Covid 19 Part XXVIII- 71,942 ROI(2,050 deaths) 51,824 NI (983 deaths) (28/11) Read OP

MOR316 wrote:

Basically, it makes no difference whether the pubs are open or closed, people are still going to have house gatherings so, I'm not sure what he's on about here

Well I often ended up at a party after the pub closed that wasn't even organised until near closing time.

eagle eye wrote: »

Well I often ended up at a party after the pub closed that wasn't even organised until near closing time.

That's not the point I was making. We all know that can happen.

I'm saying that Leo's point is meaningless. Parties, gatherings, whatever anyone wishes to call them, have been planned, are being planned and no doubt will be planned, regardless of whether the pubs are open or not.

I was invited to one for Christmas week, back in October ffs
I have people getting on to me about opening up my living room...

Actually, scratch that, Leo had an indoor gathering in Phoenix Park when pubs were closed in May

Arghus wrote: »

I think if the numbers were lower I'd feel better about it. But we have to take a few things into account - one, the virus is still circulating in numbers that can very quickly get out of hand again. There's also going to be a lot of demand and a lot of footfall into retail given the month that's in it. Now people might be controlling numbers in individual stores etc, etc but crowded shopping areas are still going to be thronged, indoor shopping centres will still be thronged - people will meet up with friends and groups.

I think if we didn't have the twin problem of case numbers just teetering on the edge of spiraling upwards and a load of pent up consumer demand that will inevitably bring people together into crowded areas, then I'd feel a lot better about it. I think retail being open - as it is - will, indirectly, contribute to numbers rising again.

Now, I amn't saying that it's as bad as pubs or restaurants or golf dinners or what have you. And I know the prospect of retailers having to close for these weeks is never really going to happen, but I think if it wasn't December it wouldn't be considered until the case numbers were lower.

If the numbers were lower and we didn't have the prospect of the December crowds I'd feel more confident that it won't backfire. Even if the numbers were lower and it was still December I'd feel more confident - but as it stands we have a bad mix of both of those things happening at the same time and while I don't think retail is as potentially disastrous as other sectors of the economy to open up, it's still potentially problematic.

Yes ,Arghus ,this is what I was thinking too.
If it wasn't Christmas everything could be a little more controlled .

So if this goes ahead here is how I see it playing out ...

Retail opening , great, we are all looking forward to that !
It will be difficult to control crowds.
Ŕ0 will creep up a little .

Restaurants and gastropubs opening.
Again, can't wait to get out for a meal and a pint .
All good to start with , but inevitably more mixing and with a few drinks less care .
Cases starting to rise again .

Two weeks later , pressure rising before Christmas with shopping , people gathering for pub to pub nights out .
People travelling for shopping and nights away .
Community transmission rising .
Cases doubling every 10 days to fortnight .

Christmas time , numbers high again and climbing .
People having family and friends over .
Flu as well as Covid cases now .
Hospitals under pressure but government have no appetite to shut down again and risk being labelled The Grinch .

After Christmas and the hospitals are having outbreaks of infection.
Pressure on health services due to increased cases , lack of staff because of illness or contact with Covid .

Everyone blaming everyone else , because it was obvious that this would happen so whose fault is it ?

What would I like to see ?
Not a continued lockdown, but 2 weekly increments between each opening
ie. open safely retail, gyms and hairdressers , enforce restrictions strictly . See if numbers stable , if so then open restaurants and gastro bars mid December , enforce strictly , check numbers , if ok then allow groups to visit Christmas week and up to New Year , and so on.

It would be great if it all worked out ( hey we all need a break at this stage ) but we will be heading to a disastrous Christmas if we don't open in a more controlled manner .

And before I am slated for being a panic merchant or doom monger , I have predicted correctly what has happened in September/ October , and have skin in the game , as it were .

Hulk Hands wrote: »

You say that people's argument isn't "stay in lockdown now to avoid another lockdown in the future" yet proceed to make that exact argument.

'50-100 cases a day'. After months of telling us to listen to the experts, have you suddenly some crystal ball to explain how 50-100 cases is the right amount to open up? All the while we've the third lowest incidence rate currently in the entirety of Europe and have had the harshest lockdown conditions in Europe since May on the whole.

Fair enough.
I guess my argument could be summed up "as stay in lockdown now(for a period)to avoid another lockdown in the future" - I guess I was arguing that people suggesting that the argument was the ludicrous stay in lockdown indefinitely to avoid a further lockdown, a deliberate misinterpretation that some people appeared to be making. Maybe you can't see the difference.

