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

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VII *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

Options
1…165166168170171…336

Comments

  • Options
    #5012
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Yet again, for those at the back, his role is to ADVISE THE GOVERNMENT. He can do that in government buildings. He is NOT a government spokesman. No part of his job entails going onto chat shows, that just seems to be a hobby/vanity project.

    :D just think of him as an adviser in the way a navigator advises a rally driver, only instead of the road ahead, Tony is admiring his side profile in the mirror..


  • Options
    #5013
    Bobeagleburger
    Registered Users Posts: 45,354 ✭✭✭✭Bobeagleburger


    rusty cole wrote: »
    would you believe me if I said in the last 5 years our population of over 85's has gone up over 25%?? cos it's true....

    There was a very interesting statistician on the radio last week and that little beut blew me away... how does that change the first wave?? people should think about that for one minute really and come to the logical conclusion.


    Care homes fiasco? Elderly basically being very cautious.

    Logical.


  • Options
    #5014
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,458 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    Deleted User wrote: »
    We are making this a crisis ourselves, when it really doesn’t need to be.

    We are testing over 10k a day and only a very small percentage test positive each day, resulting in a few hundred “cases”.

    Of these cases, a huge number are either not sick at all or extremely mildly ill such as a slight cough, fever etc.

    With all those hundreds of positives a day, our hospital numbers are still absolutely tiny. ICU was 29 last time I checked.

    Our hospital numbers also include people in hospital for other reasons who happened to test positive for Covid while in hospital.

    Our deaths are admittedly overstated and include lots of “With” Covid deaths. Where basically Covid was just suspected as a contributing factor. But the main factor was possibly that the person was 90 and terminally ill.

    If this wasn’t in the news every minute of every day, would you even realise that anything was different?

    We go back to normal when WE decide. Probably when the public are completely sick and tired of it all and not listening anymore or when the finances get too bad to keep it up any longer.

    I look at this the opposite way and take it that the measures that have been taken have had an impact, kept numbers low and therefore saved lives.

    We've dropped down the lists of EU countries so clearly doing something right.

    Now, in the last few weeks as restrictions have eased we have seen numbers go up that cannot be a co-incidence.

    At the same time other countries numbers have increased drastically and many have gone into the equivalent of Level 5 lockdown and Britain is being isolated due to a new strain.

    However all the focus seems to be on opening and closing of pubs which despite what the publicans say does lead to people mingling etc.

    I'm a person who loves a pub myself but haven't been in months, was in one on Saturday and saw rules being flouted (large groups, less than one meter between tables) and I think it's actually better if they're closed.


  • Options
    #5015
    average_runner
    Registered Users Posts: 12,851 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Young population?




    We are not much younger than other european countries. We don't even have the lowest median age


  • Options
    #5016
    average_runner
    Registered Users Posts: 12,851 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    murpho999 wrote: »
    I look at this the opposite way and take it that the measures that have been taken have had an impact, kept numbers low and therefore saved lives.

    We've dropped down the lists of EU countries so clearly doing something right.

    Now, in the last few weeks as restrictions have eased we have seen numbers go up that cannot be a co-incidence.

    At the same time other countries numbers have increased drastically and many have gone into the equivalent of Level 5 lockdown and Britain is being isolated due to a new strain.

    However all the focus seems to be on opening and closing of pubs which despite what the publicans say does lead to people mingling etc.

    I'm a person who loves a pub myself but haven't been in months, was in one on Saturday and saw rules being flouted (large groups, less than one meter between tables) and I think it's actually better if they're closed.




    Says alot for Irish culture when all we talk about is the pubs!!!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5017
    Windmill100000
    Registered Users Posts: 585 ✭✭✭Windmill100000


    murpho999 wrote: »
    I look at this the opposite way and take it that the measures that have been taken have had an impact, kept numbers low and therefore saved lives.

    We've dropped down the lists of EU countries so clearly doing something right.

    Now, in the last few weeks as restrictions have eased we have seen numbers go up that cannot be a co-incidence.

    At the same time other countries numbers have increased drastically and many have gone into the equivalent of Level 5 lockdown and Britain is being isolated due to a new strain.

    However all the focus seems to be on opening and closing of pubs which despite what the publicans say does lead to people mingling etc.

    I'm a person who loves a pub myself but haven't been in months, was in one on Saturday and saw rules being flouted (large groups, less than one meter between tables) and I think it's actually better if they're closed.

    I think it's easy for people to say lockdown when they are not impacted too much. I have my job, I'm good, I can afford to pay my mortgage and no real hardship beyond manageable stress and worry.

    But for those whose livelihoods are on the line, whose jobs have gone with a shrinking level of job prospects on the horizon, those staying in abusive relationships, those dealing with mental health problems and suicide of family members, how do they feel about lockdown?

    I think if I was in the latter group I'd have a different view about staying home and staying cosy and safe.


  • Options
    #5018
    cena
    Registered Users Posts: 9,998 ✭✭✭cena


    Are we going back into level 5?


  • Options
    #5019
    Windmill100000
    Registered Users Posts: 585 ✭✭✭Windmill100000


    cena wrote: »
    Are we going back into level 5?

    Sadly I think we will, based purely on case numbers, not deaths.


  • Options
    #5020
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,458 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    Windmill100000 wrote: »
    I think it's easy for people to say lockdown when they are not impacted too much. I have my job, I'm good, I can afford to pay my mortgage and no real hardship beyond manageable stress and worry.

    But for those whose livelihoods are on the line, whose jobs have gone with a shrinking level of job prospects on the horizon, those staying in abusive relationships, those dealing with mental health problems and suicide of family members, how do they feel about lockdown?

    I think if I was in the latter group I'd have a different view about staying home and staying cosy and safe.

    Ok, so having all pubs, shops open and inter-county travel is going to solve people's problems with abusive relationships and menal health problems?


  • Options
    #5021
    average_runner
    Registered Users Posts: 12,851 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    Windmill100000 wrote: »
    I think it's easy for people to say lockdown when they are not impacted too much. I have my job, I'm good, I can afford to pay my mortgage and no real hardship beyond manageable stress and worry.

    But for those whose livelihoods are on the line, whose jobs have gone with a shrinking level of job prospects on the horizon, those staying in abusive relationships, those dealing with mental health problems and suicide of family members, how do they feel about lockdown?

    I think if I was in the latter group I'd have a different view about staying home and staying cosy and safe.




    All good points, but sadly we went from level 5 to level 3, allowed things to open and asked to keep social contacts low.


    Now either

    a) The reopening of stuff not open in level 5 cause the rise
    b) people didn't keep a low social contact group.


    I personally believe its 'b' from what i saw. B seems to only think of themselves and not people who are in a bad situation.


    We helped out a friend for xmas this year as a few things went wrong on them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5022
    Allinall
    Registered Users Posts: 6,618 ✭✭✭Allinall


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Yet again, for those at the back, his role is to ADVISE THE GOVERNMENT. He can do that in government buildings. He is NOT a government spokesman. No part of his job entails going onto chat shows, that just seems to be a hobby/vanity project.

    Did you just make this up?

    Or were you on the interview panel when he got the job?


  • Options
    #5023
    Windmill100000
    Registered Users Posts: 585 ✭✭✭Windmill100000


    murpho999 wrote: »
    Ok, so having all pubs, shops open and inter-county travel is going to solve people's problems with abusive relationships and menal health problems?

    Nothing will solve all people's problems.


  • Options
    #5024
    average_runner
    Registered Users Posts: 12,851 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    Windmill100000 wrote: »
    Sadly I think we will, based purely on case numbers, not deaths.


    You can't wait for the death numbers to go up s then it be too late. Got to strike early.


    Germany waited and they had higher deaths this time than they had last April!


  • Options
    #5025
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,458 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    Windmill100000 wrote: »
    Nothing will solve all people's problems.

    Exactly, so it's impossible to find a perfect solution and nor can you make loads of exceptions.

    It's a very difficult call that of course is going to have negative impacts on people but to me it's no co-incidence that case numbers increase both times after restrictions were relaxed.


  • Options
    #5026
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,282 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    murpho999 wrote: »
    Exactly, so it's impossible to find a perfect solution and nor can you make loads of exceptions.

    It's a very difficult call that of course is going to have negative impacts on people but to me it's no co-incidence that case numbers increase both times after restrictions were relaxed.

    Absolutely not, the shops have been a disgrace, the coffee, the queues, the people piling on each other on south william street with the takeaway pints. But i think the pubs have become like the icrecream polio false causality, they are distanced, sanitised, screened, masked etc... the pubs are presenting way less problematic environs that most clothes stores yet are the quickest target for closure


  • Options
    #5027
    Windmill100000
    Registered Users Posts: 585 ✭✭✭Windmill100000


    murpho999 wrote: »
    Exactly, so it's impossible to find a perfect solution and nor can you make loads of exceptions.

    It's a very difficult call that of course is going to have negative impacts on people but to me it's no co-incidence that case numbers increase both times after restrictions were relaxed.

