Covid 19 Part XXXII-215,743 ROI (4,137 deaths)111,166 NI (2,036 deaths)(22/02)Read OP

Richard Hillman wrote: »

It was the only way they could have won the war. Sending waves and waves of people into Stalingrad, 3 men to a gun.

If the defense of the vaccine fails, Stalingrad has been taken. And there's only one way to take it back. Commence Operation Uranus.

You are dying for a bit of that action for sure

Fair play to Lucinda

https://twitter.com/lcreighton/status/1359974097862729728?s=21

I did note one post there which referred to risk being reduced by 80% when that core 16% of population is vaccinated. Really makes one ask why we still have major restrictions post mid May?

https://www.rte.ie/player/movie/rté-investigates-covid-19-the-third-wave/182973991973

Just off the phone to my folks back in Ireland (I live in Canada), and my Da said to watch the Covid-19 documentary that was on RTE this week...just watching it now, really terrifying. Really really terrifying. I struggle lately with anxiety about the worry of my parents (72 and 65) getting sick and them ending up in an ICU like this.

Seeing it in its raw form like this documentary, it really is scary.

Frank Bullitt wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/player/movie/rté-investigates-covid-19-the-third-wave/182973991973

Just off the phone to my folks back in Ireland (I live in Canada), and my Da said to watch the Covid-19 documentary that was on RTE this week...just watching it now, really terrifying. Really really terrifying. I struggle lately with anxiety about the worry of my parents (72 and 65) getting sick and them ending up in an ICU like this.

Seeing it in its raw form like this documentary, it really is scary.

There’s this new anti anxiety pill, it’s called ‘avoid RTÉ at all times’ a prolonged dose of that and you and your folks be will be just fine.

Renjit wrote: »

A look into crystal ball should clear all the doubts :pac:

Indeed. But currently the Government’s
messaging is as clear as mud.

Happydays2020 wrote: »

Fair play to Lucinda

https://twitter.com/lcreighton/status/1359974097862729728?s=21

I did note one post there which referred to risk being reduced by 80% when that core 16% of population is vaccinated. Really makes one ask why we still have major restrictions post mid May?

It is like a strange game is being played now.
Possibly it is an 'under-promise and over-deliver' type strategy they are going for.
Problem is that they have used this tactic a few times over the last year and now it just feels like psychological abuse on a national scale.
Sometimes it seems like they are just trying to break us.

Psychedelic Hedgehog wrote: »

I've thought this myself. Presumably they don't want to be in a position to open up the country only to have to instigate yet another lockdown.

It's a tough balancing act, as seen over Christmas. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

I don't get this though, if we have to lockdown again we will do it. How is staying in permanent lock down any better than opening up a small bit and then locking down again if needed.

niallo27 wrote: »

I don't get this though, if we have to lockdown again we will do it. How is staying in permanent lock down any better than opening up a small bit and then locking down again if needed.

Neither is ideal, and I'd imagine we'll only be able to see what the best approach is in hindsight.

Happydays2020 wrote: »

Fair play to Lucinda

https://twitter.com/lcreighton/status/1359974097862729728?s=21

I did note one post there which referred to risk being reduced by 80% when that core 16% of population is vaccinated. Really makes one ask why we still have major restrictions post mid May?

I think it's managing expectations.
Even the UK government are saying don't plan staycations, let alone holidays this year, despite a speedy rollout in vaccinations.
Israel only this week eased restrictions despite having over 25% of the population fully vaccinated (2 doses).
Australia and NZ both plan to keep their borders closed until 2022.

But when Ireland is slow to reopen, it's all the governments fault.
Even when they reopened parts of the economy before Christmas, that was all the governments fault.

Stay closed and cases are low, government are too slow.
Open up and we get a spike, government are to blame.

marno21 wrote: »

The IT are reporting that we will exit Level 5 after 4 weeks of cases being less than 100.

That's even more strict than the ridiculously conservative approach taken in 2020, where we had to wait for cases to drop below 100 for construction to open and hardware stores to open (at that people were calling such events superspreader events on this forum).

Quite the U turn from opening pubs at 250 cases in December and then giving 3 weeks of nationwide virus transmission before Christmas dinner.

Somebody smells the fear.

So because the IT says it, it's true?
Lord knows they wouldn't sell papers if they didn't bull**** the headlines.
Let me guess, some unnamed government source?

People need to stop focusing on certain figures. You could have less than 100 cases for 4 weeks, but still over 100 in ICU, which would be too much to open with.

Same for the R0. You don't just nail a figure on that.
4 weeks at R0.4 is better than 3 weeks of R0.2 and then the 4th week at R0.3.
The first means it's stable, the latter means it's growing.

I'm sick to death of people and mainly journalists asking for a specific figure when it's safe to open up. For the journalists, Covid is the biggest show in town, so after a year, read up on it and figure out ****, so you're not asking the same lame questions time after time.

marno21 wrote: »

The IT are reporting that we will exit Level 5 after 4 weeks of cases being less than 100.

That's even more strict than the ridiculously conservative approach taken in 2020, where we had to wait for cases to drop below 100 for construction to open and hardware stores to open (at that people were calling such events superspreader events on this forum).

Quite the U turn from opening pubs at 250 cases in December and then giving 3 weeks of nationwide virus transmission before Christmas dinner.

Somebody smells the fear.

Well, the forum is going to light up when people hear that tomorrow.

It’s hard to know what to think really. I look at dates like May and think, fcking hell, another three months like this. I don't blame people being depressed about that.

But, then on the other hand, I think restrictions pretty close to level 5 were on the cards until about April anyway and I think, personally, I could suck it up for a few more weeks if we really genuinely were trying to keep those numbers down to stay down - but that's just me, I know there's plenty here who will disagree.

May is a grim prospect, but is there any point in rushing into a reopening in late March, early April, if you can't guarantee that things won't once again go haywire once you start to open up. I understand people want to get back to life ASAP, we all do, but that was the case in December and it backfired spectacularly.

We're going to hear so much noise in the media over the next few days. I think we have to be a bit wary. A lot of kites are being flown.

bloopy wrote: »

It is like a strange game is being played now.
Possibly it is an 'under-promise and over-deliver' type strategy they are going for.
Problem is that they have used this tactic a few times over the last year and now it just feels like psychological abuse on a national scale.
Sometimes it seems like they are just trying to break us.

I agree with this. In previous times, not just during Covid, the political way was to under promise and over deliver. The truth now is that, people are so exhausted and a multitude of problems are building up (waiting lists for operations/missed cancer diagnoses/mental health pandemic).

When before under-promising and over-delivering was a clever way of managing the public, the people are now so at their wits end that even when the light at the end of the tunnel is seen in a couple of months, we will remember the havoc that the incompetence of the government has played on the nation's mental health and overall well-being.

Wolf359f wrote: »

So because the IT says it, it's true?
Lord knows they wouldn't sell papers if they didn't bull**** the headlines.
Let me guess, some unnamed government source?

People need to stop focusing on certain figures. You could have less than 100 cases for 4 weeks, but still over 100 in ICU, which would be too much to open with.

Same for the R0. You don't just nail a figure on that.
4 weeks at R0.4 is better than 3 weeks of R0.2 and then the 4th week at R0.3.
The first means it's stable, the latter means it's growing.

I'm sick to death of people and mainly journalists asking for a specific figure when it's safe to open up. For the journalists, Covid is the biggest show in town, so after a year, read up on it and figure out ****, so you're not asking the same lame questions time after time.

Yeah, the absolute neck of those people and journalists asking what are the metrics that will allow people return to some semblance of normality, maybe even return to a paying job. I just can't understand how they could all be so selfish asking such questions of those responsible for planning this.