Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VI - Read OP for Mod Warnings

SusieBlue · 13-10-2020 11:04AM

Libski wrote: »

There's obviously no-one in your life that you're concerned about.

One person is not more important than everyone. Your income and finances are obviously not effected by the restrictions.
I have a vulnerable person in my life who has assessed the risk for themselves and decided they would rather enjoy life spent around loved ones than spend the last few years of their lives hiding alone at home in terror.

CalamariFritti · 13-10-2020 11:05AM

Its not my life vs my job. Its more like a 1:millions chance of very sick/death vs my job. Given my track record on the national lottery I think I'll keep my job for now.

polesheep · 13-10-2020 11:05AM

Libski wrote: »

Your logic = the economy is good for older people but we won't wear masks to protect them because the economy is important for them.

Warped.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

Allinall · 13-10-2020 11:05AM

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

You are right. Done.

In the other news

The €50m fund will provide once off grants of around €250 to students in college that are struggling for cash

https://www.independent.ie/business/budget/budget-2021-live-as-it-unfolds-39614265.html

Bravo. Great help isnt it. 250 quid..... what an absolute joke.

Sure it'll only last them a couple of weekends when the pubs open up again.

Libski · 13-10-2020 11:06AM

weldoninhio wrote: »

How can you save someone who is at the end of their life? Immortality does not exist. People die.

It's easy to sacrifice someone that isn't you = selfishness.

Libski · 13-10-2020 11:07AM

weldoninhio wrote: »

What has that got to do with Covid? Or the relaxation of restrictions? :rolleyes:

That's the choice we've been given.

Libski · 13-10-2020 11:08AM

SusieBlue wrote: »

One person is not more important than everyone. Your income and finances are obviously not effected by the restrictions.
I have a vulnerable person in my life who has assessed the risk for themselves and decided they would rather enjoy life spent around loved ones than spend the last few years of their lives hiding alone at home in terror.

We're not referring to one person.

weldoninhio · 13-10-2020 11:08AM

Libski wrote: »

It's easy to sacrifice someone that isn't you = selfishness.

Sacrifice??

:D:D:D

I bet you're the type of drama queen, who if their 90 year old grandmother had a fall and cut her face would be aghast that she was now "scarred for life"

polesheep · 13-10-2020 11:09AM

Libski wrote: »

I'm referring to older people - and yes it is.

80% plus of older people who contract Covid survive, so it's not a death sentence. That's it from me though, I can see why you are here.

Stormyteacup · 13-10-2020 11:09AM

Libski wrote: »

It's easy to sacrifice someone that isn't you = selfishness.

The irony!

Just clogging up thread now - I’m sure you’ll get bored eventually.

Meantime, I am also putting ignore button to use.

bush · 13-10-2020 11:09AM

Libski wrote: »

That's the choice we've been given.

Are you willing to give up your job for the cause?

weldoninhio · 13-10-2020 11:10AM

Libski wrote: »

That's the choice we've been given.

No it isn't. The IFR is about 0.14% the same as the flu. Did I miss the last few years when we shut down for the flu?

"Dr Michael Ryan, the WHO’s Head of Emergencies revealed that they believe roughly 10% of the world has been infected with Sars-Cov-2. This is their “best estimate”, and a huge increase over the number of officially recognised cases (around 35 million).

The global population is roughly 7.8 billion people, if 10% have been infected that is 780 million cases. The global death toll currently attributed to Sars-Cov-2 infections is 1,061,539.

That’s an infection fatality rate of roughly 0.14%. Right in line with seasonal flu and the predictions of many experts from all around the world."

Ginger n Lemon · 13-10-2020 11:14AM

weldoninhio wrote: »

No it isn't. The IFR is about 0.14% the same as the flu. Did I miss the last few years when we shut down for the flu?

"Dr Michael Ryan, the WHO’s Head of Emergencies revealed that they believe roughly 10% of the world has been infected with Sars-Cov-2. This is their “best estimate”, and a huge increase over the number of officially recognised cases (around 35 million).

The global population is roughly 7.8 billion people, if 10% have been infected that is 780 million cases. The global death toll currently attributed to Sars-Cov-2 infections is 1,061,539.

That’s an infection fatality rate of roughly 0.14%. Right in line with seasonal flu and the predictions of many experts from all around the world."

It could be roughly 15% btw. That IFR would be less than flu's then. Awkward. We were under selling the flu all these months

Graces7 · 13-10-2020 11:16AM

Libski wrote: »

I'm sorry to hear that you're high risk, but you're all the more reason why I feel the way I do. We need to protect people.