    Well obviously case numbers will increase when restrictions relax. I don't think anyone is going to disagree with that. But do we stay in lockdown and deal with the significant other crises that result from it knowing that in spite of cases the vast majority of people do not die or are even hospitalised?

    I see your points, I really do. I think we are just looking at this whole situation differently which is fine. I respect your position.


  • Options
    #5028
    TomSweeney
    Registered Users Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    Genuine question.

    Let's say by summer , or by whenever they have most old/vulnerable vaccinated - what then ?
    In theory hospitals won't be slammed so they should life restrictions ... but do people honestly think they will ?

    Will they stop asking children to wear masks in school ? - or will they shift the goalposts, saying restrictions aren't there to protect hospitals being overrun but just to stop all spread of the virus.

    We know zero covid is impossible - look at Australia and NZ, so what does this mean ?


    I really want to be wrong here, I really do ...


  • Options
    #5029
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Allinall wrote: »
    Did you just make this up?

    Or were you on the interview panel when he got the job?

    No but I can read a policy document. :rolleyes: It's a government document, so free for anyone to read. No mention of chat shows or the Late Late Show in it at all.


  • Options
    #5030
    Sofa King Great
    Registered Users Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Sofa King Great


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Absolutely not, the shops have been a disgrace, the coffee, the queues, the people piling on each other on south william street with the takeaway pints. But i think the pubs have become like the icrecream polio false causality, they are distanced, sanitised, screened, masked etc... the pubs are presenting way less problematic environs that most clothes stores yet are the quickest target for closure
    Do you honestly believe that clothes stores are more problematic than pubs? Like really honestly?


  • Options
    #5031
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    SAMTALK wrote: »

    I haven't seen this on any media

    They have been continuously overstating and dramatising the threat on a daily basis since all this kicked off. Up until pretty recently they were still insisting that the looming threat of hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions of cases were a possibility when that isn’t the case at all.
    They implied healthy young people were at severe risk of death long after it was clear that statistically this isn’t true.
    They promoted the idea that giving your grandparent a hug made you a selfish granny killer.
    They have perpetuated the notion that any form of social contact is extremely dangerous, reckless and selfish (see Tony’s tweets this week urging people to stay at home, and not see family or visit restaurants/shops, even though we aren’t in lockdown).

    They showed videos of people literally dropping dead on the streets of China, some of which weren’t even legit, in order to put the fear into people.
    They have been laying on the doom and negativity non stop, with any remotely positive news cast aside and given little to no publicity.
    A pessimistic spin is put on pretty much everything, from low case numbers to the vaccination.
    If you refuse to acknowledge this then I simply cannot help you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5032
    risteard7
    Registered Users Posts: 879 ✭✭✭risteard7


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    China back to normal is proof positive that lockdown works. We haven't had the stomach for the actions required to tackle this thing.

    An urban population of 11 million versus 160,000 in rural Donegal. Yeah ok so.


  • Options
    #5033
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,458 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    Allinall wrote: »
    Did you just make this up?

    Or were you on the interview panel when he got the job?

    No of course it's not made up.

    It's public knowledge that part of the CMO's role is to advise.

    From CMO's own website:
    Advice on issues relating to work and health

    Link

    Government can choose to accept, ignore or adapt the advice as they have done in the past and like they're doing now. The CMO's advised Level 5 which they're not doing.


  • Options
    #5034
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    average_runner wrote: »
    All good points, but sadly we went from level 5 to level 3, allowed things to open and asked to keep social contacts low.


    Now either

    a) The reopening of stuff not open in level 5 cause the rise
    b) people didn't keep a low social contact group.


    I personally believe its 'b' from what i saw. B seems to only think of themselves and not people who are in a bad situation.


    We helped out a friend for xmas this year as a few things went wrong on them.

    I dont think anyone can say who or what's driving it from a societal view as the data could not explain the spread in about 40% of instances and still cannot, why do you think it's lockdown 5 every time. They should consider no matter what, as they said in the beginning, this cannot be stopped but only drawn out #flattenthecurve #we'reallinthistogether :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #5035
    Bobeagleburger
    Registered Users Posts: 45,354 ✭✭✭✭Bobeagleburger


    cena wrote: »
    Are we going back into level 5?

    Definitely. Government will probably delay going into it, but it'll almost certainly happen. Their delay will probably prolong the length of level 5 imo.


  • Options
    #5036
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,458 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    Windmill100000 wrote: »
    Well obviously case numbers will increase when restrictions relax. I don't think anyone is going to disagree with that. But do we stay in lockdown and deal with the significant other crises that result from it knowing that in spite of cases the vast majority of people do not die or are even hospitalised?

    I see your points, I really do. I think we are just looking at this whole situation differently which is fine. I respect your position.

    The majority do not die but over 2000 have. Imagine what that number would be if nothing had been done.

    Also this new strain is out and could be more deadly. So those numbers could easily multiplied to tens of thousands.

    I think this is going to be life for next 6-12 months until vacinne program rolls out and/or disease fizzles out.


  • Options
    #5037
    ElJeffe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 725 ✭✭✭ElJeffe


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    China back to normal is proof positive that lockdown works. We haven't had the stomach for the actions required to tackle this thing.

    Completely agree. The half arsed half baked approach we've taken (and most western nations) is laughable.


  • Options
    #5038
    TomTomTim
    Registered Users Posts: 2,840 ✭✭✭TomTomTim


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    They have been continuously overstating and dramatising the threat on a daily basis since all this kicked off. Up until pretty recently they were still insisting that the looming threat of hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions of cases were a possibility when that isn’t the case at all.
    They implied healthy young people were at severe risk of death long after it was clear that statistically this isn’t true.
    They promoted the idea that giving your grandparent a hug made you a selfish granny killer.
    They have perpetuated the notion that any form of social contact is extremely dangerous, reckless and selfish (see Tony’s tweets this week urging people to stay at home, and not see family or visit restaurants/shops, even though we aren’t in lockdown).

    They showed videos of people literally dropping dead on the streets of China, some of which weren’t even legit, in order to put the fear into people.
    They have been laying on the doom and negativity non stop, with any remotely positive news cast aside and given little to no publicity.
    A pessimistic spin is put on pretty much everything, from low case numbers to the vaccination.
    If you refuse to acknowledge this then I simply cannot help you.

    I'm literally just after hearing someone on one of the RTE radio stations claim that "we're all in fear". Bad enough that they are pushing a fear driven agenda, what's worse is that they are claiming to talk for all of us.

    “The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”- ― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov




  • Options
    #5039
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,458 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    They have been continuously overstating and dramatising the threat on a daily basis since all this kicked off. Up until pretty recently they were still insisting that the looming threat of hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions of cases were a possibility when that isn’t the case at all.
    They implied healthy young people were at severe risk of death long after it was clear that statistically this isn’t true.
    They promoted the idea that giving your grandparent a hug made you a selfish granny killer.
    They have perpetuated the notion that any form of social contact is extremely dangerous, reckless and selfish (see Tony’s tweets this week urging people to stay at home, and not see family or visit restaurants/shops, even though we aren’t in lockdown).

    They showed videos of people literally dropping dead on the streets of China, some of which weren’t even legit, in order to put the fear into people.
    They have been laying on the doom and negativity non stop, with any remotely positive news cast aside and given little to no publicity.
    A pessimistic spin is put on pretty much everything, from low case numbers to the vaccination.
    If you refuse to acknowledge this then I simply cannot help you.

    Can you provide examples of these articles please because I haven't seen any. Also don't the media always sensationalise (which I think you're also doing in your posts) everything anyway, you're a fool if you believe everything in it but I have not seen videos of Chinese people dropping dead on the street allegedly due to Covid.

    Tony Holohan's twitter is not part of the media. He's the Chief Medical Officer and he's advised not going to pubs and restraurants as he disagrees with the government's decisions on lockdown.


  • Options
    #5040
    Elmer Blooker
    Registered Users Posts: 6,089 ✭✭✭Elmer Blooker


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Absolutely not, the shops have been a disgrace, the coffee, the queues, the people piling on each other on south william street with the takeaway pints. But i think the pubs have become like the icrecream polio false causality, they are distanced, sanitised, screened, masked etc... the pubs are presenting way less problematic environs that most clothes stores yet are the quickest target for closure
    Have you been even near South William Street recently?
    The whole thing has been blown out of all proportion by the spoofers in the media and the 'experts'.
    I've been there recently and while there may be small groups of young people the VAST majority are older people, all looking miserable and downtrodden.
    The non stop partying on South William Street is not just a myth but downright lying.
    I now know what Eastern Europe was like under communism!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5041
    Parabellum9
    Closed Accounts Posts: 455 ✭✭Parabellum9


    Windmill100000 wrote: »
    Sadly I think we will, based purely on case numbers, not deaths.

    ~750 cases out of a population of 4.9 million, lets shut the whole country down yet again. I wonder how many people this week have caught the winter flu?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement