Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Level 5 lockdown essentially failed

Options
2456789

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Boggles wrote: »
    30 odd in ICU and 230 in hospital and we are opening the economy for Christmas?

    What were the goals you were looking for?

    That's not too shabby to be fair.

    Italy are back to ICU numbers from March / April and deaths are starting to follow.

    A country on this Island has gone into lock down again.

    Where would you prefer to be heading into the festive season?

    The numbers don’t bother me but I fear they do bother government/NPHET.

    If it wasn’t Christmas we’d be locked down for another 2 months in my opinion.

    That’s the concern.


  • Options
    #33
    landofthetree
    Registered Users Posts: 2,303 ✭✭✭landofthetree


    Close the schools in January. Let them come in during the mid term in Feb and over Easter plius one more week in the summer.

    This should be the plan as Covid numbers are going to be pretty high after Xmas.


  • Options
    #34
    tjhook
    Registered Users Posts: 738 ✭✭✭tjhook


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    What I would love to know is say mid 2021 if we get all healthcare workers and vulnerable people vaccinated can we just then return to normal?

    That's what I've been wondering too. Even at the end of next year when everybody has access to the vaccine.

    Let's say 80% of people are willing to take a vaccine, and the vaccine is 90-95% effective (maybe 95% but I'm not sure how certain that is). That leaves somewhere in the region of 25% of the population still at risk to Covid. And I think that's borderline in terms of herd immunity, but I'm open to correction.

    Will the government just let things go back to normal? Or leave measures in place to protect the 25%? Imagine the uproar if they're not protected.


  • Options
    #35
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,683 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The numbers don’t bother me but I fear they do bother government/NPHET.

    If it wasn’t Christmas we’d be locked down for another 2 months in my opinion.

    That’s the concern.

    So you are inventing scenarios to be concerned about? :confused:

    Seriously is there not enough going on?


  • Options
    #36
    _Brian
    Registered Users Posts: 18,508 ✭✭✭✭_Brian


    landofthetree wrote: »
    Close the schools in January. Let them come in during the mid term in Feb and over Easter plius one more week in the summer.

    This should be the plan as Covid numbers are going to be pretty high after Xmas.

    There’s no science in saying that. Less than 2% of recent covid cases have been in schools.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    rob316
    Registered Users Posts: 17,989 ✭✭✭✭rob316


    Failure. L5 did not drop the numbers to the same degree as L3 did. The damage to the economy far outweighed the effectiveness of the restrictions. Sage in the UK said closing non essential retail will only bring the r0 down by .1%, instead the geniuses in charge have decided to shove all our retail activity into 3 weeks. I was in Aldi on Saturday, social distancing and low numbers out the window it was absolutely packed. You will have similar scenes across the whole of december, everywhere. The weather is about to turn very cold and your incredibly naive if you think big retail stores will leave their customers outside.


  • Options
    #38
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    landofthetree wrote: »
    Close the schools in January. Let them come in during the mid term in Feb and over Easter plius one more week in the summer.

    This should be the plan as Covid numbers are going to be pretty high after Xmas.

    I will refer you to the best answer to your assertion on the other thread which you duly ignored
    seamus wrote: »
    The "turning an oil tanker" analogy is the best one when it comes to this virus. When you first turn the wheel, you can barely even feel the ship moving at all.

    Case numbers don't change on a whim. The seeds are sown and don't sprout for 14-21 days.

    So *if* we see an upward change in case numbers, it won't be till 15th January at the very earliest.

    By that point they will still have been on a continuous downward trend from where we are now.

    If we take the worst case scenario where cases stay flat till the 15th and then begin a sharp upward trend, you're still talking about New Year before we're back in 4 digits.

    More likely, with hospitality closed until Friday we won't see any remarkable change in cases caused by today's easing of restrictions.

    We *may* see small bump in numbers around the 25th as the impact from opening restaurants is felt. But we know level 3 general works, so it won't be as bad as expected.

    The most noticeable jump in cases will be around the first week in January as the impact of opening up on the 18th is felt. Imposing tighter restrictions on the 6th then should (in theory) ensure that we get cases back down and under control before we see any serious problems emerge.

    The wildcard here is peoples' behaviour. If people throw caution to the wind and go "ah shure it's Xmas, we can lock down in January", then the spike in early January could be huge.

    If people accept that this is a one-year deal and make a good faith effort to stick with the guidelines, then any increase in cases should be manageable.


  • Options
    #39
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,287 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Can only be as successful as the level of compliance - whatever the incidence of school transmission is. Large house parties are still a regular fixture as is cross country travel.


  • Options
    #40
    Bit cynical
    Registered Users Posts: 2,338 ✭✭✭Bit cynical


    kaahooters wrote: »
    if people will get vaccinated, thats the next issue.
    Some people will get vaccinated however and that will ease the need for strict lockdowns somewhat.

    What we haven't done however is found a sustainable way of living with the virus long-term. It is still a situation where we are forced to lift the lockdown a bit, then people who have been pent up head out to the shops, then news reports of people "abusing" their freedoms and calls for re-imposition of restrictions and the cycle begins again.


  • Options
    #41
    copeyhagen
    Registered Users Posts: 4,528 ✭✭✭copeyhagen


    what i would like to know, is if the median age of death is still 83?
    have we been lied to again, are nearly all hospital cases still the elderly(vulnerable)?
    whats the average age of the currently hospital admitted FOR covid, not the 200 that caught covid while in hospital?
    whats the average age of ICU covid patients?
    where they admitted to hospital/ICU with covid or caught covid while there.

    imo these are the important questions, of course we will never know the answers.. or not until after. not as long as humpty dumpty is health minister, and doctor hush is CMO


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,683 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    prunudo wrote: »
    With so many businesses open I don't believe closing the few remaining retail was really worth it when you factor in the cost of pup and lost revenue to amazon and the like.

    I can see both sides of it, standards from what I saw personally, dropped considerably, I left a couple of retail outlets because they were taking the píss with the amount of people they had let in, shopping which had been a solidarity event was now a family day out again.

    That said there was a couple of other businesses that did not deviate from their strict protocols from the start and were closed.

    I would a preferred a stern reminder to businesses to act responsibly with extra protocols and with actual enforcement than simply closing them down.

    Hopefully that's the route for next year.


  • Options
    #43
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    atr2002 wrote: »
    I was surprised they cited kids mental health as a reason not to close schools.

    If they had of extended the Halloween hols a week either side of the break and the same with Christmas, id wager the numbers would plummet, as looking to my previous post, the age profile getting infected being 35 to 45 being parents of primary school kids

    It was a political stunt to appease the voter base, nothing more. Harried parents working from home can't have little Deirdre and Seanie running around the kitchen, now can they? And take a gander at what was posted in the Schools thread a few minutes ago:

    "Multiple Covid-19 cases have been confirmed at a school in Co Galway.
    An urgent letter was sent to parents and guardians at the school by the HSE last Friday.
    They were told that all close contacts of the cases had been contacted."

    Some people here defending schools remaining open in Level 5 have a vested interest doing so.


  • Options
    #44
    tjhook
    Registered Users Posts: 738 ✭✭✭tjhook


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Some people here defending schools remaining open in Level 5 have a vested interest doing so.

    I haven't defended it on Boards, but I have a vested interest in them staying open. My kids. I want them to have an education.

    At the start of all this there was an attempt made to utilise "online leaning". It was a flop. One of my kids had one class online per day. The other had none and has simply assigned work to do in her own time.

    As you reference the Schools threads, I also remember the postings from teachers stating how online learning couldn't possibly be made to work. The combination of "I have very bad internet access", "I have no laptop", "I'm not using my own resources for this", "I'm not doing that in my bedroom", "It's not fair because not all students have the equipment to participate"... it may be valid, but it shows how there's no alternative to keeping the schools open.


  • Options
    #45
    FintanMcluskey
    Registered Users Posts: 8,285 ✭✭✭FintanMcluskey


    _Brian wrote: »
    We are by far the lowest covid figures across Europe. I’d say that’s a resounding success.
    Yea, NEPHET had hoped the figures would have been lower but remember the government watered down their recommendations for political reasons.

    It did a good job, we need to minimise the spread now.

    General feeling is we will be straight back into a L5 on 6th Jan.

    Countries round the world that were being held up as shining examples of what we could be doing are now implementing similar lockdowns to ours now.

    There is more issues in town than Covid.

    The rest of the EU realised that months ago

    It’s costing Ireland 3 million an hour to win this bolix Covid trophy of fewest cases in the EU


  • Options
    #46
    funnydoggy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭funnydoggy


    atr2002 wrote: »
    I was surprised they cited kids mental health as a reason not to close schools.

    If they had of extended the Halloween hols a week either side of the break and the same with Christmas, id wager the numbers would plummet, as looking to my previous post, the age profile getting infected being 35 to 45 being parents of primary school kids


    A government caring about mental health? :pac:


  • Options
    #47
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    FintanMcluskey wrote: »
    There is more issues in town than Covid.

    The rest of the EU realised that months ago

    It’s costing Ireland 3 million an hour to win this bolix Covid trophy of fewest cases in the EU

    Might want to inform yourself on restrictions in Europe at the moment


  • Options
    #48
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,614 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Maybe OP we should have left things as they were. Then we could be staring down the barrel now and perhaps be looking forward to another 6 months of lockdiwn

    Now I think there could have been something closer to Level 4, but I'm not going to criticise when they brought down the level of infections and the health service is still coping


  • Options
    #49
    FintanMcluskey
    Registered Users Posts: 8,285 ✭✭✭FintanMcluskey


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Might want to inform yourself on restrictions in Europe at the moment

    I know all about them from June to November.

