Covid 19 Part XXIV-37,063 ROI (1,801 deaths) 12,886 NI (582 deaths) (02/10) Read OP

Busi_Girl08 · 02-10-2020 11:45AM

JDD wrote: »

I suspect we won't get it too, because it means shelving the "Living with Covid" plan two months after publishing it and I don't think MM can lose that kind of face.

I think that ship has sailed, given that NPHET have been picking it apart before it even started.

JDD · 02-10-2020 11:48AM

polesheep wrote: »

They were only easy to enforce because they didn't really have to be enforced, as there was a buy-in from the public. That was before young people decided that they had had enough, along with other sections of society. Take a look around you, almost everyone is breaking the restrictions that are currently in place. Some people are adhering to some of them, but the public is being selective.

Polesheep, I think you are right. I don't think we'll ever get the level of buy in that we got in March for a full lockdown - even if it's only for three weeks. There'll be no rainbows in windows and clapping for health care workers and family zoom table quizzes. But that was an unprecedented level of co-operation. I have never seen Irish people comply with any law (or indeed, as it was at the time, guidance) so wholeheartedly in my entire life. I never would have thought it was even possible here. We have a well documented "elastic" relationship with rules.

We have fatigue now. That's very clear. But we have to really think about how that fatigue started, and why.

There is of course a sense that we can't continue like this forever. We can't continue not going to restaurants or cinemas or gyms, or not having communion parties or meeting people in the pub. The Living with Covid plan pretty much says that's what we're going to have for another 6-9 months.

But neither can we turn around and say feck it, open everything and make over 70's stay in their houses for the next 9 months. They'll kill themselves. That's stark, but that's the reality. My father is not depressive or pessimistic in normal times, but cocooning nearly drove my mother and him mental. He said he's not sure how he would have coped if it had been for a longer period, and many of his friends said the same thing.

We'll build field tents onto hospitals to deal with the hospitalisations and we'll accept that not only will old people and unhealthy people die but young and middle aged healthy people will also die from car crashes and sports injuries and regular old infections because we will not have the staff or facilities to provide them with basic healthcare.

So what do we do? Continue with the halfway house of restrictions that clearly aren't working and are crushing our economy. Open everything and cope with the horror that may entail. Or try something different?

The something different may actually get better buy in (not March standards, but better than now), because it is clear, and easily understood. And while nobody really wants to make anymore sacrifices, I think it's easier to comply with something if it's more pain in a short period of time, rather than medium pain for an indefinite period.

polesheep · 02-10-2020 11:57AM

JDD wrote: »

Polesheep, I think you are right. I don't think we'll ever get the level of buy in that we got in March for a full lockdown - even if it's only for three weeks. There'll be no rainbows in windows and clapping for health care workers and family zoom table quizzes. But that was an unprecedented level of co-operation. I have never seen Irish people comply with any law (or indeed, as it was at the time, guidance) so wholeheartedly in my entire life. I never would have thought it was even possible here. We have a well documented "elastic" relationship with rules.

We have fatigue now. That's very clear. But we have to really think about how that fatigue started, and why.

There is of course a sense that we can't continue like this forever. We can't continue not going to restaurants or cinemas or gyms, or not having communion parties or meeting people in the pub. The Living with Covid plan pretty much says that's what we're going to have for another 6-9 months.

But neither can we turn around and say feck it, open everything and make over 70's stay in their houses for the next 9 months. They'll kill themselves. That's stark, but that's the reality. My father is not depressive or pessimistic in normal times, but cocooning nearly drove my mother and him mental. He said he's not sure how he would have coped if it had been for a longer period, and many of his friends said the same thing.

We'll build field tents onto hospitals to deal with the hospitalisations and we'll accept that not only will old people and unhealthy people die but young and middle aged healthy people will also die from car crashes and sports injuries and regular old infections because we will not have the staff or facilities to provide them with basic healthcare.

So what do we do? Continue with the halfway house of restrictions that clearly aren't working and are crushing our economy. Open everything and cope with the horror that may entail. Or try something different?

But, unfortunately, they are fixed on a vaccine coming to the rescue. Perhaps it will. But there seems to be no appetite to try something different or even think more deeply about how they are enacting the current strategy. For example, they could have beefed up the hospitals during the summer. They could have created enforceable spaces for older and vulnerable people to get out and about more. I feel for your parents, but I can't see the public buying into another lockdown.

seamus · 02-10-2020 12:04PM

polesheep wrote: »

They were only easy to enforce because they didn't really have to be enforced, as there was a buy-in from the public. That was before young people decided that they had had enough, along with other sections of society. Take a look around you, almost everyone is breaking the restrictions that are currently in place. Some people are adhering to some of them, but the public is being selective.

