is_that_so wrote: » It's not practical unless you are isolated yet NZ, who have gone for that, are yet again they are imposing a form of lockdown for just one case. We know COVID keeps coming back and even in China where they can lock people in cases are still emerging. East Asia is really not comparable in terms of culture and as some of their measures would fall foul of GDPR.
is_that_so wrote: » Possible testing at Dublin & Cork airports coming soon.https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/travel-restrictions-eased-following-changes-to-covid-19-testing-rules-1.4405833
"Hello there Mr Murphy. Are you restricting your movements since you got back into the country? You are? Grand so! Have a lovely day"
theological wrote: » Why is it not "practical"? Because Western people think their liberties are more important than the health of others? I don't know why you are bringing in GDPR when I'm referring to travel bans like in Taiwan. COVID keeps coming back because we keep giving it an opportunity to with international travel. Taiwan as of the end of October was COVID free for 200 days.
is_that_so wrote: » Because it requires the severe measures you've described. We don't do travel bans, being in the EU and Taiwan along with S Korea and others use mobile phone tracking. That's GDPR territory. Travel is a smaller component of the spread, it's the subsequent behaviours that are at the root of it.
theological wrote: » I don't think it does. It simply requires control on people arriving in the country. Australia has followed the same approach in respect to mandatory quarantine and banning non-essential travel into the country. Their cases are now for the most part in single figures. The reality is we could do similar, it is just that we don't want to because we put our own rights above the well being of others. Hiding behind the EU doesn't spare the Irish government's strategy criticism.
ShineOn7 wrote: » Otherwise all of the restrictions were for nothing UK, the Americas and Sweden shouldn't be allowed into Ireland till they get their omnishambles together
is_that_so wrote: » Australia locked down one state for 4 months, which is hardly a ringing endorsement. Their own screwup on quarantine was what caused that. There are ways to face this pandemic and like the vast majority of countries we've chosen not to restrict freedom of movement in and out of the country. That also matches the EU position on it.
Deleted User wrote: » Most of the corona in Ireland right now is a mutation from Spain that happened in the summer. If we had mandatory quarantines for people coming in it wouldn't have happened. People who went abroad or travelled here in the summer are per definition idiots who would spread it widely. A 14 day mandatory quarantine would have stopped them in their tracks.But NOOOO it makes more sense to shut down all businesses and bankrupt the country than to inconvenience a few holidaymakers. Realistically we should also have border controls with NI unless they get in line with us.
Deleted User wrote: » I agree but these aren't the worst countries at the moment. Belgium, The Netherlands, France and Italy are much worse. And we have a land border with the UK. It's not going to fly politically for some reason. Locking up your own citizens is much easier.
is_that_so wrote: » There are ways to face this pandemic and like the vast majority of countries we've chosen not to restrict freedom of movement in and out of the country. That also matches the EU position on it.
caveat emptor wrote: » I think the biggest advocates for open borders are those with property or work interests abroad. Very much a loud and influential minority.
fly_agaric wrote: » I have not seen examples of other ways so far. The EU countries approaches have failed really as they've had to bring in blanket restrictions to control the virus again. In some senses alot of the EU countries have better policies than Ireland anyway. The Schengen members did have the courage to just ban tourists from some countries & I think some enforce tests now also. Travel regulations here are strict on paper but unenforced & IMO the numbers who will flout it are enough to compromise it. Our aproach will fail again anyway. Once they try & open up the economy more while cases are present in the community & new "seeds" can be brought in via travel the cases will rise again and the govt. will need to bring in restrictions again to prevent the HSE/hospitals buckling under the strain. We'll be at this until at least late next year IMO. I can't see the HSE getting shots of a vaccine rolled out to 70 % of so (or even 50 %) of entire population in a few months even if one is available in quantities needed.
caveat emptor wrote: » That was one state. The others have had a normal life for a very long time. We have had a **** year. These decisions will mean we will have a **** year next year too. Why are you so enamoured with "living with the virus"? Do you like staying home and not being able to see friends and family. Do you like your kids not being able to play with their friends.
