Covid19 Part XVII-24,841 in ROI (1,639 deaths) 4,679 in NI (518 deaths)(28/05)Read OP

eagle eye wrote: »

There isn't going to be a vaccine anytime soon for this thing so to me there is only one option. Stay in our semi-lockdown statec until mid-June. Make it law right now to wear facemasks in urban areas, shops etc. and to state quarantine all coming into the country until we have a vaccine.
That way we rid ourselves of the virus and can all go back to work and not have to worry about covid-19 in our daily lives.

Stheno wrote: »

Employers will be obliged to provide masks to staff under the return to work plan - problem solved

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

We need mandatory face masks/covers NOW.

JoChervil wrote: »

I know it might seem quite extreme, but if you have to wear a mask for a longer time I would do it in an 1 hour intervals. I would prepare 10 cloth masks and exchange them every hour (putting them in a separate bag after usage), if you have to wear them for so long non-stop.

cnocbui wrote: »

There are people who would have us on lockdown until a vaccine is being distributed. The central banks can't print enough money for that, it is just no substitute for the product of peoples labour. If we wait a bit longer until most companies are literally destroyed through bankruptcy, the only people left with jobs will be the public sector. they will have pocket fulls of hyper inflated euros and nothing to spend them on because the other 80% are all out of work producing nothing.

There is talk of imminent famine that will kill many time the virus' toll.
There are other medical issues that kill people and governments and virus panicers are ignoring that issue and it's consequences.

Some people, including governments, seem to have forgotten the basics: lockdown was to flatten the curve, not erase of it, because you can't once a virus reaches pandemic levels, that's why every easing of restrictions, in places like Korea and Germany and Singapore, sees sudden outbreaks again.

At some point, you just have to face reality and let nature take it's course, and we are about there. There will be worse consequences from trying to outlast the virus than getting back to the curve flattening and attempting to restart what's left of the world's economies.

podgeandrodge wrote: »

The varying opinions on this virus on here, and everywhere else, are testament to the fact that people really all have different perspectives on things, of which I think are a lot down to their personal risk tolerances. Some of us, it would appear, would gladly lock ourselves away, dettol the shopping deliveries, and don a hazmat suit (not referring to posters above) in an effort to avoid this virus, even if they are relatively young with no underlying conditions. They will gladly forgo attempts to return to a normal life because, for them, avoidance of this virus is the no. 1 priority above all else.

If you take a different approach they will say 'It's not about you, it's about protecting the vulnerable other people' - so you are painted as an absolute príck then if you adopt a more rational approach.

Other people, with more tolerance of 'risk', will take a more 'pragmatic' approach to this virus. They will change their behaviours according to health advice in general, while making a personal judgement about the risks - e.g. at the current time, they will accept that current community transmission of the virus is practically zero, and taking walks and doing a bit of shopping is highly unlikely to result in your contracting the virus. And even if it does, you'll likely get over it.

But again, they will be told 'you could be asymptomatic, and spreading it to the old and vulnerable, so you're a príck'. But most of the older and vulnerable aren't around you in the lockdown anyway as they should be cocooning.

The 'lockdown' was never about eradicating the virus and preventing the paranoid from ever contracting it. It was about levelling things to allow the health system cope. It's my view that even when we get to August, if things turned out to be exactly the same as where they are right now, lockdown will ultimately cease - because life HAS TO go on.

Measures to protect the elderly and vulnerable will have to be taken but these will be measures that ultimately do not impact the younger and less vulnerable. Society has to live with the virus for now. Sure, when lockdown is eased, and when businesses where people congregate re-open, masks may be part of the solution, along with common sense hands washing. And public transport, when large numbers being to re-use it, will likely look for masks too.




I agree with above for what it's worth. And many others do too.

One of Britain’s leading doctors has said a New York study showing more than half of coronavirus patients in hospital had been staying at home suggests the UK should relax its lockdown more quickly.

Prof. Sikora, Dean of the University of Buckingham's medical school said the study appeared to show that lockdowns were only “of limited use”.

He said: “It is fascinating that it doesn’t seem to matter if you’re locked down or not. These people were locked down, but have a high rate of hospital admissions.

“Lock down is only of limited use. The risk factors for Covid are age, illness and ethnicity. These have more impact on what you’re going to get and if you’re going to be hospitalised than if you are out and about as normal.
"The community I serve is poor. Most work in ‘essential,’ low-paying jobs where distancing isn’t easy. Nevertheless, the wave passed over us, peaked and subsided.

“The way this transpired tells me the ebb and flow had more to do with the natural course of the outbreak than it did with the lockdown,” he said.



Anyway, back to my original point - some of us are paranoid about this and want current measures, notwithstanding the near disastrous economic impact, to be augmented. Others will want to wear masks on the street, in their cars and in their bedrooms, and will say it's to protect others, not themselves.
Others will say, hey, most people arent' getting the virus, and most of those who do will survive. Society has to accept the existence of the virus and live with it, and I can go for a walk without worrying about passers by. Unless, of course, they are joggers!

Sure isn't it really just like the flu anyway

eagle eye wrote: »

No, we don't have to live with the virus. We impose state quarantine immediately on anyone coming into this country. We make it law to wear facemasks in urban areas, when shopping etc.
We stay in our semi-lockdown state until mid-June and I'd be expecting by then that we'll have had zero cases for a period of time.
Semi-lockdown ends then and we all go back to work. Quarantine stays in place and we have no virus.
I notice you put in rational thinking and alluded to yourself as one of those. You are not, you are all about you and could never be a rational thinker.
I'd like to think I'm pretty rational and not afraid to do whatever it takes to get rid of this virus and not have to worry about protecting all those more susceptible to serious illness or death over this.

eagle eye wrote: »

The plan I've put up there is rational and will get the best results for our whole population.
I've said before in one of these threads that I never ever considered that I could be a good leader of a country but after what I've seen since this thing broke out I know I could do a better job than the current leaders of government in this country.