This.
We had extensive buy-in from the public at the start. Shoulder to the wheel, all in this together, etc. Success, curve flattened, cases on the floor.

There was a general hope, expectation even, that once we pushed through that initial bit with a united front, then we'd know how to fight it, it would be mostly a non-issue and back to almost normal by the time the schools came back.

That buy-in is gone now, in the sense that people want boundaries that they can bounce off, not self-imposed restrictions to stick to.

During lockdown I went into the office to pick up some equipment as I had been off work for the first 4 weeks of lockdown. We're in an office park, and the place was deserted. As one would expect.

While restrictions were being lifted, but the advice was still "work from home if at all possible", I was back to the office park again, and still pretty quiet. A few more cars, a little more activity, but very quiet.

I was down there again yesterday, and it was busy. Like 75% of pre-covid, busy.

It seems to me that the "Please stick to the rules" phase of the response is over, and it's time to get more serious about it. Allow for whistleblowers to report workplaces that are insisting on bringing staff in. Have a mandatory basis on which to fine/sanction companies who are forcing them to come in.
Provide grants to companies specifically to move their business to remove working.
On the spot fines for householders not sticking to rules, or large groups congregating, etc.

Nobody really wanted it to come to this, but the fatigue has set in and if we want our 9-month plan to actually work, there needs to be a stick with which to enforce it.

polesheep · 02-10-2020 12:13PM

seamus wrote: »

This.
We had extensive buy-in from the public at the start. Shoulder to the wheel, all in this together, etc. Success, curve flattened, cases on the floor.

There was a general hope, expectation even, that once we pushed through that initial bit with a united front, then we'd know how to fight it, it would be mostly a non-issue and back to almost normal by the time the schools came back.

That buy-in is gone now, in the sense that people want boundaries that they can bounce off, not self-imposed restrictions to stick to.

During lockdown I went into the office to pick up some equipment as I had been off work for the first 4 weeks of lockdown. We're in an office park, and the place was deserted. As one would expect.

While restrictions were being lifted, but the advice was still "work from home if at all possible", I was back to the office park again, and still pretty quiet. A few more cars, a little more activity, but very quiet.

I was down there again yesterday, and it was busy. Like 75% of pre-covid, busy.

It seems to me that the "Please stick to the rules" phase of the response is over, and it's time to get more serious about it. Allow for whistleblowers to report workplaces that are insisting on bringing staff in. Have a mandatory basis on which to fine/sanction companies who are forcing them to come in.
Provide grants to companies specifically to move their business to remove working.
On the spot fines for householders not sticking to rules, or large groups congregating, etc.

Nobody really wanted it to come to this, but the fatigue has set in and if we want our 9-month plan to actually work, there needs to be a stick with which to enforce it.

This would only serve to further alienate the public.

The strategy has failed and there is no point in trying to enforce it. They need to drop case notification entirely and focus on hospital admissions. Treat the public as intelligent people who care about their loved ones and the wider society. When the hospitals are genuinely threatened with being overrun let the public know and appeal to their better instincts to follow some simple guidelines. But what they will actually do is things like you mentioned in your post i.e. use whistleblowers to attack businesses or further penalise those businesses that are already going to the wall. This government cannot think beyond getting out of bed every morning in the hope that someone, somewhere has developed a vaccine.

alentejo · 02-10-2020 12:14PM

I think people could possibly buy in to a hard lock down for 2 to 3 weeks, However it would need to be 2 to 3 weeks and then open up.
People would not tolerate being told, ah we need to keep the lock down going for another X weeks, and all of a sudden your lock down lasts 6 weeks.

paw patrol · 02-10-2020 12:21PM

alentejo wrote: »

I think people could possibly buy in to a hard lock down for 2 to 3 weeks, However it would need to be 2 to 3 weeks and then open up.
People would not tolerate being told, ah we need to keep the lock down going for another X weeks, and all of a sudden your lock down lasts 6 weeks.

as somebody 100% against any restriction - I'd possibly buy into this.
If there was a target, then I could buy into a plan, without it, any plan to control covid is useless. The government needs to be accountable for the actions they are taking.

What gets me (I've posted this before) is there are no targets , no metrics to exit this . There is no exit criteria which beggars belief.
The only mention of an exit is a vaccine (by leo) . That is not only insane but amateur hour for any project not mind one that effects the whole state.

I gave up on restrictions months ago and i'm seeing more and more people come to the dark side :pac: even previous lockdown lovers.

JDD · 02-10-2020 12:21PM

It seems to me that the "Please stick to the rules" phase of the response is over.

I think you are right, and I think that this is one of the reasons Level 3 and Level 4 restrictions don't work. They may not have needed laws and penalties in the first half of this year, but if we were to decide to impose stricter restrictions, we would need garda resources and penalties to back them up. Especially for employers bringing back office workers unnecessarily. It's such a needless increase in social activity, when you want to direct people's limited social contacts towards something that creates an economic benefit.

I don't know what we'd need for buy in again. A change in PR strategy for the government, that's for sure. More direct talking to the nation, and less trying to get your point across in the media.

Unpalatable as it may be, they probably know that we need to be at a point where we have higher infections, hospitalisations, ICU admissions and deaths before an short lockdown will work. We probably need to be at a point where hospital consultants are coming out and saying that ICU will be above capacity in a week.

ArthurDayne · 02-10-2020 12:24PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

Sweden is implementing family isolation rules.
Great to see them coping on.

https://twitter.com/zorinaq/status/1311930829996617730?s=20

It’s often incredible how people see things.

Copping onto what exactly? This rule is more or less in line with the general Swedish strategy — targeted measures. Identify a clear and specific risk issue and introduce measures which, due to their specific scope, have the advantage of clarity and sustainability. A rule that says people living with someone who has Covid should isolate is an eminently sensible rule which at least attempts to strike a balance between virus mitigation and socioeconomic reality. Catering for the socioeconomic disruption caused by such a targeted rule is of course easier than catering for a rule applied in a manner akin to throwing a bucket of paint against a wall.

Here it’s the flamethrower / scattergun / cluster bomb approach of just trying to target absolutely every possible facet of how society functions — the end result being sloppily-implemented, inconsistent, confusing rules and guidelines which people will tire of and which dilute the effectiveness of the government’s messaging.

When you say they are “copping on”, to me it sounds like you may well be the one copping on to what they are trying to achieve — targeted solutions with a clear defined purpose that can work over a long period of time because people can buy into them longer.

caveat emptor · 02-10-2020 12:32PM

So given that you think it's an eminently sensible do you think they were stupid to not do this in the first place. I do.
Hence my use of the term copping on.

JDD · 02-10-2020 12:33PM

as somebody 100% against any restriction - I'd possibly buy into this.

If there was a target, then I could buy into a plan, without it, any plan to control covid is useless. The government needs to be accountable for the actions they are taking.

I completely agree. If MM came onto the tv and addressed us directly, saying that we need to get hospitalisations down to between A and B numbers in order to open the country at Level 2 for a guaranteed four weeks, and we were going to attempt a strict lockdown for three weeks only to get to that point, I think people would do it. It would be such a carrot. If hospitalisations were at Y, then we would only be able to open at Level 3. And if it turned out that everyone said f*ck that, I'm not doing another lockdown, then we open at Level 4.

And then back that up with an understanding that the majority will comply without rules, but an acknowledge that we are at a different stage now than where we were in March, and therefore more regulation of compliance by the guards will be needed.

A carrot and a stick.

ACitizenErased · 02-10-2020 12:33PM

https://twitter.com/irishtimes/status/1311945649546432512?s=21

is_that_so · 02-10-2020 12:35PM

Deleted User wrote: »

SAGE in the UK is suggesting that 2 week 'circuit breakers' followed by a month of so of 'normality' through to Easter is likely to become their recommendation

The UK approach to all of this has been unpredictable at best. That could just as easily morph into 4 weeks lockdown and 2 weeks normal. As with all of these strategies there are no guarantees that anyone can stand over as we are depending on a microscopic virus behaving in a certain way.

spookwoman · 02-10-2020 12:39PM

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1311916323669041152?s=20

Gruffalux · 02-10-2020 12:40PM

The buy in everyone seems to be amazed at is because in March we had rapidly rising hospital, ICU and death figures. If and when that starts to happen again there will be the exact same buy in from the public.

ACitizenErased · 02-10-2020 12:41PM

Some on here would want to listen to Leo.

“However, he said the picture when you look at other indicators is much better with deaths and hospitalisations “nowhere near where they were back in April”.

He stressed, though, that rates of infection (the percentage of those who test positive) and rates of hospitalisations have increased tenfold since the start of July.

“That’s why we are having to issue new restrictions,” he explained. “It’s a different picture that what you get from the case loads alone.”

When asked who was putting too much emphasis on the case numbers, he said the media put the emphasis first on the case numbers and not the other indicators.

He stressed that restrictions are no longer being decided by case numbers alone anymore, but by positivity rates and hospitalisations.

“We need to always bear in mind that case numbers are only one of a number of metrics. They are not the first and they are not the most important. Case numbers only give us part of the picture.””

timsey tiger · 02-10-2020 12:41PM

alentejo wrote: »

I think people could possibly buy in to a hard lock down for 2 to 3 weeks, However it would need to be 2 to 3 weeks and then open up.
People would not tolerate being told, ah we need to keep the lock down going for another X weeks, and all of a sudden your lock down lasts 6 weeks.

Why would people buy into serious disruption to their lives, for something that wouldn't work. Surely, people are not that stupid.

What Username Guidelines · 02-10-2020 12:41PM

paw patrol wrote: »

as somebody 100% against any restriction - I'd possibly buy into this.
If there was a target, then I could buy into a plan, without it, any plan to control covid is useless. The government needs to be accountable for the actions they are taking.

What gets me (I've posted this before) is there are no targets , no metrics to exit this . There is no exit criteria which beggars belief.
The only mention of an exit is a vaccine (by leo) . That is not only insane but amateur hour for any project not mind one that effects the whole state.

I gave up on restrictions months ago and i'm seeing more and more people come to the dark side :pac: even previous lockdown lovers.

Tbh most of my anxiety around covid has to do with impact of restrictions rather than covid itself. Yes, I do believe covid is serious enough to warrant a response of some description, and I don't know what that is, but the lack of target or exit really stresses me out.

I had a feeling in initial lockdown in March it would last longer than the general consensus, I got a little wrapped up in the belief of September will be different, no idea why, while others around me thought mid-summer. Now that we're in October and it's going pear shaped again, I had next spring in mind for some semblance of normality, but again, I go back to my thoughts of September and think "why would spring be any different?"

Now I'm just in more of a fascination mode. Things are sh*t, no sign of them improving any time soon, but what's it gonna be that untangles this mess? Vaccine, public buy-in gone? I wonder what the latter even looks like?

Santy2015 · 02-10-2020 12:41PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

https://twitter.com/irishtimes/status/1311945649546432512?s=21

Possible why the decision not to move cork or any other county to level 3 is the hospitals. Only 6 in hospital in cork and none in icu

ACitizenErased · 02-10-2020 12:42PM

Santy2015 wrote: »

Possible why the decision not to move cork or any other county to level 3 is the hospitals. Only 6 in hospital in cork and none in icu

Plus it appears as if its mostly clusters, not community transmission

JDD · 02-10-2020 12:44PM

Gruffalux wrote: »

The buy in everyone seems to be amazed at is because in March we had rapidly rising hospital, ICU and death figures. If and when that starts to happen again there will be the exact same buy in from the public.

Perhaps. But with mask wearing, working from home and will the (ever decreasing) majority still adhering to social distancing I don't think hospitalisations will increase at the same rate as they did in March. We may still get to the same number, it will just take us a bit longer to get there. The longer it takes, the less scared people are of the numbers.

It was the numbers of hospitalisations increasing 100% every three days back in mid March that had everyone very focussed. Infection numbers not so much as everyone knew we had about 10 times the numbers of infections than the official tests were picking up.

Boggles · 02-10-2020 12:46PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Some on here would want to listen to Leo.

I will when he stops pretending he is opposition.

Absolute Cretin.

ACitizenErased · 02-10-2020 12:48PM

Boggles wrote: »

I will when he stops pretending he is opposition.

Absolute Cretin.

I could have predicted that response

02-10-2020 12:49PM

ArthurDayne wrote: »

It’s often incredible how people see things.

Copping onto what exactly? This rule is more or less in line with the general Swedish strategy — targeted measures. Identify a clear and specific risk issue and introduce measures which, due to their specific scope, have the advantage of clarity and sustainability. A rule that says people living with someone who has Covid should isolate is an eminently sensible rule which at least attempts to strike a balance between virus mitigation and socioeconomic reality. Catering for the socioeconomic disruption caused by such a targeted rule is of course easier than catering for a rule applied in a manner akin to throwing a bucket of paint against a wall.

Here it’s the flamethrower / scattergun / cluster bomb approach of just trying to target absolutely every possible facet of how society functions — the end result being sloppily-implemented, inconsistent, confusing rules and guidelines which people will tire of and which dilute the effectiveness of the government’s messaging.