    Inform yourself about those


  • Options
    #50
    FintanMcluskey
    Registered Users Posts: 8,285 ✭✭✭FintanMcluskey


    Beasty wrote: »
    Maybe OP we should have left things as they were. Then we could be staring down the barrel now and perhaps be looking forward to another 6 months of lockdiwn

    Which we are of course looking forward to months more lockdown

    Something like a level 3-4 mishmash

    I assume Ireland is now the most “relaxed” nation in Europe by a significant amount?


  • Options
    #51
    John O.Groats
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 837 ✭✭✭John O.Groats


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It was a political stunt to appease the voter base, nothing more. Harried parents working from home can't have little Deirdre and Seanie running around the kitchen, now can they? And take a gander at what was posted in the Schools thread a few minutes ago:

    "Multiple Covid-19 cases have been confirmed at a school in Co Galway.
    An urgent letter was sent to parents and guardians at the school by the HSE last Friday.
    They were told that all close contacts of the cases had been contacted."

    Some people here defending schools remaining open in Level 5 have a vested interest doing so.

    As have those who have a vested interest in wanting the wet pubs to reopen. Education is far more important than getting scuttered in a pub.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    copeyhagen
    Registered Users Posts: 4,528 ✭✭✭copeyhagen


    Beasty wrote: »
    Maybe OP we should have left things as they were. Then we could be staring down the barrel now and perhaps be looking forward to another 6 months of lockdiwn

    Now I think there could have been something closer to Level 4, but I'm not going to criticise when they brought down the level of infections and the health service is still coping

    the health service was never under any threat.


  • Options
    #53
    Tork
    Registered Users Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭Tork


    It doesn't do well most winters when the flu hits.


  • Options
    #54
    GT89
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,770 ✭✭✭GT89


    The government are making up their levels system as they go along. Last time we were on Level 3 restaurants were outdoor only now indoors is permitted but it's still Level 3 and not Level 2. Is the whole purpose of the level system just to scare people Level 3 sounds scarier than Level 2 and Level 5 sounds scarier than Level 4.

    But under all levels the plan appears to tinkered and changed from what was originally set out.


  • Options
    #55
    DSN
    Registered Users Posts: 288 ✭✭DSN


    John O.Groats wrote: »
    As have those who have a vested interest in wanting the wet pubs to reopen. Education is far more important than getting scuttered in a pub.

    Literally everyone has a vested interest in something for different reasons, don't think anyone is completely selfless in this, just some may think their reason more noble than others. Be it 'its my livelyhood', 'my kids need their education' or 'I or family member vulnerable so lockdown until it's gone one way or another'.


  • Options
    #56
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Well yes, if the level 5 is half arsed. Schools open? Not L5.

    Spot on. It was level 5 in name alone.


  • Options
    #57
    Thats me
    Registered Users Posts: 639 ✭✭✭Thats me


    Deleted User wrote: »
    how many months of level 5 would be needed to get back towards 0, which seems to be our goal. Would it even be sustainable?

    Proper lockdown would take 3-5 weeks, i think.

    When i writing "proper" i mean:
    • Closing everything what can be closed
    • Self isolation - no public gatherings etc
    • Mass testing
    • Isolation of all identified cases
    • Entering any public places only after passing the test
    • Curfew
    • Regular desinfection of public places, even outside
    • Isolated camps for children where they would live all the time with their teachers
    • Same about nursing homes - homes should be isolated with staff inside
    • Replacing all appliances in public places by touch-less alternatives
    • Closing all shops, leaving only these providing internet shopping with touch-less delivery
    • ...
    • Strict enforcement of all measures

    No pain - no gain.

    In return we would have suppressed many other infections, drop in sick leaves and more efficient economics.

    With weak lockdowns we will only have series of disturbances with no significant achievements. And this is not only about this pandemic. World getting overpopulated very fast, new pandemiсs will appear more often and be spread faster, on some stage current economical confrontation can transform to biological war.. It is better to be prepared and having working methods to protect the country than be left unprepared, having no idea what we do next time, especially having spend all money on non-working lockdowns 20-21 y.y.


  • Options
    #58
    Tork
    Registered Users Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭Tork


    Could you imagine the howling from many of the posters here if the above were to happen. They'd require sedation!


  • Options
    #59
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    If you thought Level 5 failed, you should have seen the alternative.


  • Options
    #60
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Tork wrote: »
    Could you imagine the howling from many of the posters here if the above were to happen. They'd require sedation!

    No sedation required as what was suggested will never happen. It's essentially Zero Covid which was never a runner here, although Thomas Ryan and his mates never got the memo.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    hmmm wrote: »
    If you thought Level 5 failed, you should have seen the alternative.

    Can you turn on your crystal ball and tell us?


Advertisement