want to get back to normality - but wait you want the sick, vulnerable, elderly and everyone associated with them to put their lives on hold - so that the hospitals etc don't get overrun.

[Deleted User]

Ace2007 wrote: »

So basically Nermal and other posters are saying they won't stay locked up for the next x months because they want to travel, going to shops etc. BUT it's ok for them to ask that over 70s and the vulnerable to stay inside, because that's for the greater good of the country so that the hospitals don't get over run.

Yes. Correct. Over 70s and vulnerable can of course go out if they want. I don’t see anything being mandatory and enforced. But ‘at risk’ people should be aware of the potential consequences to their health

Bit of course even for those not at risk, there will still be a lot of restrictions for a number of weeks / months

easypazz

Ace2007 wrote: »

So basically Nermal and other posters are saying they won't stay locked up for the next x months because they want to travel, going to shops etc. BUT it's ok for them to ask that over 70s and the vulnerable to stay inside, because that's for the greater good of the country so that the hospitals don't get over run.

You argument is pure stupid.

Lock everybody down because its not fair to ask the old to wait at home on their own.

Speaking of my own parents they would accept that situation and rather wait at home so their grandkids could have a childhood.

Cyrus

Ace2007 wrote: »

So basically Nermal and other posters are saying they won't stay locked up for the next x months because they want to travel, going to shops etc. BUT it's ok for them to ask that over 70s and the vulnerable to stay inside, because that's for the greater good of the country so that the hospitals don't get over run.

if i was over 70 or vulnerable id be making the decision myself to limit my movements, its called self preservation.

Ace2007

Deleted User wrote: »

Probably, yes. Though would imagine that it be strongly suggested rather than mandatory. No other option given that we can’t place any reliance on a vaccine.

So basically Nermal and other posters are saying they won't stay locked up for the next x months because they want to travel, going to shops etc. BUT it's ok for them to ask that over 70s and the vulnerable to stay inside, because that's for the greater good of the country so that the hospitals don't get over run.

El_Duderino 09

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Travellers and scumbags don't seem to be adhering at all. Inner city Dublin is full of gangs of kids everywhere as if nothing is happening.
I suppose they were never going to comply to anything anyway but we just have to hope the majority does.

Yeah I was chatting with a mate who's a police officer in the UK and he said his job is mostly going around telling people to go home. He said most people are genuine and the only real trouble is from junkies and children and teenagers who never spend any time at home. They have no experience of being at home all the time and the parents have no experience either.

It's frustrating but there are a significant proportion of them that live in abusive households and stay out of the house as much as possible for that reason. It's not always black and white but Travellers were never going to do what they were asked to do. It takes a certain amount of community mindedness and I just don't think Travellers have much community spirit towards settled people. It's just not part of their thinking.

easypazz

Ace2007 wrote: »

May 5 is only a day, if we have increase deaths/numbers then the "lock down" will continue - i wouldn't be getting worked up over May 5 being a deadline

If that is the case it was a waste of time in the first place.

There will be a backlash if they don't ease something on May 5th.

No hope of them not relaxing things.

KrustyUCC

Ace2007 wrote: »

May 5 is only a day, if we have increase deaths/numbers then the "lock down" will continue - i wouldn't be getting worked up over May 5 being a deadline

January 1st is only a day too I suppose

Up to Midnight May 4th they will have got 54 days of restrictions or 7 weeks 5 days out of people

The lockdown will have been 38 days or 5 weeks three days

Doing really well folks just not well enough

Flattening the curve but not enough

Sure let's give it another two weeks
Then one more to be sure

Rinse and repeat

Death by a thousand cuts

You can't keep the lockdown going indefinitely

easypazz

Ace2007 wrote: »

What are your thoughts for the sick and over 70's? Do they have to restrict their movements as well?

Its their choice. They will know the risks.

Same as if I sit into a car, I know the risks.

[Deleted User]

Ace2007 wrote: »

What are your thoughts for the sick and over 70's? Do they have to restrict their movements as well?

Probably, yes. Though would imagine that it be strongly suggested rather than mandatory. No other option given that we can’t place any reliance on a vaccine.

KrustyUCC

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

There's a doc on C4 tonight called The truth about Traveller crime, imagine RTE showing something like that, would never happen

100%

My next neighbours mother died a few days ago non. COVID-19 related

There was 10 at the funeral

I can imagine if 150 turned up to the cemetery that they would have been dispersed before the burial

Ace2007

Cyrus wrote: »

read the below for what will be happening here starting 5 May

you can fantasise about a full scale lockdown for the next 18 months all you want but it wont happen

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/0415/1130544-coronavirus-europe/

May 5 is only a day, if we have increase deaths/numbers then the "lock down" will continue - i wouldn't be getting worked up over May 5 being a deadline

Ace2007

Nermal wrote: »

I am simply not willing to accept a life of only 'essential activity' until a vaccine is developed. To accept not travelling, not going to the gym, pub, restaurants, cinema or sporting events. I am quite sure that I am not alone.

What are your thoughts for the sick and over 70's? Do they have to restrict their movements as well?

Downlinz

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Now this can be classed as wishful thinking. We don't know IF there will ever be a vaccine, let alone when it will come. We also don't even know if it will be similar to the flu where it can cover 25% of the flu viruses in some years. We don't know. When someone telly you they do know, they're not being honest.

3 years might be a good estimate for herd immunity without overwhelming the health system. You need to consider that the health system will be working to grow capacity during this period which allows transmission rates to increase.

And yes, anyone who says "we're all going to get it" is probably wrong. It would be much more accurate to say "at least 2/3 of us will have to get it unless there's a vaccine and a vaccine is a year away IF everything goes to plan"

The majority will only be infected if we do absolutely nothing to mitigate it. China and South Korea are down to single digit numbers of cases per day with only a minuscule portion of their population infected.

El_Duderino 09

Just try thinking about this scenario and answering what you think should happen:

We know the virus spreads pretty easily and the current restrictions have only slowed the spread.
Any time we relax restrictions transmissions will speed up again.
The health service must not become overrun.
A vaccine may never be available but might be available in 18 months or 2 years.

How do we proceed over the next 3-5 years?

Do we at any point remove restrictions, go back to normal life with distancing, and allow the virus to spread and the health service become overrun?

I've outlined what I think should happen re managing transmissions to achieve herd immunity and not allow the health service to become overrun.

What do you think should happen? Please include the transmission rates and the health service capacity in your answer.

El_Duderino 09

Downlinz wrote: »

No we don't, it would take 3 years + for 60% infection to be achieved without overwhelming hospitals given our ICU capacity. There's a lot of idiotic takes out there but "we're all going to get it eventually" has to be the most stupid.

There'll likely be a vaccine long before then and even if not this was never a suggested strategy for ebola, SARS or any other deadly virus which are very possible to contain which we've already seen in the east for COVID-19.
The only reason to consider herd immunity is if the prime objective is genocide.

Now this can be classed as wishful thinking. We don't know IF there will ever be a vaccine, let alone when it will come. We also don't even know if it will be similar to the flu where it can cover 25% of the flu viruses in some years. We don't know. When someone telly you they do know, they're not being honest.

3 years might be a good estimate for herd immunity without overwhelming the health system. You need to consider that the health system will be working to grow capacity during this period which allows transmission rates to increase.

And yes, anyone who says "we're all going to get it" is probably wrong. It would be much more accurate to say "at least 2/3 of us will have to get it unless there's a vaccine and a vaccine is a year away IF everything goes to plan"

Thelonious Monk

KrustyUCC wrote: »

True they weren't

Still crap like that will be used to extend lockdown for the majority doing the right things and if those idiots get sick afterwards some will need hospital and ICUs

There's a doc on C4 tonight called The truth about Traveller crime, imagine RTE showing something like that, would never happen

brick tamland

never_mind wrote: »

They either give us an inch (extend 2k to 15k, let's say) or most people will take a mile and start ignoring all guidance given. You can't tell billions of people to stay in door for a vaccine that might happen in 12-18 months... whatever about the socially inept Hunger Gamers here, the rest of us want to see our mates and to go for a stroll in a park with them.

No chance, I doubt the vast majority of us will ever get a vaccine for this even if one is produced. If one eventually available, I reckon it will be only for High Risk People and over 70s only. Doubt there will be enough to go around for everyone or the facilities for everyone to get it.

El_Duderino 09

ixoy wrote: »

I think that, as it goes on longer, it could well be a majority flaunting these rules. It won't necessarily be them socialising with strangers but with family/friends at closer than a 2m distance. They're not going to stay apart until a vaccine is produced and/or herd immunity kicks in.
I certainly can't see how we'll expect over-70s to cocoon for that period and not venture out. Saying "they'll have to" won't cut it with how people actually want to live. Sure I see a number of people, clearly over 70, out already.

Yeah those who don't social distance are at greater risk of getting the disease. And more and more people might begin to relax about social distancing and then there would be in increase in transmissions.

Likewise, vulnerable people won't HAVE to cocoon until this thing is over. They don't HAVE to cocoon right now. They will be free to take their chances and accept the greater risk of death if they catch the virus - that's how it is right now as long as they obey the rules.

P.S. I really wish people would start thinking in terms of vulnerable people and not just old people. It's all the people who are particularly vulnerable to the disease.

Nermal

DeVore wrote: »

So, this study basically says "if you arent one of the people at risk... guess what, your risk is low!" Wow. Much insight. Very science.

Not much insight in your reaction.

Quantifying risk is important, valuable science.

We have to mentally counter with data the media anecdotes of young people dying (relentlessly posted on this thread, by the way) with actual statistics.

Admit it, you were surprised by the comparison to short car journeys, weren't you?

brick tamland

UK possibly due to extend their restrictions for an extra 3weeks apparently. We wont open too much up until the North do too for fear of 1000s of folks coming over the border. Although I suspect the UK government may reduce restriction at a quicker rate when the decide to do so.

never_mind

Augeo wrote: »

There is undoubtedly going to be easing of restrictions. The current regime is unsustainable beyond the 5 week timeline.

They either give us an inch (extend 2k to 15k, let's say) or most people will take a mile and start ignoring all guidance given. You can't tell billions of people to stay in door for a vaccine that might happen in 12-18 months... whatever about the socially inept Hunger Gamers here, the rest of us want to see our mates and to go for a stroll in a park with them.

KrustyUCC

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Travellers and scumbags don't seem to be adhering at all. Inner city Dublin is full of gangs of kids everywhere as if nothing is happening.
I suppose they were never going to comply to anything anyway but we just have to hope the majority does.

True they weren't

Still crap like that will be used to extend lockdown for the majority doing the right things and if those idiots get sick afterwards some will need hospital and ICUs

alwald

easypazz wrote: »

Lets be honest, you would like to see Army on every street corner for 12 months and every public park, beach car park, pub, cinema and sports stadium demolished.

You can add publicly flogging those who don't observe the current rules since you are at it.

[Deleted User]

Nermal wrote: »

I am simply not willing to accept a life of only 'essential activity' until a vaccine is developed. To accept not travelling, not going to the gym, pub, restaurants, cinema or sporting events. I am quite sure that I am not alone.............

Cyrus wrote: »

read the below for what will be happening here starting 5 May.....

There is undoubtedly going to be easing of restrictions. The current regime is unsustainable beyond the 5 week timeline.

Cyrus

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Travellers and scumbags don't seem to be adhering at all. Inner city Dublin is full of gangs of kids everywhere as if nothing is happening.
I suppose they were never going to comply to anything anyway but we just have to hope the majority does.

these cohorts dont tend to observe the rule of law in general, it wont be any different now.