I think between 50-100 cases a day is a reasonable figure to sustain if you apply a level three level of restrictions. This is the figure Professor Philip Nolan, the Head of epidemiological modelling in NPHET - has repeatedly suggested is a sustainable target. I'd consider him an expert to be honest. Could it be higher? Could it be lower? Perhaps, but it seems reasonable to me. I don't think 300+ is. You are giving yourself a lot less slack.

Yeah, we're doing well compared to Europe and we've had a much harsher lockdown than most since the Summer. Do you think there might be a Connection? That's an argument to keep up the good work in my book - are you arguing in favour of maintaining harsher restrictions so we can maintain our advantage?

Arghus wrote: »

Fair enough.
I guess my argument could be summed up "as stay in lockdown now(for a period)to avoid another lockdown in the future" - I guess I was arguing that people suggesting that the argument was the ludicrous stay in lockdown indefinitely to avoid a further lockdown, a deliberate misinterpretation that some people appeared to be making. Maybe you can't see the difference.

I think between 50-100 cases a day is a reasonable figure to sustain if you apply a level three level of restrictions. This is the figure Professor Philip Nolan, the Head of epidemiological modelling in NPHET - has repeatedly suggested is a sustainable target. I'd consider him an expert to be honest. Could it be higher? Could it be lower? Perhaps, but it seems reasonable to me. I don't think 300+ is. You are giving yourself a lot less slack.

Yeah, we're doing well compared to Europe and we've had a much harsher lockdown than most since the Summer. Do you think there might be a Connection? That's an argument to keep up the good work in my book - are you arguing in favour of maintaining harsher restrictions so we can maintain our advantage?

where do the figures come from and actually audited as i see on RTE,
approx 3% tested positive.
the uk with lesser restrictions at differing times show figures 26nov. as 1 in 85 (you do math %).
so thats nowhere near our 5 weeks lockdown.
covid is like the rampant common cold and all are giving dubious figures and restricting citizens.
You will get it and live or die no matter what the politicians and alleged experts claim and use to
restrict the citizens movement and behaviour.
even the vaccine is an issue as the words on cost and if any use is dubious which shows
leaning to mass profit with government free "get out of jail card" for the profiteers.
of all the prices ive heard the russians have stated their vaccine (which has been place on application
ahead of most with WHO) will cost approx 20 dollars.
There is too much being made of covid by alleged experts and politicians seeking limelight.
yes you may die but it is your choice and life should not grind to a halt whilst failing to
protect the vulnerable as in nursing homes.

We're going to be in a mess in January February last time NPHET advice was ignored that's exactly what happened shame tbh


Shin

Wanderer78 wrote:

Again, the economies needs far outweigh our own needs

If you are going to make that claim let's hear a detailed explanation.
Also do you want to hop in a car and go around the country and pick out who dies? Because you and all those who don't care about covid running wild are going to be responsible for many deaths.

eagle eye wrote: »

If you are going to make that claim let's hear a detailed explanation.
Also do you want to hop in a car and go around the country and pick out who dies? Because you and all those who don't care about covid running wild are going to be responsible for many deaths.

How many deaths, the date rate is not even 1 percent. The nunber of ico admissions is also way longer than it was initially. The treatments are way better than it was at the start so the scaremongering really should stop

With schools open, majority of workplaces open, the lockdown fatigue, lax travel restrictions and the omni shambles that is the HSE contact tracing it's quite unlikely our cases arebnever going down to 50-100.

eagle eye wrote: »

It's not scaremongering it's projections based on fact.

Projections that they nphet have gotten hugely incorrect consistently over the last six months and more so it is scaremongering and false.

ElJeffe wrote: »

We will the country go into a harsher lockdown come January/February imo. Something akin to last March and not what we are seeing at present which hasn't gone far enough.

Bleak few weeks ahead im afraid.

Lockdowns like March won’t happen again, there simply isn’t public buy in.

zerosugarbuzz wrote: »

Agreed, but it’s not really Tony holohans fault the government went along with his ridiculous restrictions. Thankfully the public had the good sense to give the thumbs down to level 5 this time round.

Reckon they will only even more so now. No doubt Tony and co will be screaming for some version of martial law to impose discipline on the reckless peasants

fits wrote: »

I really wishe they’d keep the gyms, pubs and restaurants closed. Pay them to stay shut imo. Everyone would prefer safer household visits to that.

Christ.who’s “everyone”?

Btw are you a gym user? You want them shut so you can explain why that’s the case? I assume you have the stats?