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 XXXIII-231,484 ROI(4,610 deaths)116,197 NI (2,107 deaths)(23/03)Read OP

1…126127129131132…326

Comments

  • #3842
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    I didn't say that.
    Well, there's that prop story of yours... quite a left field scenario.


  • #3843
    jackboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,072 ✭✭✭jackboy


    Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »
    Reduced is not insignificant though. Lots of people doing something with massively reduced risk leads to a significant risk, and spread of the virus.

    The risk of catching it outdoors is insignificant. If everyone just met others outdoors then the virus would quickly die out. After a year we know that the virus need lots of people in a small indoor area without masks to spread.


  • #3844
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    lawred2 wrote: »
    luckily though most people aren't currently meeting up to scrummage each other

    No. It was to illustrate a point. I have seen groups of people hugging, chatting and laughing with their arms around each others' shoulders.


  • #3845
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,769 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    No. It was to illustrate a point. I have seen groups of people hugging, chatting and laughing with their arms around each others' shoulders.

    all the human stuff and for brief moments in time with free movement of air particles around them

    unless it's a reallllly long hug

    sure you never know - these reckless huggers might have already had and recovered from Covid...


  • #3846
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Well, there's that prop story of yours... quite a left field scenario.

    Again, I didn't say "That anyone who comes within 2m of you outside is going to give you COVID." You're putting words in my mouth.


  • Advertisement
  • #3847
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,769 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Circular discussion this... the empirical evidence is there. Small congregations outdoors are not being traced back to as significant sources of covid spread. Don't know why people are still twitching about it so much.


  • #3848
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    lawred2 wrote: »
    all the human stuff and for brief moments in time with free movement of air particles around them

    unless it's a reallllly long hug

    sure you never know - these reckless huggers might have already had and recovered from Covid...

    They may have. They may be vaccinated. It wasn't a brief moment in time, though. Personally, had I been in the middle of the group, I would have felt very uneasy. Maybe other people wouldn't give a fiddlers. Each to their own.


  • #3849
    Natterjack from Kerry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 622 ✭✭✭Natterjack from Kerry


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    Put yourself in a teenager's shoes. You know the virus isn't a huge risk to you. You've had your normal life put on hold for what feels like an eternity at that age. You hear that the virus doesn't spread outside. You hear schools can open because it doesn't spread much in your age group. Why would you not decide it's safe enough to meet up outside?

    Indeed, I agree to a great extent thats why they do it. Which is why a gentle explaining and informing, from the authority of the Gardai, is the right corrective measure to disperse them.


  • #3850
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    Again, I didn't say "That anyone who comes within 2m of you outside is going to give you COVID." You're putting words in my mouth.
    You need to pick less absurd examples to support your views, especially if they are people who would be less than 2m from each other, thereby implying increased risk. I'd have stuck with the huggers myself as a more common human activity!


  • #3851
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    lawred2 wrote: »
    Circular discussion this... the empirical evidence is there. Small congregations outdoors are not being traced back to as significant sources of covid spread. Don't know why people are still twitching about it so much.

    That's ignore the context though. Gatherings outside of people in prolonged close contact present a risk. That's just a fact.


  • Advertisement
  • #3852
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,769 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    That's ignore the context though. Gatherings outside of people in prolonged close contact present a risk. That's just a fact.

    Everything presents a risk!

    The longer I stand in one place - the longer my risk of getting hit by falling debris from the sky increases.

    That's a fact.

    The empirical evidence doesn't exclude certain types of congregations... so context isn't being ignored. While there will be some cases transmitted outdoors - they will be in the minority. Small outdoor congregations are not primary contributors to covid spread.

    Sure as daft as it was to go ahead with crowds at Cheltenham last year - was it ultimately the super spreader event that would be expected from 1/4 million people in close confines for a number of days?


  • #3853
    Leftwaffe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,558 ✭✭✭Leftwaffe


    Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »
    Its not just about teenagers meeting up outside though is it ? Its about teenagers meeting up outside during a pandemic lockdown. Not quite they same thing...

    My advice is to get used to it. People are going to start living their lives again very shortly, vaccine or no vaccine. When the weather improves people will be out in droves.

    Genuinely feel sorry for the curtain twitchers because this will all be over soon and they’ll still be complaining about gatherings and people enjoying themselves. One of the biggest consequences of this pandemic aside from the death toll will be the irreversible change in mentality of a sorry minority.


  • #3854
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    lawred2 wrote: »
    Everything presents a risk!

    The longer I stand in one place - the longer my risk of getting hit by falling debris from the sky increases.

    That's a fact.

    The empirical evidence doesn't exclude certain types of congregations... so context isn't being ignored. While there will be some cases transmitted outdoors - they will be in the minority. Small outdoor congregations are not primary contributors to covid spread.

    I agree the risk is much lower outdoors. My point is simply this. That risk decreases or increases depending on the circumstances. It's not okay to simply tell people that they're grand once they're outdoors.


  • #3855
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    How would posters here assess the risk of an outdoor picnic?


  • #3856
    Sweet.Science
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,070 ✭✭✭Sweet.Science


    Turtwig wrote: »
    How would posters here assess the risk of an outdoor picnic?

    Depends if the in laws would be there


  • #3857
    jackboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,072 ✭✭✭jackboy


    Those reporting and complaining about people meeting outdoors are actually contributing to the spread of the virus. We know that driving people indoors is a bad idea.


  • #3858
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,769 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    jackboy wrote: »
    Those reporting and complaining about people meeting outdoors are actually contributing to the spread of the virus. We know that driving people indoors is a bad idea.

    these people don't want anyone meeting anywhere


  • #3859
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Turtwig wrote: »
    How would posters here assess the risk of an outdoor picnic?

    Personally, I would see it as no problem once you maintained two meters distance between people from other households.


  • #3860
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Turtwig wrote: »
    How would posters here assess the risk of an outdoor picnic?
    Good for the soul and the mental health, with some sensible precautions added to keep everyone happy. Might be wise to review who you plan to picnic with, numbers, families etc.


  • #3861
    blade1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,822 ✭✭✭✭blade1


    jackboy wrote: »
    Those reporting and complaining about people meeting outdoors are actually contributing to the spread of the virus. We know that driving people indoors is a bad idea.

    Let's burn down all buildings.
    That'll keep everyone outside.


  • Advertisement
  • #3862
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,769 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    I agree the risk is much lower outdoors. My point is simply this. That risk decreases or increases depending on the circumstances. It's not okay to simply tell people that they're grand once they're outdoors.

    that's fair enough.

    but the vast majority of outdoor meetings between people won't involve lengthy close contact and will be largely conducted with some level regard to covid..

    I just can't get past a mindset that is horrified at the sight of a couple of people walking with a coffee outdoors


  • #3863
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    lawred2 wrote: »
    that's fair enough.

    but the vast majority of outdoor meetings between people won't involve lengthy close contact and will be largely conducted with regard to covid..

    Exactly. It's the very small minority of clowns that are the problem.


  • #3864
    lee_baby_simms
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,511 ✭✭✭lee_baby_simms


    lawred2 wrote: »
    Circular discussion this... the empirical evidence is there. Small congregations outdoors are not being traced back to as significant sources of covid spread. Don't know why people are still twitching about it so much.

    There’s so much noise around Covid these days that past the point of incoherence at times.

    I know of people who don’t believe masks make a big difference, most believe they do, some believe you need to wear 2 masks, some believe 2 meter rule is not effective due to variants...

    You can find a mountains of data, some more questionable than others, to support any of the above but it just blurs lines and muddys the water.


  • #3865
    Natterjack from Kerry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 622 ✭✭✭Natterjack from Kerry


    jackboy wrote: »
    Those reporting and complaining about people meeting outdoors are actually contributing to the spread of the virus. We know that driving people indoors is a bad idea.

    No, it's a good idea. Households cannot mix. Outdoors, they mix. The more people isolate, the lower the transmission.


  • #3866
    jackboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,072 ✭✭✭jackboy


    Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »
    No, it's a good idea. Households cannot mix. Outdoors, they mix. The more people isolate, the lower the transmission.

    Not working in the real world, that is why that attitude actually contributes to the spread of the virus. The risks outdoors are tiny. Way less indoor gatherings since Christmas. Way more outdoor gatherings since Christmas. Numbers plummeting. It’s not rocket science.


  • #3867
    stephenjmcd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,467 ✭✭✭✭stephenjmcd


    Natterjack from Kerry wrote: »
    No, it's a good idea. Households cannot mix. Outdoors, they mix. The more people isolate, the lower the transmission.

    The gardai would be on a never ending wild goose chase if you were reporting people meeting outdoors.

    Only have to go to the nearest beach or park to see it. In practically people have been meeting outdoors throughout this, you see it all the time.

    We had this crap last April and May in good weather oh the beaches are packed, they'll contribute to spread.... didn't seem to have much impact if any to spread. People need to get used to seeing people meeting outdoors, it would be worse if they went inside.


  • #3868
    tails_naf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 862 ✭✭✭tails_naf


    stephenjmcd wrote: »
    The gardai would be on a never ending wild goose chase if you were reporting people meeting outdoors.

    Only have to go to the nearest beach or park to see it. In practically people have been meeting outdoors throughout this, you see it all the time.

    We had this crap last April and May in good weather oh the beaches are packed, they'll contribute to spread.... didn't seem to have much impact if any to spread.

    People were more careful in the first lockdown, at least from my point of view. I don't mind really people going to well spaced out open air places if they can take distancing seriously, it's just people are not taking distancing very seriously this time.


  • #3869
    Ficheall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,038 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    lawred2 wrote: »
    The longer I stand in one place - the longer my risk of getting hit by falling debris from the sky increases.

    That's a fact.
    Hang on.. What?


  • #3870
    Natterjack from Kerry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 622 ✭✭✭Natterjack from Kerry


    stephenjmcd wrote: »
    The gardai would be on a never ending wild goose chase if you were reporting people meeting outdoors.

    Only have to go to the nearest beach or park to see it. In practically people have been meeting outdoors throughout this, you see it all the time.

    We had this crap last April and May in good weather oh the beaches are packed, they'll contribute to spread.... didn't seem to have much impact if any to spread. People need to get used to seeing people meeting outdoors, it would be worse if they went inside.

    So there are a lot of bad, selfish, and recklass law breaking people in Ireland. That's no reason not to pursue them and keep those observing the law safer.


  • Advertisement
  • #3871
    GeorgeBailey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭GeorgeBailey


    Was just in my local park. There was a group of 6 pensioners in a group talking to each other. To whom should I report this scandalous behaviour? Newstalk maybe? They were coked to the eyeballs too (I don't know that for sure but I think it's a safe assumption to make given their wholly reckless behaviour).


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement