Relaxation of Restrictions, Part X Read OP For Mod Warnings

JRant · 15-04-2021 08:36AM

the kelt wrote: »

As I said above in an edit.

It’s is kinda funny hearing arguments against getting our health service running as well as it possibly can be, because it doesn’t help with COVID yet suggest that all people are concerned about these days is preventing a COVID death and nothing else and it’s called a straw man argument by said same people.

Why do I get a feeling that once COVID is done and dusted and hospitals are over run every winter and more people are dying from other diseases missed or not treated during these times that a lot of people won’t actually give a ****e but will sit up till all hours every night to defend COVID policy

I've said it before but until we stop operating our health system on a 9-5 mon-fri basis we won't see any improvement.

Graham · 15-04-2021 08:37AM

the kelt wrote: »

As I said above in an edit.

It’s is kinda funny hearing arguments against getting our health service running as well as it possibly can be, because it doesn’t help with COVID

It's almost like this is a thread in the COVID forum discussing COVID or something.

Not sure who you imagine is against 'getting our health service running' either.

On a more general note, it is entertaining watching several posters backpedaling though.

'We should relax restrictions immediately and get thousands of new doctors and nurses but definitely not for anything COVID related.'

jusvi2001 · 15-04-2021 08:37AM

Lumen wrote: »

More ICU capacity does not change the case for lockdown. Germany has several times our ICU capacity, and yet the German cabinet had just approved an "emergency brake" to force states to impose measures.

But not long and never ending like ours. Our healthcare is in shambles since a decade. with lock downs government can hide our fit for no purpose health care from public. its only going to get worse with delayed diagnosis and treatment for non covid illness.

the kelt · 15-04-2021 08:40AM

Graham wrote: »

It's almost like this is a thread in the COVID forum discussing COVID or something.

Not sure who you imagine is against 'getting our health service running' either.

It is entertaining watching the backpedaling though.

'We should relax restrictions immediately and get thousands of new doctors and nurses but definitely not for anything COVID related.'

Things i never said!

Graham · 15-04-2021 08:41AM

the kelt wrote: »

It’s is kinda funny hearing arguments against getting our health service running as well as it possibly can be

Isn't it a bit early for the "things that nobody said" game?

Graham · 15-04-2021 08:43AM

the kelt wrote: »

Things i never said!

In other shock news, there's more people than you posting here.

Have a read through the last couple of pages of posts and you'll get the gist.

the kelt · 15-04-2021 08:44AM

Graham wrote: »

Isn't it a bit early for the "things that nobody said" game?

Probably is to be fair!

So we can blow it up now or tell me where i mentioned those "things i never said?"

drkpower · 15-04-2021 08:45AM

gozunda wrote: »

Nope.

The two quotes - the first which details some mysterious 'deal'

The second which talks of some type of "mantra"

The fact remains that from the offset- it was well detailed that the vulnerable were to cocoon where possible, restrictions were brought in to help reduce and keep down the rate of infection so healthcare services could continue to cope with treating those who did get seriously ill.
M

This was your comment regarding managing the rate of infection where you referred to death

A point irrelevant as pointed out approx 50% of those in hospital with covid are under 65. And the death rate / mortality is not the only consideration. And case numbers have been an important predictor of the numbers likley to be hospitalised tidate.

We know the restrictions (brought in under emergency legislation) are there for a reason. And are temporary in nature due to the emergency of the pandemic. Its not like Ireland has decided to align itself politically and sociological with North Korea or wherever. We have restrictions due to an ongoing global pandemic

Again the control of the rate of infection was to provide for those who got ill / seriously ill access to healthcare care services. We now have vaccination. With that the rate of infection for all age groups will fall. That means going forward covid will be most likley managed by repeated annual vaccination.

And yes it is acknowledged that other medical services and treatments were limited for cancer etc. Part of that was to help reduce the risk of those cocooning from being infected but also to ensure that healthcare resources were directed where there was immediate need. I believe approx 50% of such treatments overall were affected so not all. And yes these conditions will have to be prioritised as soon as possible.

What is for certain - that these treatments would not have gone ahead - where we had repeated scenes like those of January / February 2021.

There is very little new in all of that, but a few short points:
1. The mantra was what the authorities suggested; the deal was our compliance to achieve the mantra.
2. Again, case numbers are of little significance; we don’t focus on case numbers of any other infectious disease; we focus on morbidity and mortality, and hospitalisations/deaths are the more accurate proxy for same
3. The global pandemic will be ongoing for a long time, and will then convert to endemic cv19; are you suggesting severe restrictions (level 3-5) until the global pandemic is over? If so, when do you think it will be over.
4. The vast majority of late presentations and thus diagnoses were as a consequence of a combination of screening pauses and failure of symptomatic patients to present, both directly as a cause of lockdown; certainly the 2 peaks in April/may 2020 and jan/feb 2021 justified both; the remainder of the lockdown, not so much. That is the other side of the public health ledger that has been ignored and could end up causing more morbidity and mortality than Covid, certainly in younger age groups.

the kelt · 15-04-2021 08:46AM

Graham wrote: »

In other shock news, there's more people than you posting here.

Have a read through the last couple of pages of posts and you'll get the gist.

In other shock news if you're not directly responding to a posters point you dont quote their post, you just hit a general reply to the thread if you're responding to the thread.

Graham · 15-04-2021 08:46AM

the kelt wrote: »

Probably is to be fair!

So we can blow it up now or tell me where i mentioned those "things i never said?"

I'm sorry you assumed talk of back peddling was referring to you, it wasn't.

It was a general comment about the last few hours posts. I have edited the post to clarify.

facehugger99 · 15-04-2021 08:48AM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I genuinely do not understand why some continue to deny the above or for what reasons. It's either a refusal to back down at this stage for fear of losing face, or because they personally are somehow benefitting (saving money WFH, enjoying the extra time with family etc).
.

This is the main reason.

A lot of people avoiding a commute and working from home or on a generous PUP payment.

Absolutely no conception that it's being underwritten by taking on debt of over €50bn and rising - on top of the previous debt from a decade ago of course.

Short-sighted, self-centered way of thinking.

The same lads will be crying about the tax rises and service cuts a year from now.

15-04-2021 08:48AM

the kelt wrote: »

As I said above in an edit.

It’s is kinda funny hearing arguments against getting our health service running as well as it possibly can be, because it doesn’t help with COVID yet suggest that all people are concerned about these days is preventing a COVID death and nothing else and it’s called a straw man argument by said same people.

Why do I get a feeling that once COVID is done and dusted and hospitals are over run every winter and more people are dying from other diseases missed or not treated during these times that a lot of people won’t actually give a ****e but will sit up till all hours every night to defend COVID policy

I think a lot of people will call for lockdowns every winter from now on.

Graham · 15-04-2021 08:50AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I think a lot of people will call for lockdowns every winter from now on.

I think a lot of people will throw out that type of scare story with no foundation from now on.

Realistically, outside the fringe elements I can't see lockdowns outside a pandemic scenario. We've all had enough of them at this point.

drkpower · 15-04-2021 08:51AM

Graham wrote: »

I'm trying to reconcile why some posters are calling for a significant relaxing of restrictions at the same time as calling for a ramping up of hospital capacity.

Are you really trying though? I’m not so sure.

Ramping up capacity has been needed for decades, and even more needed now regardless of lockdown, to deal with at least (1) the late diagnoses consequences of lockdown and (2) an actual fit for purpose public health/testing and tracing regime that can obviate lockdowns in the future due to cv19 or something else. The latter is how WHO and others advocate dealing with cv19, rather than using lockdowns; the latter is due to the failure of the former, and has been allowed to happen in part because some, including yourself it appears, continue to focus on the last resort solution as the answer rather than the other way around.

Sobit1964 · 15-04-2021 08:53AM

Graham wrote: »

I think a lot of people will throw out that type of scare story with no foundation from now on.

Realistically, outside the fringe elements I can't see lockdowns outside a pandemic scenario. We've all had enough of them at this point.

Some people will certainly call for a lockdown each winter - they will correctly be identified as loons.

Hopefully everyone else after this christmas will start staying home if they are ill, not cough and splutter on people in public, and improve their hygiene - this would be a great bonus.

Graham · 15-04-2021 08:57AM

drkpower wrote: »

Are you really trying though? I’m not so sure.

Ramping up capacity has been needed for decades, and even more needed now regardless of lockdown, to deal with at least (1) the late diagnoses consequences of lockdown and (2) an actual fit for purpose public health/testing and tracing regime that can obviate lockdowns in the future due to cv19 or something else. The latter is how WHO and others advocate dealing with cv19, rather than using lockdowns; the latter is due to the failure of the former, and has been allowed to happen in part because some, including yourself it appears, continue to focus on the last resort solution as the answer rather than the other way around.

Ahhh, now I see.

The posts in the Covid forum in the thread about relaxing restrictions calling for thousands of new doctors and nurses are actually unrelated to either Covid or restrictions.

Got it. :rolleyes:

drkpower · 15-04-2021 08:58AM

Graham wrote: »

I think a lot of people will throw out that type of scare story with no foundation from now on.

Realistically, outside the fringe elements I can't see lockdowns outside a pandemic scenario. We've all had enough of them at this point.

Why not? We have many endemic viruses, including cv19 from now on, which cause significant morbidity and mortality and severe health system strain every year.

Lockdown seems to be tolerated by many to reduce infection rates rather than more extreme consequences. The logical implication is that is should be a tool to control endemic viruses, particularly at the winter peak.

drkpower · 15-04-2021 08:59AM

Graham wrote: »

Ahhh, now I see.

The posts in the Covid forum in the thread about relaxing restrictions calling for thousands of new doctors and nurses are actually unrelated to either Covid or restrictions.

Got it. :rolleyes:

That’s a facetious response and you know it.

15-04-2021 09:05AM

drkpower wrote: »

Why not? We have many endemic viruses, including cv19 from now on, which cause significant morbidity and mortality and severe health system strain every year.

Lockdown seems to be tolerated by many to reduce infection rates rather than more extreme consequences. The logical implication is that is should be a tool to control endemic viruses, particularly at the winter peak.

Yes, it will always be an option for governments to use. It's unrealistic to expect that lockdowns will be a thing of the past. The seeds are already being sown for an autumn / winter lockdown in the UK with Johnson saying the other day that it was the lockdown, not the vaccine, that was responsible for the fall in case and death numbers.

And then there are the potential climate lockdowns: https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2021/03/03/report-world-needs-equivalent-of-pandemic-lockdown-every-two-years-to-meet-paris-carbon-emission-goals/?sh=8aaa7706deed

And according to the World Economic Forum, lockdowns are improving city life: https://spectator.com.au/2021/02/the-world-economic-forum-lockdowns-are-improving-cities-around-the-world/

(They subsequently deleted the tweet after significant criticism.)

Fandymo · 15-04-2021 09:07AM

Graham wrote: »

Cool story Fandymo, what has that got to do with relaxing restrictions?

Graham wrote: »

I'm trying to reconcile why some posters are calling for a significant relaxing of restrictions at the same time as calling for a ramping up of hospital capacity.

If you can't keep up with the questions, you yourself, are asking, perhaps it's time to step away from the keyboard.

Graham · 15-04-2021 09:16AM

Deleted User wrote: »

It's unrealistic to expect that lockdowns will be a thing of the past.

Are you talking COVID related reasons or something else?

Deleted User wrote: »

Johnson saying the other day that it was the lockdown, not the vaccine, that was responsible for the fall in case and death numbers.

You mean we might be taking the right approach after all?

FintanMcluskey · 15-04-2021 09:22AM

Leo on Newstalk talking about increasing minimum wage

No discussion whatsoever about 400k + out of work long term

Easy promise to increase minimum wage when nobody is actually working

Close businesses for a year and then force them to pay higher wages when they do open

15-04-2021 09:25AM

Graham wrote: »

Are you talking COVID related reasons or something else?

You mean we might be taking the right approach after all?

I'm talking flu lockdowns, climate lockdowns, and covid lockdowns. The idea of climate lockdowns has been floated: https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/Panorama/Articles/Avoiding-a-climate-lockdown

Definitely not taking the right approach. Have destroyed society, the economy, terrified people, wrecked mental health, children's education etc.

Johnson is sowing the seeds for an autumn / winter lockdown with that kind of talk. I'm almost certain the UK will be back in lockdown in autumn / winter.

Graham · 15-04-2021 09:31AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm talking flu lockdowns, climate lockdowns, and covid lockdowns.

I see.

I don't think many outside the fringe elements are calling for, or expecting, flu lockdowns and climate lockdowns.

FintanMcluskey · 15-04-2021 09:33AM

Leo said he can envisage a problem with mandatory hotel next July and August if people fly into Northern Ireland to escape mandatory quarantine.

The risk with implementing increased restrictions in Ireland is that there is no metric to actually remove them.

Graham · 15-04-2021 09:38AM

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

The risk with implementing increased restrictions in Ireland is that there is no metric to actually remove them.

Not sure what you mean by 'metric' Fintan.

One would assume the process used to amend/add/remove laws will still remain in a post-covid era.

arccosh · 15-04-2021 09:48AM

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Leo said he can envisage a problem with mandatory hotel next July and August if people fly into Northern Ireland to escape mandatory quarantine.

The risk with implementing increased restrictions in Ireland is that there is no metric to actually remove them.

there is an expiry date on the temporary measures (SI's on the health act) ... meaning it's default removed unless there are mitigating circumstances.

Keep in mind also, it's very hard to keep a temporary measure in place because there are so many overarching laws it leaves people open to a legal anal blasting

edit: all current ones are May 04 2021

FintanMcluskey · 15-04-2021 09:57AM

Graham wrote: »

Not sure what you mean by 'metric' Fintan.

One would assume the process used to amend/add/remove laws will still remain in a post-covid era.

I mean what quantifiable metric will remove those restrictions

It’s none of the following
-hospital numbers
-ICU number
-vaccination of vulnerable and HCWs
-case numbers

At what point will restrictions be removed?

Captain_Crash · 15-04-2021 09:58AM

arccosh wrote: »

there is an expiry date on the temporary measures (SI's on the health act) ... meaning it's default removed unless there are mitigating circumstances.

Keep in mind also, it's very hard to keep a temporary measure in place because there are so many overarching laws it leaves people open to a legal anal blasting

edit: all current ones are May 04 2021

Do you not think they’ll be extended? I’d be very surprised if they were allowed expire

Graham · 15-04-2021 10:00AM

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

I mean what quantifiable metric will remove those restrictions

It’s none of the following
-hospital numbers
-ICU number
-vaccination of vulnerable and HCWs
-case numbers

At what point will restrictions be removed?

I would assume at whatever date the SIs expire or the appropriate Minister makes the call.

I can understand why we wouldn't tie the restrictions to an arbitrary number given the rapidly changing nature of a pandemic.

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

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part X Read OP For Mod Warnings