Can we have some fcuking control on the airports from high risk countries please?

Best wait to next year to see if there is a vaccine. It's only a few months.

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

If I could get travel insurance I'd be on my way.

What's stopping you getting travel insurance?

There is no issue with chill insurance for example, covered for everything bar Covid.

Plus EHIC card of course

saabsaab wrote: »

Best wait to next year to see if there is a vaccine. It's only a few months.

There will be vaccines for definite next year, question is how widely available they will be, how effective they will be and what the uptake level will be.

A few unknowns that may take a few years to work through.

faceman

saabsaab wrote: »

Best wait to next year to see if there is a vaccine. It's only a few months.

Why?

saabsaab wrote: »

Best wait to next year to see if there is a vaccine. It's only a few months.

If that's how people feel and it makes the majority of people feel safer to travel then all well and good, for the rest of us I know I certainly haven't been waiting around for a vaccine which may or may not appear in the next number of months or be safe from side effects and offer a strong level of protection..

By waiting you and yours and the community at large is going to be safer. Why not wait and see?

A study has shown that those travelling are at greater risk.

theological

Tenzor07 wrote: »

If that's how people feel and it makes the majority of people feel safer to travel then all well and good, for the rest of us I know I certainly haven't been waiting around for a vaccine which may or may not appear in the next number of months or be safe from side effects and offer a strong level of protection..

So that's a great reason to travel places with a higher level of infection and potentially import more of the virus to Ireland?

If your decisions affected you alone I might understand but they have the potential to affect others particularly those closest to you. This is why it is selfish reasoning.

faceman

saabsaab wrote: »

By waiting you and yours and the community at large is going to be safer. Why not wait and see?

A study has shown that those travelling are at greater risk.

Nonsense

3xh

saabsaab wrote: »

By waiting you and yours and the community at large is going to be safer. Why not wait and see?

A study has shown that those travelling are at greater risk.

Which study?

The moment you arrive in Irish airports to leave Ireland, you’re met with gel dispensers and signs asking you to mask up. The DAA cleaning staff do regular rounds cleaning and spraying touch points.
Plenty of open space for distancing. Mandatory masks on board. No queuing for airplane toilets. HEPA filters on board aircraft if we take it they work as described. Potential swab testing upon arrival. Most likely mandatory contact tracing info requirements upon arrival. And when you get to your destination country, chancers are the rate per 100,000 is lower than Ireland.

It just shows you the power of media. You’ve been convinced doing all that^^^ is riskier than going to Tesco.

theological

faceman wrote: »

Nonsense

Except for the fact I provided you a study which showed that this is true in the UK based on test data.

Of course travelling to a country with a much higher level of infection will make you more likely to contract the virus.

theological wrote: »

So that's a great reason to travel places with a higher level of infection and potentially import more of the virus to Ireland?
If your decisions affected you alone I might understand but they have the potential to affect others particularly those closest to you. This is why it is selfish reasoning.

Dublin's case rate per 100k is 122 last time I looked, Ireland's is at 88 or so?

This means that by staying in Dublin I am likely to get the virus here and by going to shopping centers, queuing in Cafe's/restaurants waiting for a table, walking through a busy city street or sat in St. Stephen's green on a bench means I am exposed to the virus enough that I may spread it to colleagues who work in Dublin but live in Meath or Louth?

Or if I go through an empty Dublin airport to sit on a half empty flight with facemask and breath medically filtered conditioned air to go visit a country with a case rate 1/4 Ireland's that I'm more at risk??

Irish Aris

theological wrote: »

The problem all along is that it should have been legally enforced and been legally enforceable. The sacrifice that we gave earlier in the year has been completely wasted in part because there weren't controls on travel.

Now that the high court have ruled this way the Government should legally restrict travel until this is over. Isolation for nationals, and no new arrivals until the virus is out of the country.

I would love for the government in the UK to do the same instead of the silly race to the airport every week. This week it is Poland and Turkey for anyone following.

Very unlikely to happen though, right?
They spent weeks arguing that Ryanair doesn't have a case because it is only an advice, and they got it to be named from the court as an advice. if they were to say now it is a legal restriction I'd expect another court case. An own goal if there was ever one. In my opinion it actually undermines the whole live with Covid plan as people now will start treating everything in the plan as advice if it suits them.

and to be clear: I'm not saying that you are right or wrong in your assessment about isolating the country (fwiw I don't agree, but that's just my opinion), I'm just saying that it is extremely unlikely to happen and frankly I don't see the point unless every country in Europe (if not the World) has the same approach at the same time. Us closing and everyone else staying open just delays the inevitable that when you reopen the country after a few weeks of closing it you will start importing cases again.

Atlantic Dawn

Feria40 wrote: »

What's stopping you getting travel insurance?

There is no issue with chill insurance for example, covered for everything bar Covid.

Plus EHIC card of course

It's more the expense of getting home if it was an air ambulance job needed.

faceman wrote: »

Nonsense

I don't think so.. see below.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiuitr_nZbsAhU9QRUIHbQwC8oQFjABegQIAhAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fedition.cnn.com%2F2020%2F09%2F18%2Fhealth%2Fcoronavirus-airline-transmission-studies%2Findex.html&usg=AOvVaw0p-s8Hd2y1BOnZd6Yp8vmh

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

It's more the expense of getting home if it was an air ambulance job needed.

As the previous poster had said, your medical expenses will either be covered by the EIHC card or other insurances covered by your normal policies..no other massive insurance policy is needed for travel unless you're going somewhere like the U.S.A.

Would you be partaking in extreme sports? Cliff diving or swimming with the Sharks? If not then you're 98.99% unlikely to need an air ambulance to evacuate you from Corfu or some such place...

3xh

saabsaab wrote: »

I don't think so.. see below.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiuitr_nZbsAhU9QRUIHbQwC8oQFjABegQIAhAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fedition.cnn.com%2F2020%2F09%2F18%2Fhealth%2Fcoronavirus-airline-transmission-studies%2Findex.html&usg=AOvVaw0p-s8Hd2y1BOnZd6Yp8vmh

Saabsaab, that woman ‘is alleged’ to have infected the other 15. Simply, there is no way of knowing it was her for sure. Testing regimes weren’t as good then as they are now.

But let’s assume it was her. There was no social distancing then at the gate, airbridge, toilet queue, etc. No constant reminders about hand gel. Mandatory masks?! No chance. Not so strict assigned seating where pax could move around if they wanted a better seat after take-off. It all adds up.

Throw in the now improved aircraft cleaning regimen and flying is clearly safer than an essential trip to Tesco. To use that story is clutching at straws and for the journalist trying to use it, lazy reporting.

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

It's more the expense of getting home if it was an air ambulance job needed.

What potential scenarios come to mind given that you will be fully insured albeit with Covid excluded?

3xh wrote: »

Saabsaab, that woman ‘is alleged’ to have infected the other 15. Simply, there is no way of knowing it was her for sure. Testing regimes weren’t as good then as they are now.

But let’s assume it was her. There was no social distancing then at the gate, airbridge, toilet queue, etc. No constant reminders about hand gel. Mandatory masks?! No chance. Not so strict assigned seating where pax could move around if they wanted a better seat after take-off. It all adds up.

Throw in the now improved aircraft cleaning regimen and flying is clearly safer than an essential trip to Tesco. To use that story is clutching at straws and for the journalist trying to use it, lazy reporting.

Here's another, basically saying that it is still a risk!

https://metro.co.uk/2020/06/18/uk-flights-are-slowly-returning-brits-warned-still-risk-12872982/

saabsaab wrote: »

Here's another, basically saying that it is still a risk!

https://metro.co.uk/2020/06/18/uk-flights-are-slowly-returning-brits-warned-still-risk-12872982/

Well if "Travel risk expert Lloyd Figgins" says it's still a risk to travel then I better stay at home and hide under the bed until the cure is released!! :eek:

I had given these forums a bit of a break over the last few weeks.. think I'll take another break

Bit shocking at this stage how unquestioning many people are or news sources

3xh

saabsaab wrote: »

Here's another, basically saying that it is still a risk!

https://metro.co.uk/2020/06/18/uk-flights-are-slowly-returning-brits-warned-still-risk-12872982/

An absolute nothing article, saabsaab. From June, too.

theological

Feria40 wrote: »

I had given these forums a bit of a break over the last few weeks.. think I'll take another break

Bit shocking at this stage how unquestioning many people are or news sources

It's more shocking to see how people continue to put their head in the sand even when it is demonstrated that one those who travel abroad are more likely to contract coronavirus than those who don't or two that travel is leading to new importations of cases into the community.

theological wrote: »

It's more shocking to see how people continue to put their head in the sand even when it is demonstrated that one those who travel abroad are more likely to contract coronavirus than those who don't or two that travel is leading to new importations of cases into the community.

Case rate near me in Blanchardstown/Mulhuddart is 196/100k.... much safer to travel abroad than visit the shops and other crowded areas there...

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Case rate near me in Blanchardstown/Mulhuddart is 196/100k.... much safer to travel abroad than visit the shops and other crowded areas there...

And nobody traveling abroad will be using taxis, nuses, rail or visiting shops and streets there?

saabsaab wrote: »

And nobody traveling abroad will be using taxis, nuses, rail or visiting shops and streets there?

So what? They do all that here, and as i've pointed out, the infection rate is higher in Dublin than in many EU countries. Therefore you've as much chance of catching the Virus here as abroad, and in fact you may even get tested at an airport, you won't get tested here without paying for it...

fly_agaric

Feria40 wrote: »

I would respectfully disagree with you on the latter part or your post. The vast majority of people I speak with are absolutely itching to get away and only the 2 week guideline on movement restriction is putting them off thus far.

Would be an interesting experiment I suppose but I believe tourism and travel into Ireland are not going to recover until this is "over" no matter what our govt. says or does.

A free for all will help the airlines carrying people outward (Irish tourists won't have to restrict movement when they come back in), assuming of course the destination countries doing better than us will want them as the infection rates here continue to rise.

Tenzor07 wrote:

Case rate near me in Blanchardstown/Mulhuddart is 196/100k.... much safer to travel abroad than visit the shops and other crowded areas there...

Lol, for you yes but perhaps not for the country you grace with your presence!

fly_agaric wrote: »

Lol, for you yes but perhaps not for the country you grace with your presence!

It's possible to travel and reduce risk, ...Hire a car, stay in a private apartment, dine/drink outdoors, wear a mask, wash your hands, stay away from crowds....don't travel if you have symptoms...

if you can't do that then stay home and hide under your bed until the vaccine comes.

fly_agaric

Tenzor07 wrote: »

It's possible to travel and reduce risk, ...Hire a car, stay in a private apartment, dine/drink outdoors, wear a mask, wash your hands, stay away from crowds....don't travel if you have symptoms...

if you can't do that then stay home and hide under your bed until the vaccine comes.

Not going abroad for a holiday until this is over isn't "staying home and hiding under your bed until the vaccine comes".