is_that_so wrote: » Almost all approaches have "failed", it's managing it until we get vaccines. They've all been tweaking their responses. Unlike us, shutting down is a last resort rather than a first choice but many of them have masks everywhere as a result. It's really the testing regime that's key anyway. There will be vaccines, in the plural next year. Another 2-3 candidates should report data this month.
fly_agaric wrote: » I think that is a bit unfair to the govt. here. They were very cautious I admit because our health service isn't that good and is in a fragile state with waiting lists etc. after spring. The other European countries only got a few weeks before they were bringing in new restrictions too. On the vaccine(s) plural, as said a limiting factor is how quickly HSE can get it distributed to the public. I think that will take them several months once enough is available. It is also unknowable how big an effect anti vax ideology will have on uptake. Depressingly I expect there'll be huge social media efforts run to discredit the vaccines and sow FUD once they becomes available. Hopefully people will ignore it.
fly_agaric wrote: » It is also unknowable how big an effect anti vax ideology will have on uptake. Depressingly I expect there'll be huge social media efforts run to discredit the vaccines and sow FUD once they becomes available. Hopefully people will ignore it.
is_that_so wrote: » It's a contrast to other counties. We got Level 5, they have curfews. Ultimately the cases will decline through both approaches because of the reduced contacts.
is_that_so wrote: » The punitive restrictions the virus brings should be enough for most people to be open to a vaccine.
3xh wrote: » And conversely, there’ll be a huge social media effort by the WHO, HSE, ECDC, to espouse the benefits and minuscule dangers of the vaccine.
3xh wrote: » It works both ways. People are right to be cautious, probing and sceptical of how all this Covid, lockdown, vaccine came about.
fly_agaric wrote: » As it should be. I don't think it does work both ways. At some point you have to trust in experts over the fruits of your own research into the matter or what is curated for your personal bubble on social media.
3xh wrote: » Here’s hoping any negative long term effects of these multiple vaccines don’t take 7 years to be redressed and admitted to, so.
nofools wrote: » I think it is important to keep an open mind about it. Don't get prematurely into the anti vax conspiracies with all these fears of the new world order but don't blindly trust those with commercial or political interests in rushing things either.
Covid-19: All travellers into State will have to provide negative PCR test
3xh wrote: » I agree totally. My point is that by facilitating unquestioned roll-out, Etc of these vaccines by taking one just to conform to society, you can’t say ‘stop, take it out,’ after it’s done any (potential) damage. The current figures we see every day from NPHET are the very figures being used to justify a vaccine. Those figures are simply massaged, erroneous even, in my view. I.e. a Covid death is anyone dying with Covid. A hospitalisation is anybody in hospital with Covid, even if they entered hospital primarily with a non Covid issue. And lastly, as seen today in one of the Covid threads here, it appears Covid free patients are contracting Covid in hospital and then being added to the ‘increasing’ hospitalisation figure further justifying lockdown and eventual vaccinations. This is why I’m sceptical. It’s not anti-Vax.
Strumms wrote: » If you go in to a hospital for a hip replacement operation... but you get attacked by a deranged lunatic, stabbed to death...you’ve been stabbed to death, murder. You haven’t died ‘with’ stab wounds you’ve died because you were stabbed, murdered. If a person has cancer, regardless of the prognosis... if they get covid and die because of contracting covid, covid is why they are dead....not cancer. A patient can have say Alzheimer’s disease, no cure, it’s fatal... but if they develop terminal cancer before Alzheimer’s kills them... then cancer killed them.. I don’t get this weird want by some to ignore the classification of deaths and attribute a covid death to other conditions...it’s weird.
saabsaab wrote: » As I said before pointless trying to lock down the country to eliminate the virus but importing new cases. Like trying to empty the bath but leaving the taps still running
saabsaab wrote: » Totally agree. As i say would you prefer to die with Covid or of Covid?
Tenzor07 wrote: » Also pointless closing the stable door after all the horses have bolted?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4781b34abcdc100dc96f5c22e41cff29.svg)
