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

Deleted User wrote: »

Who even is following the rules any more? Staying in other than for essential reasons, not meeting friends, not letting kids meet their friends, staying religiously within their 5k?

It's busier by the day around me now, more games of football in the park, busier traffic, groups of adults meeting up outside the local coffee shops. I'm one of them

The government's solution to this is just to shout louder, increase fines, give us nothing but crumbs to celebrate. They are driving this behaviour through the way that they are communicating.

I, and most of the people I know, are done

thats annoying though - I am following the rules and expect others to do also even if the rules are too severe. so you are basically doing what you want then in a 5km radius? sure what fun is that. i want to get the hell out of here and travel and see the world and my family and friends again. so i'll stay put even though my whole self wants to just get out of dodge. i'll stay put because that is what i am being asked to do. (and legally obliged to do).

Hellrazer wrote: »

There will be an outer Mongolian variant that will push back the opening further.

Don't worry thats next weeks one, this weeks one is the media's latest discovery the UK and Californian variants have MERGED into a MUTATED one.

:rolleyes:

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Fair play to you

Thats a tough thing to do

Realistically we have at least until after Easter before any easing of restrictions

Going by leaks its going to be June or July before intercounty travel at the earliest

Thats 6-7 months of not seeing friends,family, partners

Very tough ask of people

Probably unrealistic

yeah it is tough. and i thought most people were doing it or are people just saying they are? its annoying that the papers are basically saying another 6 months of this. so whats happening then? people are just ignoring restrictions?

Deleted User wrote: »

Flu season traditionally peaks in February

Looking at HSE releases and Annual summaries it appears to be week 3 - so mid Jan

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/influenza/seasonalinfluenza/surveillance/influenzasurveillancereports/seasonsummaries/Influenza%202017-2018%20Annual%20Summary_Final.pdf

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Looking at HSE releases and Annual summaries it appears to be week 3 - so mid Jan

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/influenza/seasonalinfluenza/surveillance/influenzasurveillancereports/seasonsummaries/Influenza%202017-2018%20Annual%20Summary_Final.pdf

Interesting graph.

Flu season is at "high intensity" around first half of Jan, "mid intensity" around mid Feb and "low intensity" at end of March.

Nicely matches up to what we are seeing now.

TheDoctor wrote: »

Interesting graph.

Flu season is at "high intensity" around first half of Jan, "mid intensity" around mid Feb and "low intensity" at end of March.

Nicely matches up to what we are seeing now.

...and what we saw last Summer.

Never understood how this hasn't really been talked about more.

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

...and what we saw last Summer.

Never understood how this hasn't really been talked about more.

The list of things that aren't discussed much or at all is frightening.

Vitamin D
Seasonality
Rapid Accurate Testing (as opposed to PCR)
What did the HSE do regarding protecting residents of care home between the surges
Why the supermarket workers have been pretty much immune to Covid despite being on the front line? Have they even reported a spike in sick days?
Why wont the Health officials tolerate alternate opinions?
Did the health officials ever plan for a pandemic?
What was that preparation?

It's all just hype and fear mongering in media these days, unfortunately we are left to try to figure these things out ourselves!

francogarbanzo wrote: »

But that's precisely the balance that governments must strive to achieve. Balancing safety with freedom. My point is that our current restrictions exist too far on the safety side of the spectrum.

As far as the "hospitals overwhelmed" goes, I don't have a solution for that and I don't believe the solution should be "curtail human rights until we reach milestone x." (Though it'd be much easier to swallow if they did tell us what "milestone x" even is.)

Also, just because other countries are doing something, doesn't make it right.

I guess whether the restrictions err too much on the safety side of the spectrum is a matter of opinion. Some will think they do, some the opposite. Personally I think that, given the surges we've seen in many places, from New York in the spring, to Europe, to the sun belt in the States in the summer, to even our own Christmas experience, most governments would shy away from letting a virus rip through a population (not saying thats what you're necessarily suggesting)

I'm all for human rights but they're not a suicide pact either. I'm ok with temporary restrictions, sh1t as they are, if it gets us back to a form of normality as soon as possible. I certainly wouldn't like to see scores of unnecessary deaths and hospitalisations and rationalise it by thinking at least my rights are unaffected.

You're right, just because other countries are doing doesn't make it right, but I think given these countries are generally viewed as stable, sensible places, there's a pretty good chance that with the best minds they have working on this, the responses they've come up with are about the best we can do.

Just because a response is sh1t, doesn't mean there's a better one IMO.

Russman wrote: »

I guess whether the restrictions err too much on the safety side of the spectrum is a matter of opinion. Some will think they do, some the opposite. Personally I think that, given the surges we've seen in many places, from New York in the spring, to Europe, to the sun belt in the States in the summer, to even our own Christmas experience, most governments would shy away from letting a virus rip through a population (not saying thats what you're necessarily suggesting)

I'm all for human rights but they're not a suicide pact either. I'm ok with temporary restrictions, sh1t as they are, if it gets us back to a form of normality as soon as possible. I certainly wouldn't like to see scores of unnecessary deaths and hospitalisations and rationalise it by thinking at least my rights are unaffected.

You're right, just because other countries are doing doesn't make it right, but I think given these countries are generally viewed as stable, sensible places, there's a pretty good chance that with the best minds they have working on this, the responses they've come up with are about the best we can do.

Just because a response is sh1t, doesn't mean there's a better one IMO.

It seems we have a different view on the role of government and the nature of human rights, and that's fine. I'd say that this core ideological difference accounts for most of the lockdown vs. no-lockdown argument.

As for restrictions enacted in order to return to normality, I don't follow the logic here. The lack of normality has been caused by the restrictions, not because the virus itself has been so disruptive to everyday life. In other words, places where restrictions are less harsh or even non-existent, life is more or less normal from what I hear. And in addition, people there aren't dying because of lack of access to care because the hospitals are so full of people with Covid.

The specific restrictions I'm referring to by the way are the closing of schools, the in-country travel bans (5k travel limit, county travel limit, etc.,) forced closure of "non-essential" retail.

Deleted User wrote: »

Why did you pick 2018?

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/influenza/seasonalinfluenza/surveillance/influenzasurveillancereports/previousinfluenzaseasonssurveillancereports/

The peak is most common in February. This is not just an Irish phenomena. It is repeated all over Europe and North America.

Honestly, I just googled one and it was the first result that came back. I thought a February peak sounded interested.
The report shows 2018 and 2017 Data, both of which suggest a January peak.

Obviously there are a ton of factors that may contribute to it and make it different each year.

francogarbanzo wrote: »

It seems we have a different view on the role of government and the nature of human rights, and that's fine. I'd say that this core ideological difference accounts for most of the lockdown vs. no-lockdown argument.

As for restrictions enacted in order to return to normality, I don't follow the logic here. The lack of normality has been caused by the restrictions, not because the virus itself has been so disruptive to everyday life. In other words, places where restrictions are less harsh or even non-existent, life is more or less normal from what I hear. And in addition, people there aren't dying because of lack of access to care because the hospitals are so full of people with Covid.

The specific restrictions I'm referring to by the way are the closing of schools, the in-country travel bans (5k travel limit, county travel limit, etc.,) forced closure of "non-essential" retail.

Totally appreciate there are different points of view, as you say, thats fine.

I don't think though that, essentially ignoring the virus and carrying on as we were would have any degree of normality. I think people not dying because of lack of access to care is as a result of the restrictions, not despite the restrictions. Surely the scenes in Lombardy and New York last year gave a glimpse into what potentially could have happened if severe action was not taken. I know it didn't, but with our pitifully small ICU capacity we were against the wall. Even Germany with their ICU numbers (and reputation for being fairly stoic and sensible) had to go with restrictions and curfews.

Now I'm not suggesting that government have got everything right with the restrictions, not for a second, but I think they got far more right than wrong, and as a government they have to IMO err on the side of caution.