nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Off Topic Thread 5.0

[Deleted User]

Thread continued from here https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057835955&page=250

The usual rules apply. Non-rugby talk here. Consider this a social place, but like a pub, things like religion and politics can be divisive, so don't say things here you wouldn't say to someone's face in the pub. Sober

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

molloyjh

Its interesting reading some of the comments here re treating us like adults & the haphazard approach to tackling the issue.

The haphazard approach is purely down to the fact that so much of the population is simply not acting like adults. We've been given pretty clear guidelines to follow. Keep your circle small, avoid non essential travel as much as possible, work from home where possible, social distance, wash your hands, wear masks.

I personally know numerous people who flaunted some, if not all, of that guidance. We heard reports of people socialising with 50+ people. Thats not even close to keeping your circle small. I know of a number of companies who feel it important that their staff maintain a presence in the office when they dont actually need to.

Theres so routinely a need to point the finger at authority but, in this case, had enough of us done what we were told over the last 3-4 months then we wouldn't be facing into what we are.

Its so frustrating having kept my circle to immediate family & a few neighbours out on the street to hear of people going to functions with dozens of people (someone I know actually went to an event like that & said they felt uncomfortable about it, but still stayed & got pissed!). I haven't seen friends in months yet I know people who have had friends over to stay and/or rented a house for a long weekend to meet up with groups of friends.

If we as a population were behaving like adults then this wouldn't be happening. But we're not. So why should we be treated as adults? And for as long as enough people are being haphazard about how they approach this then the response from NPHET & the Gov will remain haphazard as they try to tackle not just the virus, but the populations poor response to it too.

kuang1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't think they should close schools. Level 5 doesn't automatically mean schools close albeit the teaching unions might have something to say about that.

I think everything else should be closed before Schools which is largely what level 5 means.

And school transmission is far from a non issue: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/covid-19-may-spread-more-easily-in-schools-than-thought-us-report-warns-1.4323634

Lucky for me then that I never said it was a non issue.

And I wasn't implying that you were calling for schools to be closed. Crossed wires a little there I think.

awec

I would say the overwhelming majority of people have been complying with all the measures.

I do not agree with any notion that the public aren't behaving like adults, therefore the government shouldn't treat them like adults. The government are not parents scolding a bold child.

I am not against lockdowns etc, but if they want to get stricter then give us the damn specifics about what exactly is causing them to react so extremely.

The messaging has, IMO, been a total shambles on this from the start. They get a lot of leeway for the first few months when things were nuts and we didn't know anything and we were scrambling. But there is no more excuses left.

[Deleted User]

molloyjh wrote: »

Its interesting reading some of the comments here re treating us like adults & the haphazard approach to tackling the issue.

The haphazard approach is purely down to the fact that so much of the population is simply not acting like adults. We've been given pretty clear guidelines to follow. Keep your circle small, avoid non essential travel as much as possible, work from home where possible, social distance, wash your hands, wear masks.

I personally know numerous people who flaunted some, if not all, of that guidance. We heard reports of people socialising with 50+ people. Thats not even close to keeping your circle small. I know of a number of companies who feel it important that their staff maintain a presence in the office when they dont actually need to.

Theres so routinely a need to point the finger at authority but, in this case, had enough of us done what we were told over the last 3-4 months then we wouldn't be facing into what we are.

Its so frustrating having kept my circle to immediate family & a few neighbours out on the street to hear of people going to functions with dozens of people (someone I know actually went to an event like that & said they felt uncomfortable about it, but still stayed & got pissed!). I haven't seen friends in months yet I know people who have had friends over to stay and/or rented a house for a long weekend to meet up with groups of friends.

If we as a population were behaving like adults then this wouldn't be happening. But we're not. So why should we be treated as adults? And for as long as enough people are being haphazard about how they approach this then the response from NPHET & the Gov will remain haphazard as they try to tackle not just the virus, but the populations poor response to it too.

Totally agree and a lot of the people I know who disregarded the restrictions are the same ones now complaining about further restrictions. It's very frustrating and amazes me the disassociation between their actions and the countries covid profile.

Much like yourself we've followed every guideline and then some and will continue to do so - but if social media is anything to go by I think the next lockdown will be difficult to enforce.

kuang1

molloyjh wrote: »

If we as a population were behaving like adults then this wouldn't be happening. But we're not. So why should we be treated as adults? And for as long as enough people are being haphazard about how they approach this then the response from NPHET & the Gov will remain haphazard as they try to tackle not just the virus, but the populations poor response to it too.

Very fair point.
Something I'd love to see set up is a hotline, or "snitch line" similar to what crime line would have.

If you know of anyone organising a party or going against the guidelines call this number etc.

After a short while of this existing, even the possibility of that nosey old bag living in no.14 calling the authorities on me might be enough of a deterrent for me to NOT invite 10 lads over to watch the match this Saturday.

Could be effective to a degree anyway.
Do the guards have the numbers to make it work though?

[Deleted User]

I suspect it's far easier to follow the guidelines to the letter if your life revolves around a young family

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

I would say the overwhelming majority of people have been complying with all the measures.

I do not agree with any notion that the public aren't behaving like adults, therefore the government shouldn't treat them like adults. The government are not parents scolding a bold child.

I am not against lockdowns etc, but if they want to get stricter then give us the damn specifics about what exactly is causing them to react so extremely.

The messaging has, IMO, been a total shambles on this from the start. They get a lot of leeway for the first few months when things were nuts and we didn't know anything and we were scrambling. But there is no more excuses left.

If an overwhelming number had been doing what they should have then, by definition, we wouldn't be having the problem we are now having. The numbers simply wouldn't be near where they are. Most probably are following the guidelines, but clearly not enough are.

We were told from the beginning that the roadmap that they came up with wasn't definitive. We were told it was contingent on our own behaviours & the prevalence of the virus in the community. We were told we could see early adoption of some or all of later phases, but similarly that we could see a reversal to some or all of previous phases. This we all knew.

While I agree that the comms from this Gov have been incredibly poor, all of the above we were clearly told about by the previous Gov, who I thought were as clear as they could have been. Not a whole lot has changed since then really. We still need to keep our circles small & avoid unnecessary travel. Sure pubs were reopened, but that wasn't licence for people to meet up in groups the way some have.

I fundamentally disagree with the notion that more information will lead to more or better compliance. Most people simply don't bother with the information. Clear communication around the reasons for greater restrictions of course should be a minimum, but again that doesnt change much, if anything at all.

What people need to do now is still the same thing that they needed to do 4 months ago. If enough people don't do that then what happens next is on them. Not the Gov, not NPHET, but the grown adults who can't behave responsibly. And I'd have zero problem with that message being delivered very strongly from here on out.

[Deleted User]

molloyjh wrote: »

If an overwhelming number had been doing what they should have then, by definition, we wouldn't be having the problem we are now having. The numbers simply wouldn't be near where they are. Most probably are following the guidelines, but clearly not enough are.

We were told from the beginning that the roadmap that they came up with wasn't definitive. We were told it was contingent on our own behaviours & the prevalence of the virus in the community. We were told we could see early adoption of some or all of later phases, but similarly that we could see a reversal to some or all of previous phases. This we all knew.

While I agree that the comms from this Gov have been incredibly poor, all of the above we were clearly told about by the previous Gov, who I thought were as clear as they could have been. Not a whole lot has changed since then really. We still need to keep our circles small & avoid unnecessary travel. Sure pubs were reopened, but that wasn't licence for people to meet up in groups the way some have.

I fundamentally disagree with the notion that more information will lead to more or better compliance. Most people simply don't bother with the information. Clear communication around the reasons for greater restrictions of course should be a minimum, but again that doesnt change much, if anything at all.

What people need to do now is still the same thing that they needed to do 4 months ago. If enough people don't do that then what happens next is on them. Not the Gov, not NPHET, but the grown adults who can't behave responsibly. And I'd have zero problem with that message being delivered very strongly from here on out.

More information communicated better is never a bad thing.

The problem is that too many people are resorting to facebook for their information.

awec

molloyjh wrote: »

If an overwhelming number had been doing what they should have then, by definition, we wouldn't be having the problem we are now having. The numbers simply wouldn't be near where they are. Most probably are following the guidelines, but clearly not enough are.

We were told from the beginning that the roadmap that they came up with wasn't definitive. We were told it was contingent on our own behaviours & the prevalence of the virus in the community. We were told we could see early adoption of some or all of later phases, but similarly that we could see a reversal to some or all of previous phases. This we all knew.

While I agree that the comms from this Gov have been incredibly poor, all of the above we were clearly told about by the previous Gov, who I thought were as clear as they could have been. Not a whole lot has changed since then really. We still need to keep our circles small & avoid unnecessary travel. Sure pubs were reopened, but that wasn't licence for people to meet up in groups the way some have.

I fundamentally disagree with the notion that more information will lead to more or better compliance. Most people simply don't bother with the information. Clear communication around the reasons for greater restrictions of course should be a minimum, but again that doesnt change much, if anything at all.

What people need to do now is still the same thing that they needed to do 4 months ago. If enough people don't do that then what happens next is on them. Not the Gov, not NPHET, but the grown adults who can't behave responsibly. And I'd have zero problem with that message being delivered very strongly from here on out.

But what is the evidence for this? There is transmission within the family home as far as I know? Social visits within homes have been allowed for months now for example.

Going from where we are now, to a level 5 national lockdown is huge. It screams incompetence.

Imagine someone in work telling you today that they think they'll be a week late with their work. And then in a few days time, they come back and tell you they'll be 6 months late. You'd be sitting thinking what the fcuk are they doing?

It wasn't even a week ago they were discussing POSSIBLY going to level 2 / 3 for 2/3 counties.

[Deleted User]

awec wrote: »

But what is the evidence for this? Is current transmission not within the family home? Social visits within homes have been allowed for months now.

Going from where we are now, to a level 5 national lockdown is huge. It screams incompetence.

Imagine someone in work telling you today that they think they'll be a week late with their work. And then in a few days time, they come back and tell you they'll be 6 months late. You'd be sitting thinking what the fcuk are they doing?

It wasn't even a week ago they were discussing POSSIBLY going to level 2 / 3 for 2/3 counties.

It could be incompetence, or it could be a lot of people taking the absolute piss and causing a fresh spike.

molloyjh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I suspect it's far easier to follow the guidelines to the letter if your life revolves around a young family

Why? A young family just introduces an entirely different set of issues. For example at the time in her life when she most needed social interaction with other kids my daughter had to do without. Not only that, but the grandparents that she saw all the time were taken away for moths too. Her entire world was turned upside down. And through that my wife & I had to manage full time jobs & caring for her full-time as well. Everything suffered. Her well being, work, our own well being.

Now we're facing into winter when outdoor activities are going to be significantly reduced compared to the last 6 months. But there are no indoor activities to take their place. Whereas last year we could have gone to play centres, this year we need to find something else to pass all those hours & days. And if we're in a lockdown situation we would have to do that without being able to fall back on family to look after her & give us a break. Which is fairly tiring to say the least.

That's not to say that we have it worse than anyone else, its just that each scenario just presents an entirely different set of challenges. If schools stay open then we need to limit our circle further somewhere else as her being in pre-school itself makes it larger. But someone who is living alone can afford to include people in their circle that my wife & I can't, such as a few friends etc.

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

It could be incompetence, or it could be a lot of people taking the absolute piss and causing a fresh spike.

So give us the data, and the models used and specifically tell us what the concern is.

Are we going to run out of hospital beds? ICU beds? Specifically what steps have been taken by the HSE to prepare for a second wave that was absolutely inevitable?

Is the concern for the old and vulnerable? Again, what specific steps have been taken to enable them to cocoon more effectively? What are we doing with nursing homes to prevent the same outbreak as last time?

kuang1

molloyjh wrote: »

I fundamentally disagree with the notion that more information will lead to more or better compliance. Most people simply don't bother with the information. Clear communication around the reasons for greater restrictions of course should be a minimum, but again that doesnt change much, if anything at all.

I don't agree with you on this Molloy. I think most people do bother with the information.

The minority that don't however is plenty sizable enough to keep number of transmissions at current levels or worse.

Communicating evidence and reason behind decisions on restrictions is absolutely vital to higher rates of compliance imo.

Take the mask wearing as an example. The beneficial reasons for this were conveyed to the public at large.
After this point, if someone knew of these reasons, and still elected to not wear a mask where appropriate, then ok; you're clearly a selfish dick.
And enough people out there are either not a dick, or don't wish to be seen to be a dick so we get massive compliance on mask wearing.

Communicate the information clearly. It helps.

Tony Holohan's return today might see this improve a bit I think.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

But what is the evidence for this? There is transmission within the family home as far as I know? Social visits within homes have been allowed for months now for example.

Going from where we are now, to a level 5 national lockdown is huge. It screams incompetence.

Imagine someone in work telling you today that they think they'll be a week late with their work. And then in a few days time, they come back and tell you they'll be 6 months late. You'd be sitting thinking what the fcuk are they doing?

It wasn't even a week ago they were discussing POSSIBLY going to level 2 / 3 for 2/3 counties.

Most spread happens within the home, but it has to get into the home first to do that. The more interaction people have with others, inside or outside the home, increases the risk of it entering the home. That is exactly why we are being asked to limit our circles as much as we can. The less people we come into contact with, the less risk we have of contracting the virus & also the less risk we have of passing it on should we have it.

In your analogy of the worker the big problem you have is that you are looking at the individual as having complete control over what happens. That is simply not the case here. The Gov can't control this. They can only tell us what we need to do. They can't enforce it because we simply dont have the resources or capability to do that. They have to rely on that.

A more accurate analogy to use would be someone in work updating you on the status of a job that has been outsourced to another company. Two weeks ago they told you that the job was 80% complete & they expect it to be finished in 2 weeks. Last week they told you there had been some delays on the 3rd parties side so it would be a bit longer than anticipated, but also warned that things might not be going as well as hoped. This week they are telling you that the 3rd party has screwed up & its going to be another 4 weeks. Does the fault really lie with the worker or the 3rd party there?

molloyjh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

More information communicated better is never a bad thing.

The problem is that too many people are resorting to facebook for their information.

Just to be clear, I never said more info was bad. The above is clearly true. I just don't believe that more info will lead to better outcomes. We have more than enough compelling info as it is and the people at large are failing. I dont see how more info will address that, no matter how well communicated. Remember, people like awec here looking for modelling data are not exactly the average Joe Soap. The population at large want small, easily digestible messages. We saw the confusion some simple guidelines caused a couple of months ago purely because people didn't read them and, as you said, just got the info from somewhere else like social media.

[Deleted User]

molloyjh wrote: »

Why? A young family just introduces an entirely different set of issues. For example at the time in her life when she most needed social interaction with other kids my daughter had to do without. Not only that, but the grandparents that she saw all the time were taken away for moths too. Her entire world was turned upside down. And through that my wife & I had to manage full time jobs & caring for her full-time as well. Everything suffered. Her well being, work, our own well being.

Now we're facing into winter when outdoor activities are going to be significantly reduced compared to the last 6 months. But there are no indoor activities to take their place. Whereas last year we could have gone to play centres, this year we need to find something else to pass all those hours & days. And if we're in a lockdown situation we would have to do that without being able to fall back on family to look after her & give us a break. Which is fairly tiring to say the least.

That's not to say that we have it worse than anyone else, its just that each scenario just presents an entirely different set of challenges. If schools stay open then we need to limit our circle further somewhere else as her being in pre-school itself makes it larger. But someone who is living alone can afford to include people in their circle that my wife & I can't, such as a few friends etc.

I'm not doubting that it's tough. I've been babysitting for my sister more than usual as I have the time. The first time was a few months back and she was so happy, telling me they haven't had a moment to themselves since February.

What I am suggesting is that it is easier if you have a young family to adhere to the guidelines. That's all. It already suits parents' lifestyle to a degree. Getting into a groove and staying in an insular bubble is what parents seem to do anyway. They're never too far away from their children. The stereotype of not seeing your friends once they have kids isn't without merit. Priorities shift once children enter the equation. Parents are happy to stay home more than single people.

[Deleted User]

awec wrote: »

So give us the data, and the models used and specifically tell us what the concern is.

Are we going to run out of hospital beds? ICU beds? Specifically what steps have been taken by the HSE to prepare for a second wave that was absolutely inevitable?

Is the concern for the old and vulnerable? Again, what specific steps have been taken to enable them to cocoon more effectively? What are we doing with nursing homes to prevent the same outbreak as last time?

No offense awec but your the one throwing around phrases like 'screaming incompetence' with no more information than I have. I'm merely suggesting that the spiralling numbers could be down to societal factors and a lack of compliance - not incompetence around the management of the pandemic by the Government. It could be a mix of both or it could be entirely the fault of the Government and NPHET.

There was reporting last month that ICU capacity was insufficient but that available staff was the major issue behind there not being more capacity. As for care homes I understand that they have a testing schedule now to prevent another disaster.

I don't ultimately have answers to all these questions, maybe the internet can help you out, but I'm also not going to make accusations about competence or second guess medical experts with my current level of insight.

Out of interest - do you think any of these people are following the guidelines:

sydthebeat

molloyjh wrote: »

If an overwhelming number had been doing what they should have then, by definition, we wouldn't be having the problem we are now having. The numbers simply wouldn't be near where they are. Most probably are following the guidelines, but clearly not enough are.

I don't at all agree with this.

What on earth did they expect when things gradually reopened?
There was no way on hell the case rate was doing to stay in the low double figures.
We had a concrete reason for the first lockdown. Protect the vulnerable by flattening the curve and protect the health service from being overrun. Essentially buying more time. Well that was 7 months ago, the curve was flattened. The HSE were disgraceful in their attempt to protect the vulnerable by actively allowing covid into nursing homes, which, when the dust settles will be down to be the biggest scandal of this whole thing.

As I said already this is a management issue within the HSE that they are trying to solve by recommending severe actions to the whole country. There's no way the whole country should be going from level to 2 in the majority to level 5. The case number rise has been steadily low enough for the last four weeks to show that there is no huge explosion of cases.

We're 7 months on from that now... We need to learn to live with this thing, while protecting business and the economy.

The communication and "do as I say, not as I do" actions from those giving the orders had been diabolical.

Yeah_Right

Deleted User wrote: »

More information communicated better is never a bad thing.

The problem is that too many people are resorting to facebook for their information.

This is a problem. The amount of rubbish that I hear from family and colleagues is mad and 99% of it comes from FB and Twitter.

In the last week, I have been in both Blanchardstown Mall and Pavillions in Swords. Have to say that the amount of people not bothering with masks or social distancing in Blanch was disturbing.

[Deleted User]

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not doubting that it's tough. I've been babysitting for my sister more than usual as I have the time. The first time was a few months back and she was so happy, telling me they haven't had a moment to themselves since February.

What I am suggesting is that it is easier if you have a young family to adhere to the guidelines. That's all. It already suits parents' lifestyle to a degree. Getting into a groove and staying in an insular bubble is what parents seem to do anyway. They're never too far away from their children. The stereotype of not seeing your friends once they have kids isn't without merit. Priorities shift once children enter the equation. Parents are happy to stay home more than single people.

I'm a few years ahead of Molloy in that my youngest is 6 and eldest is 9. They have had a great year and have a bubble of friends on our road that they could safely interact with as all the parents are reliable, sensible people.

We were strict at the start but it's been straight forward enough splitting my time between work and parenting as work hasn't been massively busy and the kids have been able to play safely outside (live on a cul-de-sac).

I've family with older kids who have struggled with the lack of social outlet and I've family with younger kids who have had a similar experience to Molloy.

I think the biggest thing for me is that I don't mind not socialising. If I was in my 20s I'd probably be struggling to be honest.

awec

sydthebeat wrote: »

I don't at all agree with this.

What on earth did they expect when things gradually reopened?
There was no way on hell the case rate was doing to stay in the low double figures.
We had a concrete reason for the first lockdown. Protect the vulnerable by flattening the curve and protect the health service from being overrun. Essentially buying more time. Well that was 7 months ago, the curve was flattened. The HSE were disgraceful in their attempt to protect the vulnerable by actively allowing covid into nursing homes, which, when the dust settles will be down to be the biggest scandal of this whole thing.

As I said already this is a management issue within the HSE that they are trying to solve by recommending severe actions to the whole country. There's no way the whole country should be going from level to 2 in the majority to level 5. The case number rise has been steadily low enough for the last four weeks to show that there is no huge explosion of cases.

We're 7 months on from that now... We need to learn to live with this thing, while protecting business and the economy.

The communication and "do as I say, not as I do" actions from those giving the orders had been diabolical.

Yep, exactly.

We can lock down now, then gradually reopen, and guess what'll happen then.

Is the plan to just keep locking down until there's a vaccine?

[Deleted User]

awec wrote: »

Is the plan to just keep locking down until there's a vaccine?

Yes, hence the traffic light system.

sydthebeat

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes, hence the traffic light system.

Well I definitely see that there is no widespread public appetite for that all at.

Business spend big money making their premises covid ready, buy perishable products, create scheduling etc and NPHET think its fine to close them down at a drop of a hat without any warning??

Nope, that's not at all acceptable or good enough.

What's an acceptable case level?
Are people testing positive after having the virus weeks ago and are no longer contagious?
What level of false positives are we getting?

The hospitalisations and ICU admittance aren't showing currently that we need to jump to level five.

molloyjh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not doubting that it's tough. I've been babysitting for my sister more than usual as I have the time. The first time was a few months back and she was so happy, telling me they haven't had a moment to themselves since February.

What I am suggesting is that it is easier if you have a young family to adhere to the guidelines. That's all. It already suits parents' lifestyle to a degree. Getting into a groove and staying in an insular bubble is what parents seem to do anyway. They're never too far away from their children. The stereotype of not seeing your friends once they have kids isn't without merit. Priorities shift once children enter the equation. Parents are happy to stay home more than single people.

That is true to a point. But then the opportunities to get out are disproportionately more important to us too. Parents need a break, need their own lives and their own outlets.

Having young kids in this thing automatically means less of that. With schools open our circle is automatically larger because our daughters is. She can't reduce her circle, so we have to reduce ours even further to account for that.

Our neighbours are younger & don't have kids. They are able to socialise with a few friends & still keep their circle small. Sure it isnt as much as it was before, but its still something. Like I said, other than neighbours I haven't seen any friends at all since this started.

They are different challenges, and the day to day for us probably isn't miles off what it was before. But that lack of the monthly or bi-weekly outlet takes its toll. Possibly somewhat amusingly, a bunch of us on the road were talking recently about it. We all agreed that the thing we miss most about pre-C19 was actually lunch break. A time everyday when we could take a breath and just stop. Because with young kids & a full time job its full on all the time.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

Yep, exactly.

We can lock down now, then gradually reopen, and guess what'll happen then.

Is the plan to just keep locking down until there's a vaccine?

I think the plan was that we re-open, people adhere to the guidance well enough, we see an increase in cases but because people are doing enough its an increase we can cope with.

What we got was a re-open, too many people not adhering to the guidelines well enough and so an increase in cases that we soon realised we weren't going to be able to cope with.

Nobody anywhere knew for certain how people were going to react. The only way to find out was to try it & hope people did enough. We were warned what would happen if people didn't do enough. So we can't in anyway be surprised that we are going backwards as a result.

I know the gut reaction is to blame those in charge, but for this it all comes down to how the population behave. That steers everything. Thats the critical factor.

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes, hence the traffic light system.

So the end result is a country that might have fewer cases, but that's going to be totally broke.

The more lockdowns we go through, the more people are going to end up with no home and no job, in a country that doesn't have the money to support them properly.

awec

molloyjh wrote: »

I think the plan was that we re-open, people adhere to the guidance well enough, we see an increase in cases but because people are doing enough its an increase we can cope with.

What we got was a re-open, too many people not adhering to the guidelines well enough and so an increase in cases that we soon realised we weren't going to be able to cope with.

Nobody anywhere knew for certain how people were going to react. The only way to find out was to try it & hope people did enough. We were warned what would happen if people didn't do enough. So we can't in anyway be surprised that we are going backwards as a result.

I know the gut reaction is to blame those in charge, but for this it all comes down to how the population behave. That steers everything. Thats the critical factor.

But we can cope with this increase? We haven't been told otherwise. As already said, the number of hospitalisations is a fraction of what it was in March.

If the current trend of hospitalisations is enough to warrant a level 5 lockdown nationally then any increase is going to lead to the same lockdown in future.

It is just as likely that we open up again, people adhere to the guidance again, and we see another spike again.

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

So the end result is a country that might have fewer cases, but that's going to be totally broke.

The more lockdowns we go through, the more people are going to end up with no home and no job, in a country that doesn't have the money to support them properly.

But what's the alternative? Sweden didn't lock down and, despite a better healthcare system, had more than 60% more dead per 1,000. In Ireland that would equate to around another 1,200 dead. So where & how do we find the right balance?

molloyjh

awec wrote: »

But we can cope with this increase? We haven't been told otherwise. As already said, the number of hospitalisations is a fraction of what it was in March.

If the current trend of hospitalisations is enough to warrant a level 5 lockdown nationally then any increase is going to lead to the same lockdown in future.

It is just as likely that we open up again, people adhere to the guidance again, and we see another spike again.

An increase in cases like we are seeing will inevitably lead to an increase in hospitalisations. This surely cant be disputed? So do we wait for the hospitalisations and whatever resulting deaths that brings or get out in front of it before it gets that far?

mfceiling

I wouldn't believe a single word I read on a social media platform.
Anyway the army will explain everything in better detail next week when we're dragged from our homes and forced into disinfection camps.