Relaxation of Restrictions, Part III - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

is_that_so wrote: »

Drama queen! Did I mention 50,000?

You mentioned a spike.

A spike of up to 5,000 people getting infected and 5% of these going to ICU is something we can handle.

We currently get 73 people infected per day.

You are welcome.

Well I had a fabulous day today and I’ll be having a fabulous weekend too. Great to see people out and about soaking up the good weather, relaxed and enjoying themselves. Not a pearl clutcher in sight. For most of the people in my circle we are over all of this shlte now. Just waiting on the rest of the country to wake up so we can actually access the services we need again.

SusieBlue wrote: »

Because their deaths are the only ones being treated as a national tragedy.
Their deaths are being used as justification to continue the insanely drawn out roadmap to easing of restrictions, while the others are never referenced or given any thought, or their families for that matter.

Why are the 73 with coronavirus more important than the 73+ who are suffering one way or another today under current restrictions?

I don't agree with your opinion that it's been treated as a national tragedy and no regard is given to anyone else.

There's coverage everyday in the media about lack of access to cancer screening, surgeries, the toll on mental health. It's clearly an issue, a massive issue.

We had 73 confirmed cases today, 60% of those were attributed to community transmission. So the virus is still not fully contained in the community - a lot has been achieved, but it's still out there.

And considering that hospitals are already known for being hot-spots in transmission and infection and the virus has a much more dangerous impact on those already ill or requiring treatment, then you have to be sure that hospitals are safe places to be for patients. If the virus is spreading in the community, it's going to spread in hospitals. You can't just throw open the gates immediately at let all these potentially immunocompromised people into a situation where they can pick up a potentially lethal infection.

So you have to do all you can to suppress the virus. And that means in practice that procedures don't take place, that wards are closed. If covid is spreading freely these people won't be getting treated in hospital, or they'll be picking up the infection in hospital and being put at greater risk.

And, yes, there will be suffering and there will be people who die on account of procedures and screening etc being mothballed - and that is truly horrible, but there's no good outcomes to our approach here: there's just options that are less worse than the others. You have to think about what approach ultimately saves more lives.

EUROMOMO are a pan-European organisation who look at data relevant to rates of excess mortality across Europe. They use good quality data.

https://euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps

I urge you to look at this. It clearly shows the massive increase across Europe in 2020 of excess mortality, compared to other years, that can be directly attributed to Covid. This disease has killed so many people - the graphs speak for themselves - and most of these people are the ones that already sick or requiring treatment. It cuts through these people like butter. People will die as a result of a lack of access to treatment, but so many more will eventually die if you don't suppress the disease as much as you possibly can.

silverharp wrote: »

cause and effect does not seem to be determined by lockdowns or reversing them

https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1265563344053899265

And to give more weight to the contents of that twee, Switzerland today announced further lifting of restrictions next week. They didn't even have as severe restrictions as Ireland, no limit on travel distances, etc. The second wave seems to be a mainly Irish concern, most other countries are ploughing on ahead and they will be far better for it.

RobitTV wrote: »

You people keep on mentioning "Spike" there is no evidence to back this up.

The virus is on the decline across Europe. Why the misery?

The 350 euro a week is going to run out at some point.

So if we propose something outside your mindset it's something something. I've been relentlessly positive throughout this, and infinitely more patient than some. Your own whingeing about the lockdown would try the best of parents.

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

You mentioned a spike.

A spike of up to 5,000 people getting infected and 5% of these going to ICU is something we can handle.

We currently get 73 people infected per day.

You are welcome.

Again with wildly random made-up numbers.

Doombreak: Watch the Ibiza sunset later on tonight it was incredible last night.

People in Spain back on the beaches without fear.

Arghus wrote: »

The proportion of infected people who have recovered people isn't a relevant figure, if you are looking at your future plans for easing of restrictions. It just tells you that x percentage of people who have had it have recovered - it doesn't tell you anything about how many people it could infect in the future, which is really your main concern.

You mean our healthcare system is our main concern along with ICU beds, thats why we flattened the curve in the first place, as to not overwhelm it?

But now you are saying our main concern is how many infections there could be in the future?

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Not sure if anyone watched the "Tonight Show" on VM1 yesterday, where they had Dr. Tomas Ryan, who stated that Ireland needs a wider range expert committee with medical professionals who are working at the leading edge of medical science and not made up of HSE staff who aren't leading experts in dealing with this health emergency?

What it clear is that with no government here over 100+ days after the election, a sunbathing GP "in charge" that there's a real vacuum of strong leadership in this country with expert groups from employers and workers from all industries in this country missing from the decision making group made up of civil servants....

Saw it.

The government wheeled out Richmond who really crashed and burned trying to answer the questions Cooper was firing at him.

caveat emptor wrote: »

Let me guess.
OK Michael.
I mean Mr O’Leary
Or do I mean bord failte ?
Maybe Mr Vitners

I know now. It’s GemmaJohn isn’t it.

You're the (ex-?)soldier who wanted the army to round people up like cattle back in March. You should be glad now that nobody in authority was dumb enough to do anything like that.

It isn't just business interests and conspiracy theorists who are looking for the un-suspension of commerce and civil society.

Arghus wrote: »

I don't agree with your opinion that it's been treated as a national tragedy and no regard is given to anyone else.

There's coverage everyday in the media about lack of access to cancer screening, surgeries, the toll on mental health. It's clearly an issue, a massive issue.

We had 73 confirmed cases today, 60% of those were attributed to community transmission. So the virus is still not fully contained in the community - a lot has been achieved, but it's still out there.

And considering that hospitals are already known for being hot-spots in transmission and infection and the virus has a much more dangerous impact on those already ill or requiring treatment, then you have to be sure that hospitals are safe places to be for patients. If the virus is spreading in the community, it's going to spread in hospitals. You can't just throw open the gates immediately at let all these potentially immunocompromised people into a situation where they can pick up a potentially lethal infection.

So you have to do all you can to suppress the virus. And that means in practice that procedures don't take place, that wards are closed. If covid is spreading freely these people won't be getting treated in hospital, or they'll be picking up the infection in hospital and being put at greater risk.

And, yes, there will be suffering and there will be people who die on account of procedures and screening etc being mothballed - and that is truly horrible, but there's no good outcomes to our approach here: there's just options that are less worse than the others. You have to think about what approach ultimately saves more lives.

EUROMOMO are a pan-European organisation who look at data relevant to rates of excess mortality across Europe. They use good quality data.

https://euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps

I urge you to look at this. It clearly shows the massive increase across Europe in 2020 of excess mortality, compared to other years, that can be directly attributed to Covid. This disease has killed so many people - the graphs speak for themselves - and most of these people are the ones that already sick or requiring treatment. It cuts through these people like butter. People will die as a result of a lack of access to treatment, but so many more will eventually die if you don't suppress the disease as much as you possibly can.

But at what cost? Where do we draw the line?
We have no cure and no vaccine, so do we continue on this fruitless endeavour to ‘suppress the virus’ indefinitely, at the expense of the quality of life of 99.9% of the population of the country?
How is that fair?

The needs of many should always outweigh the needs of the few.
That’s why we went into lockdown, because 100-250k deaths was unacceptable, too high a number, and we had to do something to try to stop it.
We succeeded yet we are still being asked to sacrifice another 12 weeks of our lives, for no clear cause because the goalposts keep moving.
That just isn’t acceptable and it isn’t sustainable.
Keeping certain industries closed for almost half a year with a negligible amount of cases and deaths is absolute insanity.