When you say they are “copping on”, to me it sounds like you may well be the one copping on to what they are trying to achieve — targeted solutions with a clear defined purpose that can work over a long period of time because people can buy into them longer.

100% well said.

what we need to cop onto is the plethora of snake oil worst case scenarios salesmen like this lad

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/coronavirus/top-doctor-warns-coronavirus-could-kill-up-to-120000-irish-people/ar-BB10UPL9

Gruffalux · 02-10-2020 12:49PM

spookwoman wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1311916323669041152?s=20

Ahh the poor fella. What a terrible time for him. He is very eloquent and strong and handsome. Come on, Jack!

ZX7R · 02-10-2020 12:54PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Some on here would want to listen to Leo.

“However, he said the picture when you look at other indicators is much better with deaths and hospitalisations “nowhere near where they were back in April”.

He stressed, though, that rates of infection (the percentage of those who test positive) and rates of hospitalisations have increased tenfold since the start of July.

“That’s why we are having to issue new restrictions,” he explained. “It’s a different picture that what you get from the case loads alone.”

When asked who was putting too much emphasis on the case numbers, he said the media put the emphasis first on the case numbers and not the other indicators.

He stressed that restrictions are no longer being decided by case numbers alone anymore, but by positivity rates and hospitalisations.

“We need to always bear in mind that case numbers are only one of a number of metrics. They are not the first and they are not the most important. Case numbers only give us part of the picture.””

He is right the Media have a fixation with reporting test numbers and not just for Ireland

Boggles · 02-10-2020 12:55PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I could have predicted that response

You couldn't predict 2 o'clock at 1.45 given your track record.

hmmm · 02-10-2020 12:58PM

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/1002/1168952-covid-northern-ireland/

"Prepare for potential second lockdown, medical chief tells Northern Ireland"

Strange headline. What does "preparing" mean - rush around to meet everyone you know for that final party, pack into the pubs for a pint?

seamus · 02-10-2020 12:59PM

polesheep wrote: »

Treat the public as intelligent people who care about their loved ones and the wider society. When the hospitals are genuinely threatened with being overrun let the public know and appeal to their better instincts to follow some simple guidelines.

I think that moment has passed to be honest. Appealing for the good of society has been done.
People feel like they've put in their time, they are mentally and emotionally exhausted. And the damn virus has started winning again.

The feeling around Covid was one of fighting spirit, but that has given way to resignation, as people realise that a virus doesn't tire or give up.

Saying, "The hospital system is on the verge of collapse, now is the time to put in your effort", is the equivalent of telling an exhausted runner that they're nearly halfway there so it's time to speed up.

It's also too late to ask people to be careful. It's like telling that runner to run faster because now there's a bear chasing him. All the extra effort in the world won't stop what's about to happen.

There's a reason why mask compliance is so high - because people have been told that it has to be done. And not doing so will have you barred from premises and made a social pariah.

Whatever way you spin it, in the absence of enforcement, people will apply the version of the rules that they personally find the most tolerable.

The business owner who doesn't like home working, will tell his staff they have to come in. And they don't feel like they have a choice.
The woman who loves nothing more than a face to face chat will have half the street in her back garden twice a week.
The pub owner will let clients stay for 6 hours provided that they keep buying pints.
The guy who loves his pint will have no issues staying those six hours, or hopping from bar to bar all night to get his pints.

And they will all tell themselves that it's OK because they're doing their best.

Humans, as an animal, crave routine. Even in the midst of prolonged wars, we find that after the initial devastation of the first few months, people start going back about their daily business, partially numbed to the chaos around them. They go to work, they play with their kids, they have sex, they party with their mates, paying a passing interest to the explosions happening elsewhere in the city.

That's where we are right now. People desperately want to get back to a routine. It doesn't have to be "normal", but it has to be regular. And routines require solid boundaries. In the absence of civil boundaries, people will define their own.

I 100% agree that the focus on daily cases needs to end. And a better metric is needed. I think I said it here about two weeks ago. It's an example of an undefined boundary; it's pure chaos. A number being touted on a daily basis without any real context into whether it's good, bad or indifferent. It is in many ways less helpful now; a higher or lower number today has absolutely zero bearing on me. I'm not going to alter my behaviour or change my boundaries based on how many random people I don't know, have covid.

ACitizenErased · 02-10-2020 01:01PM

Boggles wrote: »

You couldn't predict 2 o'clock at 1.45 given your track record.

Nah we all know your sarcasm and denial well enough by now

Covid 19 Part XXIV-37,063 ROI (1,801 deaths) 12,886 NI (582 deaths) (02/10) Read OP

Comments