Exactly so and thank you, I was high risk of any infection way before covid so came into seclusion then. I have not had so much as a cold in my years here .

And it is good to hear from you and others who appreciate the dangers and the reality. Life is precious and lovely and fragile.

I am in touch with friends far off and we support each other. And not worried re covid as I made sure I am safe way back. It is just common sense surely?

Ginger n Lemon · 13-10-2020 11:16AM

Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Michael McGrath, has said this will be a "hope and confidence" Budget

https://www.independent.ie/business/budget/budget-2021-live-as-it-unfolds-39614265.html

Not sure how to feel. Upset or horrified.

Oh well, here is for "Hope"

questionmark? · 13-10-2020 11:22AM

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

You are right. Done.

In the other news

The €50m fund will provide once off grants of around €250 to students in college that are struggling for cash

https://www.independent.ie/business/budget/budget-2021-live-as-it-unfolds-39614265.html

Bravo. Great help isnt it. 250 quid..... what an absolute joke.

1) how much do you think students should get?

2) how will it be funded?

3) when funding a higher contribution than that proposed what other sector should have funding reduced to pay for it?

Ginger n Lemon · 13-10-2020 11:27AM

questionmark? wrote: »

1) how much do you think students should get?

2) how will it be funded?

3) when funding a higher contribution than that proposed what other sector should have funding reduced to pay for it?

Based on their needs actually.

I dont understand why do all students who struggle for cash get one off 250 euros? As there are students who "struggle for cash" while living with parents and there are students who struggle for cash and could be kicked out of their accommodation within weeks, and might not have parents to go to.

This is akin to PUP of 350 euros for part time staff, little fiasco.

Graces7 · 13-10-2020 11:32AM

polesheep wrote: »

You don't seem to realise that people who are high risk rely even more on a properly functioning economy.

In what way? Please! This is the most specious argument yet. Shameful really.

We rely on folk being careful not to spread infections and taking simple non-harmful measures to do that.

That applies whatever the state of the economy.

Gradius · 13-10-2020 11:36AM

Quarantine internally.

Eradicate.

Quarantine externally.

Graces7 · 13-10-2020 11:43AM

robfowler78 wrote: »

I think the end game for this is the same as any other virus or disease that we currently live with a vacine will just help it won't solve it. What's clear is we need a better health service we have needed this for a long time have people forgotten the trolley counts every year during winter. We are vastly under prepared with ICU beds. Long term:

we need to stop reporting every test and positive case on the news.

Concentrate on the hospitalisations

Keep our current message of hand washing etc but this should be a message every winter not just because of Covid. I know I don't visit elderly relatives when I have a bad cold never have I though that's just common sense.

We need a proper track and trace system.

We are wasting billions of euro that could be used to rearrange and organise the health service. Money has never been cheaper to borrow.

The original lockdown should of been used to do this instead we really didn't do anything meaningful to improve our ICU etc. I think people thought this would be over much sooner including people in government.

We can't lockdown forever regardless of what people think stadiums can't stay empty, hospitality can't stay closed we need to start except this is not going anywere. People will die as they do every day for a load of different reasons it can't be avoided its nobel and no one likes to see people die but we now it happens for lots of reason to young, old, explained unexplained every day.

If people can't see even the WHO are starting to talk about lockdowns not been the primary weapon that's because countries are realising they need to get the finances in order they can't come out and say that but let me tell you as soon as winter is over vacine or no vacine the summer will be used to change the narrative and the government will roll back on alot of there ideas and the people advocating lockdown will be hearing a different message.

People need not die because we took no precautions. So much else wrong in your post AS THINGS ARE. Pie in the sky time !

We are dealing with here and now not as you think things should have been and should be. With the reality we actually have, And avoid folk dying needlessly . Each life is precious; we are not just statistics.

WHO did not also discount lockdowns altogether

And if folk would just stop parties and follow the basic guidelines? The only reason for the current restrictions is the behaviour of folk who ignore simple safeguards.

darconio · 13-10-2020 11:45AM

I'm not very good at math, and I will probably make some mistakes in my calculation, however I wanted to break down these 800 cases that the media are so eager to feed us on a daily basis.

According to this chart we are currently testing 3 people every 1000

On a Dublin population of 1.3 million means that we had nearly 4000 people tested (how that number is achieved is beyond me but let's assume it's real)
Of these 4000 we had about 300 tested positive : that's 7.5% people with the deadly virus

Calculating this over a population of 1.3 million would mean that potentially around 100.000 people are already infected. This is only a daily count so according to the numbers and to the daily infection rate in 10 days we could have the whole Dublin population infected. Because remember: you just need to go out without ppe and touch the same apple in lidl that was touched by one of these plagued individuals (shame on them!) and that's it, you are going to die.

With these big numbers it's clear that:

- We are doomed: lockdown or not lockdown it's already too late, we probably have already the deadly virus, the fact that only 1 person died with the covid yesterday it's irrelevant, we are all going to die, but our hands will be spotless and it doesn't matter if our last words will be muffled by a face covering.

-If the above is not true, then means that the testing for corona is not reporting correctly or, amazingly, that covid-19 is not as deadly or scary as they want us to believe

ShyMets · 13-10-2020 11:47AM

Graces7 wrote: »

People need not die because we took no precautions. So much else wrong in your post AS THINGS ARE. Pie in the sky time !

We are dealing with here and now not as you think things should have been and should be. With the reality we actually have, And avoid folk dying needlessly . Each life is precious; we are not just statistics.

WHO did not also discount lockdowns altogether

And if folk would just stop parties and follow the basic guidelines? The only reason for the current restrictions is the behaviour of folk who ignore simple safeguards.

I suspect schools are playing a big part in the rising numbers. But its far easier to blame house parties

charlie14 · 13-10-2020 11:55AM

Dionaibh wrote: »

I'm not anti-vaccine. In fact, I have said that I'd take the Russian vaccine in the morning. I get vaccines, like most people do.

I just don't see how children will ever be able to recover from wearing one of those things for potentially years at school, not seeing their friends laugh and smile, not seeing the human face. As bad as the damage will be for adults, I genuinely believe it will be irreversible when it comes to children. Why I say it could be the worst n human history is because of the number of children involved. All across the world children are being forced to wear them.

That is something I asked you before that puzzled me and faik you didn`t say.
Why would you take a Russian vaccine that has not gone through The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vaccine Testing and Approval Process rather than one that has ?

polesheep · 13-10-2020 12:09PM

Graces7 wrote: »

In what way? Please! This is the most specious argument yet. Shameful really.

We rely on folk being careful not to spread infections and taking simple non-harmful measures to do that.

That applies whatever the state of the economy.

You gave a description earlier of your trip to hospital. How could that be funded other than through a properly functioning economy? You are both entitled to it and very welcome to it, but it does have to be paid for.

Gradius · 13-10-2020 12:15PM

polesheep wrote: »

You gave a description earlier of your trip to hospital. How could that be funded other than through a properly functioning economy? You are both entitled to it and very welcome to it, but it does have to be paid for.

We're rapidly approaching a most "interesting" time, as the Chinese proverb goes. With economies limping along and cash being burned like it's going out of fashion, it poses a real dilemma.

How do you fund health care/vaccine research/enforcement when the money isn't there?

These are the relative good times while we burn through all our savings, so to speak. But it can't last.

And with no exit strategy, well, this is going to get very interesting.

robfowler78 · 13-10-2020 12:19PM

Graces7 wrote: »

People need not die because we took no precautions. So much else wrong in your post AS THINGS ARE. Pie in the sky time !

We are dealing with here and now not as you think things should have been and should be. With the reality we actually have, And avoid folk dying needlessly . Each life is precious; we are not just statistics.

WHO did not also discount lockdowns altogether

And if folk would just stop parties and follow the basic guidelines? The only reason for the current restrictions is the behaviour of folk who ignore simple safeguards.

Maybe read again and don't be so high and mighty. I never said the. WHO discounted lockdowns all together. I also said people should abide by hand washing etc and that that should be common sense. I don't believe the government done all it could in the original lockdown ie track and trace, increase ICU better prepared health service to hellp treat people. But your saying to not look at the past or the future just deal with now....... Now that's pie in the sky. How else can we tell were we go wrong and how else can we prepare for what's coming?

charlie14 · 13-10-2020 12:25PM

Gradius wrote: »

Quarantine internally.

Eradicate.

Quarantine externally.

Apologies if it appears I may appear to be knocking your ideas just for the sake of it.

I am genuinely not. I recognise that you one of the few here that has a proposal. Unlike many here whose only contribution is to bitch and moan about everything under the sun.

If they were 100% guaranteed combing their hair in the morning would end this epidemic the majority of them would come up with a reason not to.
Anything I say about your proposal or anyone else`s is in the area of discussion not put down or dismissal.

I can see where there could possibly be merit in internal quarantine, but on eradication I`m not sure total eradication of the virus would be possible.

One of the main problems I would see making that extremely difficult is the external quarantine.
I have no doubt that external elements are not helping. You only have to look at the border counties to see that. Especially with case numbers in Donegal and Cavan, but with Brexit and how we are tied in to an open border with Northern Ireland under the agreement our hand are tied on external quarantine. There would also be the problem of the common travel area between ourselves and the UK, but perhaps you can see away around or a solution to those.

walus · 13-10-2020 12:36PM

Libski wrote: »

It's easy to sacrifice someone that isn't you = selfishness.

Well, you see life of a 20 year old is roughly worth 4x as much a a life of a 80 year old - 'value of statistical life' speaking. Has that been taken into account by any of the policy and decision makers? That adds onto the fact that those vulnerable people are a very small group of our society.

So technically speaking, forgive for being blunt here, we chose a path and are optimizing our lives for a tiny amount of the least valued lives. That is unheard of and would not have place even in an organization such as HSE, which is charged with protecting human health. Even there, especially there considering limited resources that they need to efficiently apply, value of life is seriously taken into consideration.

The government should have conducted a thorough analysis of the measures undertaken to monetize the risk reductions and to facilitate comparison of benefits and costs. I very much doubt that this has been done.

Gradius · 13-10-2020 12:45PM

charlie14 wrote: »

Apologies if it appears I may appear to be knocking your ideas just for the sake of it.

I am genuinely not. I recognise that you one of the few here that has a proposal. Unlike many here whose only contribution is to bitch and moan about everything under the sun.

If they were 100% guaranteed combing their hair in the morning would end this epidemic the majority of them would come up with a reason not to.
Anything I say about your proposal or anyone else`s is in the area of discussion not put down or dismissal.

I can see where there could possibly be merit in internal quarantine, but on eradication I`m not sure total eradication of the virus would be possible.

One of the main problems I would see making that extremely difficult is the external quarantine.
I have no doubt that external elements are not helping. You only have to look at the border counties to see that. Especially with case numbers in Donegal and Cavan, but with Brexit and how we are tied in to an open border with Northern Ireland under the agreement our hand are tied on external quarantine. There would also be the problem of the common travel area between ourselves and the UK, but perhaps you can see away around or a solution to those.

It's true, there are practically no solutions on the table.

People seem more than content holding their faces to tree trunks in complaining, completely missing, and dismissing, the forest.

I could go on all day about each individual problem and solutions in enacting a country quarantine. But it's just ammunition for the trunk gazers

The facts of the matter are plain.

1) endless lockdowns are not going to work, indeed they are destroying the economy which is needed to provide healthcare. Lockdowns are a death spiral.

2) people chomping at the bit to get back to normal have convinced themselves that being able to do what they want is grand. That's a death spiral too.

3) hopes for a vaccine are nothing to plan upon. If one is created that is satisfactory, I foresee disasters in the campaign and a load more problems.

So, a difficult plan is better than no plan.

Quarantine internally, eradicate, quarantine externally. It is entirely possible, but it's difficult and people hate difficulty.

But the appetite will grow the more we cling to these death spirals. Next Summer, mark it.

charlie14 · 13-10-2020 12:46PM

Gradius wrote: »

We're rapidly approaching a most "interesting" time, as the Chinese proverb goes. With economies limping along and cash being burned like it's going out of fashion, it poses a real dilemma.

How do you fund health care/vaccine research/enforcement when the money isn't there?

These are the relative good times while we burn through all our savings, so to speak. But it can't last.

And with no exit strategy, well, this is going to get very interesting.

That is the one thing in all this is how cheap it has remained for states to borrow.
The US in dealing with a recession generally print money and spend their way out of it. Keeping all their production line relatively unaffected where they are then a jump ahead of those that used austerity when the good times come around again.

I just have the feeling that those with the big bucks who are lending at low rates are thinking the same way on this pandemic.That there will be no good times unless it is brought under some kind of control at least.

Nobody appears to have an exit strategy, but every country, and the guys with the big bucks, would appear to see a high level of immunity as at least a starting gate.
From what I can there are only two ways of achieving that. Naturally acquired immunity or immunity acquired through vaccination.

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

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VI - Read OP for Mod Warnings