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…959698100101…330

Comments

  • #2912
    MOR316
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Denny61 wrote: »
    Are ye all clowns on here. If one person decides to go on a hike 10km.and he would not meet any one to spread anything .ok but what if a thousand people on the same day took on that attitude and all set off only to end up asa large group of people within close proximity..so wake up ye fools and stay at home

    Been at the Proper 12 again, Conor?


  • #2913
    wadacrack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,172 ✭✭✭wadacrack


    The smart thing to do now, is just be as responsible as possible. Whether you agree with restrictions the government decisions or not its our behaviour which will determine how quickly we come out of this. The big hope then is long lasting immunity with a vaccine


  • #2914
    murpho999
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,765 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    MOR316 wrote: »
    There is nothing wrong with it.

    I don't live near the sea but, I enjoy travelling there and enjoy my walks up and down the strand, on my own. Have been doing them for years.

    I see no harm in it or how I could possibly spread it/contract it
    Scoondal wrote: »
    And if you travel 10kms from your house and meet no-one what's the problem? I have a hike planned for 1 January, 80kms from my house. How am I spreading covid ?

    These points are not thought out at all.
    If there was no restrictions then everyone would flock to the spots that people like such as the sea, Glendalough (which was a problem before), mountain parks etc.
    Car parks fill, people need to get more petrol, go to shops more, queue for coffee etc.

    It's the same with golf, swimming and tennis. The activities themselves are perfectly safe but it's the movement of people that's a problem.

    If a hike is worth travelling 80kms for then it must be attractive to others too so you can't have lots of people going there. Very simple to me.

    Also they have to set a numerical limit that people would always argue against if it was at 10kms then people would say why not 15/20.

    Limits always impact people that would do the right thing to protect those that can't.
    Bit like speed limits. Many are capable of driving safely over 120km on a motor way but because some can't then you need to impose a limit to protect those.


  • #2915
    WhiteMemento9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,575 ✭✭✭WhiteMemento9


    Can we set up a Covid county? We don't really need Cork so let's say, Cork. We will give everyone in Cork 24 hours to get out if they don't want to live in the Covid country. Everyone else who wants to be part of the living with Covid plan can be herded down to Cork. We build a big wall around Cork. They can eat, drink, drive to beaches, and climb mountains to their heart's content.


  • #2916
    khalessi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,216 ✭✭✭khalessi


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Watch how parents will now be looking for full day care now the schools are closed.

    So the Creche workers will be at even more risk!

    With Creches remaining open surely this must mean that those workers should now become a priority for the vaccination above teachers?

    Hopefully the vaccine will be prioritised at the moment we are 11th on list which would be May June all going well.


  • Advertisement
  • #2917
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Arghus wrote: »
    Arah, get up the yard, the extent to which you can't accept that it was clearly silly to relax restrictions as we did is absolutely laughable.

    The government shouldn't even try to please people? Well, they tried to please some people and now we're in a situation where everyone is pissed off. Maybe you regard that as an excellent job, I don't.

    You seem to think everyone should agree with you. Do you find it troubling when they don’t? I think the ground was prepared in early December for the restrictions that are going to be put in place tomorrow. If you thought there wouldn’t be restrictions after Christmas now that’s silly or do you subscribe to the nonsense that we should have stayed locked down to avoid lockdown. The pontificating from some on this thread is tiresome tbh.


  • #2918
    oldtimeyfella
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 382 ✭✭oldtimeyfella


    murpho999 wrote: »
    These points are not thought out at all.
    If there was no restrictions then everyone would flock to the spots that people like such as the sea, Glendalough (which was a problem before), mountain parks etc.
    Car parks fill, people need to get more petrol, go to shops more, queue for coffee etc.

    It's the same with golf, swimming and tennis. The activities themselves are perfectly safe but it's the movement of people that's a problem.

    If a hike is worth travelling 80kms for then it must be attractive to others too so you can't have lots of people going there. Very simple to me.

    Also they have to set a numerical limit that people would always argue against if it was at 10kms then people would say why not 15/20.

    Limits always impact people that would do the right thing to protect those that can't.
    Bit like speed limits. Many are capable of driving safely over 120km on a motor way but because some can't then you need to impose a limit to protect those.


    It's almost as if these people are only thinking about themselves :eek:


  • #2919
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,285 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    hmmm wrote: »
    You do realise that 100 people on a forest path is not the same as 100 people in a supermarket or a pub or a shopping centre? I'd prefer to be within a metre of someone with Covid on a mountain with the wind blowing, than to be 6 metres away in a restaurant - and I've read a lot on how it is transmitted.

    We've done a terrible job educating people about the impact of ventilation.

    Do you not realise that the more liberties you give people the more things they'll do? If you say you can go to beaches and mountains etc etc it'll give people the feeling that they can do more stuff and it wont end with beaches and mountains.

    They had to make it as strict as possible or people would f*ck around.


  • #2920
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    WhiteMemento9 wrote: »
    Can we set up a Covid county? We don't really need Cork so let's say, Cork. We will give everyone in Cork 24 hours to get out if they don't want to live in the Covid country. Everyone else who wants to be part of the living with Covid plan can be herded down to Cork. We build a big wall around Cork. They can eat, drink, drive to beaches, and climb mountains to their heart's content.

    I suspect most people who say they want to live with covid don't want to. They want you to live with it.


  • #2921
    Arghus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,160 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    Happydays2020 wrote: »
    Lives and livelihoods.

    There were important economic considerations - the problems were seeded because people were doing both before they were allowed to do both.

    It was a false choice and a bad gamble.

    Lives and livelihoods are not any better off now facing into another level 5 for at least another month. It's a bogus argument.

    We'll pay a heavy price now, heavier than it had to be and, while, maybe, the government couldn't foresee everything, it shouldn't have gone out of its way to make the least desirous outcome the most likely.


  • Advertisement
  • #2922
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,077 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    Lockdown for at least a month

    Of course we all know it's going to be at least double that


  • #2923
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    murpho999 wrote: »
    These points are not thought out at all.
    If there was no restrictions then everyone would flock to the spots that people like such as the sea, Glendalough (which was a problem before), mountain parks etc.
    Car parks fill, people need to get more petrol, go to shops more, queue for coffee etc.

    It's the same with golf, swimming and tennis. The activities themselves are perfectly safe but it's the movement of people that's a problem.

    If a hike is worth travelling 80kms for then it must be attractive to others too so you can't have lots of people going there. Very simple to me.

    Also they have to set a numerical limit that people would always argue against if it was at 10kms then people would say why not 15/20.

    Limits always impact people that would do the right thing to protect those that can't.
    Bit like speed limits. Many are capable of driving safely over 120km on a motor way but because some can't then you need to impose a limit to protect those.

    It's all easily said and done but do you expect 5 million people just to stay in their homes and do nothing for the next 8 weeks.


  • #2924
    TonyMaloney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭TonyMaloney


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    You seem to think everyone should agree with you. Do you find it troubling when they don’t? I think the ground was prepared in early December for the restrictions that are going to be put in place tomorrow. If you thought there wouldn’t be restrictions after Christmas now that’s silly or do you subscribe to the nonsense that we should have stayed locked down to avoid lockdown. The pontificating from some on this thread is tiresome tbh.

    Our bloody health service is under threat. Who knows how many avoidable deaths we'll now see. Thousands?

    All so you could bring your fictional wife to the pub


  • #2925
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,285 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    niallo27 wrote: »
    It's all easily said and done but do you expect 5 million people just to stay in their homes and do nothing for the next 8 weeks.

    No, and they didn't last time either - but tight restrictions mean MORE people WILL actually stay at home while the legends on these threads will do what they like. And then the numbers will drop!
    It's that simple!


  • #2926
    Arghus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,160 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    You seem to think everyone should agree with you. Do you find it troubling when they don’t? I think the ground was prepared in early December for the restrictions that are going to be put in place tomorrow. If you thought there wouldn’t be restrictions after Christmas now that’s silly or do you subscribe to the nonsense that we should have stayed locked down to avoid lockdown. The pontificating from some on this thread is tiresome tbh.

    No I don't think everyone should agree with me. Is that all you can hide behind when I put facts to you that you can't dispute, distort or whatabout?


  • #2927
    Humberto Salazar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Humberto Salazar


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    Lockdown for at least a month

    Of course we all know it's going to be at least double that

    But it's not a lockdown is it? Same as November. Roads were busy, schools open. Supermarkets and pharmacies open. Don't know how this will bring numbers down. I doubt it will.


  • #2928
    oldtimeyfella
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 382 ✭✭oldtimeyfella


    niallo27 wrote: »
    It's all easily said and done but do you expect 5 million people just to stay in their homes and do nothing for the next 8 weeks.


    As much as possible, yes.


  • #2929
    igCorcaigh
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 12,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭igCorcaigh


    It may very well be that the variant is more transmissible.
    It may also be the case that the variant is contributing significantly to the recent surge.

    But the evidence for that possibility in the Irish context has not been presented.
    Yet here we see the government and media presenting the case as established fact.
    That really is my only point.

    (The embedded quote here is going to be messed up, isn't it)
    igCorcaigh wrote: »
    I'm still unsure about the effect of the new Kent variant on this recent surge in cases.
    Here's this from the Guardian:



    So, we learned today that the latest estimate of the reproductive number R0 is 1.8

    Yet the natural (in the wild) R0 of the existing variant is estimated to between 2 and 4.
    https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/risk-comms-updates/update-28-covid-19-what-we-know-may-2020.pdf?sfvrsn=ed6e286c_2

    So, we do not need to rely on the idea of a new more transmissible strain to explain the recent surge in cases.
    An increase in social mixing, as indicated by recent contact numbers, as well as what everyone can see, is sufficient to account for the case numbers we see now.


  • #2930
    mcburns07
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,395 ✭✭✭mcburns07


    Humberto Salazar wrote: »
    But it's not a lockdown is it? Same as November. Roads were busy, schools open. Supermarkets and pharmacies open. Don't know how this will bring numbers down. I doubt it will.

    Eh it brought down numbers in November ?


  • #2931
    Antares35
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,845 ✭✭✭Antares35


    CruelSummer wrote: »
    If these places are outdoors with oceans of space, there's no problem. The chip on your shoulder towards people visiting these places is obvious. You don't 'own' the beauty spots around where you live, just the land you live on. You've no authority as to who frequents the beach/mountain.

    Th "chip" has been well explained so unless you condone the anti social behaviour I've outlined I don't see why your have a problem with my posts. No issue with anyone who acts reasonably..I don't go to your home and block up your road or fúck my rubbish over your wall. But by all means adopt the townie versus city position because that's easier I guess.


  • Advertisement
  • #2932
    what the hell!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 854 ✭✭✭what the hell!


    WhiteMemento9 wrote: »
    Can we set up a Covid county? We don't really need Cork so let's say, Cork. We will give everyone in Cork 24 hours to get out if they don't want to live in the Covid country. Everyone else who wants to be part of the living with Covid plan can be herded down to Cork. We build a big wall around Cork. They can eat, drink, drive to beaches, and climb mountains to their heart's content.

    That's exactly what we've wanted to do in Cork for hundreds of years now ha!


  • #2933
    CruelSummer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,325 ✭✭✭CruelSummer


    TonyMaloney wrote: »
    Our bloody health service is under threat. Who knows how many avoidable deaths we'll now see. Thousands?

    All so you could bring your fictional wife to the pub

    I’m shocked and disgusted at the smug, judgemental attitude on here. Do people on this thread seriously believe that only those breaking restrictions contract Covid? So someone on a wide open beach outside 5km will contract it? Someone who went to a nice meal in December in a well run restaurant are somehow at fault?
    Meanwhile all those who religiously wear their masks, and shop in a packed non socially distanced supermarket are the beacons of Covid containment in society today.


  • #2934
    martingriff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,342 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Not happy we have to go into lockdown again. Depressing but with the way hospital and ICU admissions are going in the last week it was needed. Hopefully whatever level of services that were going on in other hospital settings that they can still continue


  • #2935
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Thelonious Monk wrote: »
    Yeah and most rural people will break it I would imagine, but how nuanced can they make the restrictions? They're hard enough to follow as is.
    5km restrictions will mean more people stay at home.

    I live rurally, you’re correct no one I know took any heed of the 5km the last time or the 2km before that. Makes sense in urban areas.


  • #2936
    hmmm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Thelonious Monk wrote: »
    Do you not realise that the more liberties you give people the more things they'll do? If you say you can go to beaches and mountains etc etc it'll give people the feeling that they can do more stuff and it wont end with beaches and mountains.

    They had to make it as strict as possible or people would f*ck around.
    I understand why they had to introduce a limit, and have to enforce it and we should all obey it. Like you say people will be chancing their arms otherwise.

    But that restriction is there to try and stop the virus travelling, and not as some posters seem to imply because certain activities are risky or should be discouraged. It's obvious that bringing your kids for a hike up a mountain is going to be safer than letting them wander around the place bored looking for things to do, and it's obvious also that someone riding a mountain bike somewhere is going to be safer than being forced to go for a walk around the city centre surrounded by other people.

    For the next pandemic whenever it is, hopefully we'll be better prepared to not try the impossible and stop people from leaving their homes, but redirect them towards safer things.


  • #2937
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Humberto Salazar wrote: »
    But it's not a lockdown is it? Same as November. Roads were busy, schools open. Supermarkets and pharmacies open. Don't know how this will bring numbers down. I doubt it will.
    It should reduce the number of contacts, which in time should also see outbreaks limited. In six weeks time or so we should also have finished with two doses for care homes and a decent number of the frontline workers with their first shots.


  • #2938
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,285 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    I live rurally, you’re correct no one I know took any heed of the 5km the last time or the 2km before that. Makes sense in urban areas.

    Yeah but they can't make different rules for people depending on how rural or urban they are etc or no one would understand what the hell is going on


  • #2939
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,019 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    I suppose the government doing the necessary work to bolster our capacity is out the question ? That’s my main issue along with the awful communication of the Michael Martin lead government in explaining the easing and tightening of restrictions. As a group the government have done a poor job. I do think we as a country do want to get past this, but the government and heads of the HSE need to actually do their part also. That’s why there’s been slippage IMO. It’s because we do our part and there isn’t a reciprocal action by the government.


  • #2940
    Necro
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 56,361 Mod ✭✭✭✭Necro


    Denny61 wrote: »
    Are ye all clowns on here. If one person decides to go on a hike 10km.and he would not meet any one to spread anything .ok but what if a thousand people on the same day took on that attitude and all set off only to end up asa large group of people within close proximity..so wake up ye fools and stay at home

    Mod:

    Threadbanned

    Moderator: Current Affairs/IMHO, Soccer, Pro Wrestling



  • Advertisement
  • #2941
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    mcburns07 wrote: »
    Eh it brought down numbers in November ?

    It brought them down from about a 1000 to 250 whereupon they lashed back up again as soon as the leash was off because enough seeding was left.
    Now we have about 2500-3000 cases really, maybe more, and given that almost everyone (bar direct hospitality) is deemed an essential worker, except maybe if you make plastic gnomes for cats, I doubt L5 lite is going to get a handle on the present numbers, to be honest. It will just annoy people in the end.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement