tobefrank321 wrote: » If we targeted a billion or a couple of billion euro at the high risk areas such as nursing and care homes, expand ICU capacity even further, use other methods that had success aside from ventilators and also newer drugs, there would be no need to lock down our economy. Some social distancing would have to continue.
boring accountant wrote: » It is possible to prevent people from being pissed in pubs. They do it quite successfully in Canada and the US due to the legal liability issues with serving drunk customers. There’s no reason they cant cut someone off after 4 drinks. This idea that pubs reopening = an automatic return to piss yung wans vomiting in the streets is ludicrous.
What Username Guidelines wrote: » Hows that? If they're correct that we have 10x more cases, so 200k cases, maybe more, doesnt that mean we'd have current deaths x~20, and that assumes we'd be able to treat all those that need treating.
CruelSummer wrote: » Everytime there's economic trouble, people in the private sector come for teachers. Pick up a form and apply for a job in Education. Easy peasy trying to organise daily activities and education remotely for classes, while minding and teaching ones own children. I'm working in Education and I'm dying to get back to work. I think this lockdown is madness and I cannot stand the way children and young people have been treated in this whole situation. It's turning out they're not even the 'super-spreaders' they were made out to be, just picking up infections off parents. I'm sick of the dis-respect from people towards teachers, I personally find parents who post such remarks rude and obnoxious, and whose children have zero respect or life skills themselves. It doesn't do you or your child any favours and gives them a bad name...
lord quackinton wrote: » The uk death numbers are 28734 Population of 66 million Sweden 2854 10 million Just get the average and round up 2500 max
Ginger n Lemon wrote: » I dont think so. I actually think that German government are so confident this is not a deadly disease that they are allowing 22 guys get in close contact with each other for 90 minutes. On 1 corner you ll easily have 18 lads grappling with each other. You are right, 10 players from 1734 tested did have covid19 and are now isolated. And its still going ahead. And thats wonderful. We need strong leaders like Germany have, who are not going to be flip flopping their strategy based on "models" or "estimates" or "dreaded 2nd wave might come, lets give it 3 more months stay at home to save lives and put people into poverty".
hmmm wrote: » Ludicrous? It's a perfectly valid question, and I don't remember seeing any proposals from the vitners as to how they were going to prevent this. If you have inside information please feel free to share.
bettyoleary wrote: » I think the Germans know very well the seriousness of this disease that is a silly and infantile statement to make. They are doing exactly the same as us just a bit ahead. They are very much basing their strategies on models. Merkel has a PHD in Chemistry. She know full well they are walking on thin ice and may need to reverse restrictions at any time. As for footballers they are tested on a daily basis for Covid and they are healthy, fit young men. They are also privileged in that they get the best medical care should anything go wrong. They will be playing behind closed doors, earning millions of pounds. They are not the average bus driver on the 202 in Cork going back to work.
stephenjmcd wrote: » https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1257699161350311937?s=19 And some people here have suggested we keep borrowing long term, unsustainable in many ways, especially more so with this.
Ginger n Lemon wrote: » You are incredibly spot on. Germans do indeed know Covid much better than us. German virologist: Covid-19 is less deadly than feared Quote: a representative sample population within Germany was tested and examined in great detail to determine what percentage had already been infected with Covid-19. The headline result is that 15% of that population was infected, which implies an Infection Fatality Rate of 0.36%. This would put him somewhat in the middle of the previous experts we have spoken to. Professor Streeck was keen to point out, however, that he still believes this is a conservative estimate, and thinks it may be closer to 0.24-0.26% and may come down further still as we know more. He published the higher number to err on the side of caution: “it is more important to have the most conservative estimate and see the virus as more dangerous than it is,” he said.
cadaliac wrote: » Quite happy you didn't teach me, to be perfectly honest.
Ginger n Lemon wrote: » he still believes this is a conservative estimate, and thinks it may be closer to 0.24-0.26% and may come down further still as we know more.
lord quackinton wrote: » If we had not locked down we would have had 2500 deaths max
How many people long term unemployed would you consider unacceptable before removing restrictions 500k 750k 1million
road_high wrote: » The figures are sobering. The speed and suddenness of the shortfall is stark.
facehugger99 wrote: » We have likely condemned thousands of healthy people to an early grave. Health budgets will be slashed for years to come. Screenings, operations, ability to purchase the latest drugs and treatments; all either lost or severely compromised.
Deleted User wrote: » If we look back on this in a years time and it is clear that the death rate is down at that kind of level, there needs to be some serious questioning of the scientists leading this charge. There is an increasing amount of research showing similar outcomes to this, and yet it is not being taken into account at all in the strategies for coming months
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » We need to keep going and push down the rate of infection relentlessly. This will give us a stronger base for the next phase of the resurgence of the virus and we may be able to avoid the worst re-impositions on society.
CruelSummer wrote: » A few things came to my attention yesterday that seem to be glossed over a little too quickly here.. 1. A case has come to light in France dating all the way back to December 27th 2019..if this is the case - person in hospital wards, no PPE, isolation procedures, etc - it stands to reason it was all over France within weeks if it is as infectious as claimed...it also begs the question - how long has Covid 19 been around, and what is the true level of infection in populations and death rate? Was France's peak weeks ago? France is an EU country, with many flights to Ireland...do the maths. All hospitals need to re-examine cases as far back as last October so we can all get a clear picture. 2. If Ireland's lockdown is so much more 'successful' than the U.K., why are they re-opening schools, etc. before us - on a phased basis. What exactly are NPHET playing at here, and who is their advice coming from? I think the New Zealand Prime Minister likes to praise herself a lot - but she makes a fair point re Ireland's lockdown being painfully slow to come out of.. Joe Duffy said earlier Spain are pushing FORWARD their re-opening as they've had no surge. Neither have Denmark...why is this data not being applied to Ireland? 3. The sooner we get a government the better - but if they don't act fast and start lifting this unnecessary lockdown, they'll have no money and no economy to manage. Paschal & co. better not start with the poor mouth worst recession, tax hikes, etc. talk - because I want to go back to work and earn a living and I am not willing to pay for this unnecessary catastrophe. 4. When did we as a population decide it is ok to treat children and young people the way we currently are. Children cannot leave a 2km zone for weeks, now a measly 5km. They cannot play and interact with friends - screen interactions are not a substitute for young children, teenagers and young people are being vilified for sitting in a park sunning themselves...while staying in groups 2 metres apart...has anyone thought of the consequences this lockdown is going to have on them long-term...nearly 6 months of formal education missed on top of it. Pensioners avoiding and acting strangely around children on walks, they will pick up on it and it's not right. 5. Over the course of history - where did any government implement a policy to save 80+ year olds, while putting the rest of their fit and healthy populations inside and out of work - destroying income, productivity, mental & physical well-being. Yes some people are at risk, they need to take pre-cautions. This is stating the obvious to me... 6. How can Ireland afford to donate millions to a Global Bill Gates Vaccine initiative - why were the public not consulted about this?
road_high wrote: » Economic conversations really stepped up today. Regina Doherty on the Covid payment -“this can only be a short term measure, not sustainable long term”.... I don’t think that could be any clearer?
ixoy wrote: » It certainly won't give us a stronger financial base if we don't do it right either. The same base that will ultimately finance all the lock-down payments, grants to bootstrap, etc and not to mention the day-to-day running that's required. You get that it has to be paid for right?
easypazz wrote: » We also share a land border with the country with the most deaths in Europe. 500000 of our citizens live in Northern Ireland. Are there 1 million Irish passport holders in mainland UK (remember they all got them for Brexit) Might we see an influx of Irish passport holders from the UK due to us having eased restrictions before them.
hmmm wrote: » It depends on whether you are happy to accept the substantial risk that we will have to lockdown again within a few weeks by opening too fast, or whether you'd prefer us to be reasonably confident that things can go back to relative normality. Leaving aside the gambling with the health of people and hospital staff.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/07abd39dc4f0afde3c391afc78cc920e.svg)
