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

Covid 19 Part XXX-113,332 ROI(2,282 deaths) 81,251 NI (1,384 deaths) (05/01) Read OP

1…3637394142…330

Comments

  • #1142
    Benimar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,790 ✭✭✭Benimar


    awec wrote: »
    I think "you must comply 100% and if you do not you are selfish" is an unrealistic, simplistic viewpoint to take that lacks any empathy whatsoever for the circumstances and state of people other than yourself.

    I don’t expect 100% compliance, but if me believing that no one needs house parties or mass gatherings because of their ‘circumstances’ makes me lack empathy, then so be it.

    I understand people need social contact. I also understand this can be done in small numbers while keeping social distance etc. There is no reason for groups of 10+ to meet up indoors.


  • #1143
    zerosugarbuzz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭zerosugarbuzz


    eviltimeban wrote: »
    Or even just release the numbers without the whole press conference. I mean, aren't they sick and tired of having to go in there every day??

    No, it feeds their egos and gives them a great sense of importance. They will actually be loathe to give it up.!


  • #1144
    growleaves
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,983 ✭✭✭growleaves


    Xaniaj wrote: »
    Very much the case of The Boy Who Cried Wolf.

    If we enjoy Christmas or live a normal life we subsequently have to 'pay for it' with a slew of asymptomatic PCR-test positives. Lol. The humanity

    See you here next year for cold and flu season when we haven't expanded our hospital system ('its not that simple, its complex'), you'll all have beads of sweat on your forehead every winter counting so-called 'cases'.


  • #1145
    zerosugarbuzz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭zerosugarbuzz


    fits wrote: »
    I’m out at least temporarily

    I’d just work from home more than I have been lately and keep the distance when in.

    You were supposed to be working from home all along unless it was absolutely essential for you to be in your workplace. Sounds like you have been a bit lax regarding the guidelines. I have only been on my office twice since mid March and both times for less than an hour.


  • #1146
    Happydays2020
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭Happydays2020


    awec wrote: »
    I think "you must comply 100% and if you do not you are selfish" is an unrealistic, simplistic viewpoint to take that lacks any empathy whatsoever for the circumstances and state of people other than yourself.

    During the 6 week lockdown I visited my parents. I was careful when there and I was anxious about it but saw as a necessity as my father has been very lonely in this period.

    Given I had social contact with others on the 20th, I will wait until after this weekend to see them again. Although will see where cases are as I don’t want to put them under undue risks.

    I am (kind of) breaking the rules although that is open to interpretation, but doing it in a way that is trying to manage the risk.


  • Advertisement
  • #1147
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    fits wrote: »
    I’m out at least temporarily

    I’d just work from home more than I have been lately and keep the distance when in.
    We had planned to have my mum over for Xmas dinner but I told her what happened so she stayed at home.

    I have to say I’m amazed at people who are so concerned by the present situation but yet remain in an environment that they consider dangerous. So you preferred not to upset senior management, not having your Mum over for dinner was of lesser importance. Strange tbh.


  • #1148
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 55,046 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    Benimar wrote: »
    I don’t expect 100% compliance, but if me believing that no one needs house parties or mass gatherings because of their ‘circumstances’ makes me lack empathy, then so be it.

    I understand people need social contact. I also understand this can be done in small numbers while keeping social distance etc. There is no reason for groups of 10+ to meet up indoors.

    I agree that house parties and mass gatherings are ridiculous and there is no excuse.

    But I was talking about much less egregious breaking of the restrictions.


  • #1149
    Pinch Flat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,780 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    I dunno I can see the Christmas numbers having a big dent. Know plenty of people that had packed houses for Christmas - mixing with plenty of other households during the day, elderly mixing etc. Couple of houses around me had loads of cars parked up for Christmas day - I suspect the same again over new years. I think the January numbers are going to be huge. All the data suggests it. Can see them stopping the schools again to try and reintroduce a march style lockdown. The numbers are way too high.


  • #1150
    Happydays2020
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭Happydays2020


    fits wrote: »
    I’m out at least temporarily

    I’d just work from home more than I have been lately and keep the distance when in.
    We had planned to have my mum over for Xmas dinner but I told her what happened so she stayed at home.

    I suggest putting this behind you as the intentions were positive. There was a bit of collective complacency before Christmas and no one was deliberately trying to put you at risk.


  • #1151
    zerosugarbuzz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭zerosugarbuzz


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    I have to say I’m amazed at people who are so concerned by the present situation but yet remain in an environment that they consider dangerous. So you preferred not to upset senior management, not having your Mum over for dinner was of lesser importance. Strange tbh.

    It’s always the ones who point their finger the most who themselves are breaking the rules more than any.


  • Advertisement
  • #1152
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    Yeah increase in hospitalisations is a bit of a concern. The next two weeks will probably be crucial I'd think.

    537477.png


  • #1153
    Happydays2020
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭Happydays2020


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    I dunno I can see the Christmas numbers having a big dent. Know plenty of people that had packed houses for Christmas - mixing with plenty of other households during the day, elderly mixing etc. Couple of houses around me had loads of cars parked up for Christmas day - I suspect the same again over new years. I think the January numbers are going to be huge. All the data suggests it. Can see them stopping the schools again to try and reintroduce a march style lockdown. The numbers are way too high.

    What data are you seeing?

    I am looking to the U.K. as the basis for my concern right now.


  • #1154
    Pinch Flat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,780 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    Happydays2020 wrote: »
    What data are you seeing?

    I am looking to the U.K. as the basis for my concern right now.

    Plenty of data quoted up thread. Rapid increase in hospitalization, positivity rate increasing, less people replying to contact tracing.

    Sage have recommended UK schools close. I see us following.


  • #1155
    speckle
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,251 ✭✭✭speckle


    caveat emptor wrote: »
    More info on the variant. It's defo here 7 samples but it's going to be anywhere where the disease is currently spreading. If there have been 7 found there's likely many many more and it's on it's way to becoming the dominant variant globally.

    https://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1343859960292249600?s=20

    That us dublin and kilkenny ish... lets keep an eye on the kilkenny numbers re positives and ages/situations and hospital admissions.


  • #1156
    Drumpot
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,306 ✭✭✭✭Drumpot


    awec wrote: »
    It really isn't.

    There is quite a bit of sneering on this forum from some posters, yourself included, at those who are unable to cope with this miserable existence as well as you are.

    People who are utterly obsessed at the numbers, and nothing else matters. The numbers must drop at all costs, it doesn't matter what that cost is.

    In the real world, things are more complicated and nuanced. The longer restrictions go on, the lower compliance will be. This is not selfishness, it is reality.

    Humans relentlessly over complicate things, in many cases it’s so they can justify doing something that suits themselves. Most wars/disputes are just that, religion, politics, borders, brexit etc, all humans over complicating everything and creating a “real world” that is imaginary. There are no borders, only in our heads, but I digress.

    This is not rocket science. The more interactions people have with other people, the more the virus spreads. There are different environments where the virus tends to spread quicker. The percentage chances of the virus spreading increases collectively and individually the more we interact.

    The virus can spread through airborne particles, you don’t need to be a scientist to imagine what sort of places wouldn’t be great for the virus to spread. Being in a room with a person or people isn’t great, particularly if it’s a small room and/or is poorly ventilated. If nobody talks it’s not so bad, if they talk the risk increases, if they sing/shout or pant (exercise) it’s progressively more risky. Drinking alcohol in company of others is dangerous by default as you let your guard down and may take risks you would not take while sober, that’s just basic common sense.

    If you are struggling with mental health issues, get help, don’t expect or demand society to bend to what you think you need. If you believe that you “NEED” gyms or pubs or some external thing to help you not go mad, you need to ask yourself if relying so much on these is a healthy living choice.

    I’ve been going to therapy for years and speak from experience, expecting external things to make you happy is leaving yourself at the mercy of others and is a bad long term way of living. Relying on one specific thing in your life to maintain healthy mental health (even exercise) is bad. What if your body makes it harder to do exercise? In general it’s not good to have all your mental health needs in one basket, it’s better that we have multiple outlets and supports. I goto support groups and professional therapists when I need them.

    I think this crisis has unmasked a lot of vulnerability’s in the way we live and what we value. The universe and nature will not bend to what we want because we feel that we should be able to suit ourselves. Personally I think it’s another example of how disconnected the modern world is from the environment we rely on to sustain us.

    “The real world” you speak of is only real to humans, it doesn’t exist in nature or other animals (but it does impact them), it’s a dogmatic idea that people subscribe to which is making it harder for western countries to manage the crisis. That is the unfiltered, inconvenient truth.


  • #1157
    fits
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,047 ✭✭✭✭fits


    zerosugarbuzz wrote: »
    It’s always the ones who point their finger the most who themselves are breaking the rules more than any.

    I’ve the poster you quoted on ignore and added you as well now.


  • #1158
    Happydays2020
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭Happydays2020


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    Plenty of data quoted up thread. Sage have recommended UK schools close. I see us following.

    I think it was Independent Sage who recommended that.

    The key data right now are cases, R number, hospitalisations/ICU and deaths. They are genuinely concerning.

    The problem right now is messaging - that is what will change behaviour.


  • #1159
    fits
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,047 ✭✭✭✭fits


    Happydays2020 wrote: »
    I suggest putting this behind you as the intentions were positive. There was a bit of collective complacency before Christmas and no one was deliberately trying to put you at risk.

    Oh I never said they were. But when around others regularly you’d hope they are being as cautious as you are. Anyway no harm done thankfully.


  • #1160
    octsol
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 80 ✭✭octsol


    ICU climbing again @ 34


  • #1161
    crossman47
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭crossman47


    Happydays2020 wrote: »

    The problem right now is messaging - that is what will change behaviour.

    I really don't think it will. People are now ignoring the messages either through fatigue or ignorance and I don't see a way out of it. Many people saw the arrival of a vaccine as a signal that this panic was over and behaved accordingly. I'm not saying they were selfish - its human nature to grasp at straws.


  • Advertisement
  • #1162
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    Plenty of data quoted up thread. Rapid increase in hospitalization, positivity rate increasing, less people replying to contact tracing.

    Sage have recommended UK schools close. I see us following.
    We're not following the UK on pandemic response and for good reason.

    I think school closures will hinge on the number of young people presenting with the illness.

    Closing schools is a huge step because it requires shutting down the economy and telling everyone to stay at home. If kids cant go to school, parents can't go out to work.

    A phased school closure approach might be taken, e.g. kids in 4th, 5th and 6th year move to online learning only, as do colleges.

    This reduces the movement of the most at risk young people while allowing parents to continue to go to work.

    It's a tightrope really.

    Delaying school reopenings is a possibility; keep them closed till 20th January when case numbers should be past the peak. That's less impactful economically.

    A long school shutdown like we had in March is not going to happen again, really.


  • #1163
    Happydays2020
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭Happydays2020


    fits wrote: »
    Oh I never said they were. But when around others regularly you’d hope they are being as cautious as you are. Anyway no harm done thankfully.

    I understand your frustration. During the summer I was in a hotel and felt that the environment and practices were not safe (even in normal times) so we decided to check out. An argument with the hotel manager and one ruined day but felt safer. But I have no long term relationship with that hotel so was an easy choice.


  • #1164
    speckle
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,251 ✭✭✭speckle


    speckle wrote: »
    That us dublin and kilkenny ish... lets keep an eye on the kilkenny numbers re positives and ages/situations and hospital admissions.

    We will need to take this into account

    https://www.kilkennypeople.ie/news/home/598106/gowran-nursing-home-dealing-with-covid-outbreak.html


  • #1165
    Happydays2020
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭Happydays2020


    seamus wrote: »
    We're not following the UK on pandemic response and for good reason.

    I think school closures will hinge on the number of young people presenting with the illness.

    Closing schools is a huge step because it requires shutting down the economy and telling everyone to stay at home. If kids cant go to school, parents can't go out to work.

    A phased school closure approach might be taken, e.g. kids in 4th, 5th and 6th year move to online learning only, as do colleges.

    This reduces the movement of the most at risk young people while allowing parents to continue to go to work.

    It's a tightrope really.

    Delaying school reopenings is a possibility; keep them closed till 20th January when case numbers should be past the peak. That's less impactful economically.

    A long school shutdown like we had in March is not going to happen again, really.

    If the numbers are high we may see a delayed reopening but your points are well made. There are broader aspects.

    If it is the case of a delayed reopening, then we will also need to see adherence to the restrictions. No point in closing a regulated environment if the same kids are hanging out in one another’s houses.


  • #1166
    bikeman1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,459 ✭✭✭bikeman1


    From what I could make out on my social media, the healthcare workers I know of, GPs, Covid Nurse and other healthcare settings had a full and normal Christmas with gatherings in houses and get togethers from multiple families as they tried to have a normal Christmas.

    Can some people not realise that, a few days of something heading towards a “normal” Christmas gives you a huge mental boost and allows many of us face headlong into a tough January, but one that we know how to get out of.

    We know that numbers go up when socialising happens. This is not a surprise. Everyone did what they did (Shopping / Meals Out / House Visits / Travel) full well with the knowledge that it would increase the numbers, but the boost it gave them is what drove them on. Now we lock it down again and ride it out but this time with vaccinations being the key extra tool this time protecting the most vulnerable.

    For me the excess deaths is the true metric for measuring how any country does in this whole thing, and for that we are doing very well. A lot of pre Christmas testing, both private and public has picked up a lot of cases that might have gone missed which way will serve society better that they were picked up before Christmas and stopped the spread in the homes.


  • #1167
    growleaves
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,983 ✭✭✭growleaves


    Drumpot wrote: »
    The universe and nature will not bend to what we want because we feel that we should be able to suit ourselves. Personally I think it’s another example of how disconnected the modern world is from the environment we rely on to sustain us.

    “The real world” you speak of is only real to humans, it doesn’t exist in nature or other animals (but it does impact them), it’s a dogmatic idea that people subscribe to which is making it harder for western countries to manage the crisis. That is the unfiltered, inconvenient truth.

    Your criticisms should be addressed to a mirror. You believe that politicians and careerist scientists can control nature totally through a combination of micro-statistical analysis and manipulation of the physical environment.

    You give no weight to human nature and believe that human society can be dissolved at-will.

    "Its not rocket science". This must be the most mis-used phrase on this forum. You're married to a simple, easy-to-comprehend theory of causality with no empirical basis. The simplicity of this theory does not make it more credible - it just makes it easy for joe soap to swallow.

    The practical aspects of the theory - suspending human society arbitrarily and indefinitely, are bizarre, a-historical and inhuman.


  • #1168
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    stephenjmcd wrote: »
    Ah come off it, someone can be fed up and tired of restrictions, doesn't exactly mean that their selfish.

    I'm completely fed up, if I wanted to be selfish aswell I'd go around to see my 91 year old grandmother but that's not a risk I'm willing to take.

    So being fatigued isn't the same thing as being selfish.

    Keep in mind before you trot out one liners that not everyone can cope like you can, everyone's circumstances are different.

    For me, a lot of the most selfish people are the ones saying I'm ok with these restrictions and dealing fine, what is wrong with you that your dealing with them the same as me.


  • #1169
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    While that variant has increased transmissibility by ~50% it's almost certainly not increased the severity of morbidity or mortality according to latest public health England update. Looking at it simplistically if we keep everything the same we'll have 50% more cases. So situation has changed and we don't seem to be adapting. Nobody knows what will happen in 2 weeks from now but it's likely to be worse than the worse case scenarios people contemplated.


    Good thread on it here.
    https://twitter.com/jcbarret/status/1343863110352973826?s=20

    Report here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948152/Technical_Briefing_VOC202012-2_Briefing_2_FINAL.pdf

    Hopefully the indicators change but the UK is going from bad to worse and I can't see us going any differently at least in the short term.

    537479.png


  • #1170
    Drumpot
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,306 ✭✭✭✭Drumpot


    growleaves wrote: »
    Your criticisms should be addressed to a mirror. You believe that politicians and careerist scientists can control nature totally through a combination of micro-statistical analysis and manipulation of the physical environment.

    You give no weight to human nature and believe that human society can be dissolved at-will.

    "Its not rocket science". This must be the most mis-used phrase on this forum. You're married to a simple, easy-to-comprehend theory of causality with no empirical basis. The simplicity of this theory does not make it more credible - it just makes it easy for joe soap to swallow.

    The practical aspects of the theory - suspending human society arbitrarily and indefinitely, are bizarre, a-historical and inhuman.

    Where did I say politics or scientists can totally control and manipulate the physical environment (nature)? I actually said that we are disconnected from our environment so much we don’t know how to react prudently when it changes dramatically. We have been warned for a long time that a virus pandemic was very probable, what mitigation plans did we have in place?

    Where did I say society should easily be dissolved at will? I’m saying over complicating the issue has made it harder to manage. In terms of “it’s not rocket science “ I meant the spread of the virus is easy to understand.


  • Advertisement
  • #1171
    Derek Zoolander
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 434 ✭✭Derek Zoolander


    caveat emptor wrote: »
    While that variant has increased transmissibility by ~50% it's almost certainly not increased the severity of morbidity or mortality according to latest public health England update. Looking at it simplistically if we keep everything the same we'll have 50% more cases. So situation has changed and we don't seem to be adapting. Nobody knows what will happen in 2 weeks from now but it's likely to be worse than the worse case scenarios people contemplated.




    Good thread on it here.
    https://twitter.com/jcbarret/status/1343863110352973826?s=20

    Report here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948152/Technical_Briefing_VOC202012-2_Briefing_2_FINAL.pdf

    Hopefully the indicators change but the UK is going from bad to worse and I can't see us going any differently at least in the short term.

    537479.png


    Problem is that increase in transmissibility is potential worse than an equivalent increase in severity

    https://twitter.com/adamjkucharski/status/1343567425107881986?s=21


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement