A must read for the ''lockdown'' brigade.

Pinkpotato

endabob1 wrote: »

Most of Europe is on lockdown, as is Asia, India just shut down for 3 weeks, 1.2 billion people.... I am genuinely curious about where social distancing is working

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/world/asia/coronavirus-south-korea-flatten-curve.amp.html%3f0p19G=2870

Jurgen Klopp

Pinkpotato wrote: »

So we lock down again and again every few weeks, so we can build the herd immunity?That's the long term goal for this!
Social distancing slows the spread, it works in other countries where they don't have literal bold teenagers for adults. It's like we need to lock them in their bedroom to stop them sneaking out.

Same ones will scream how the gardai are rats and pigs for not letting them leave the house if it came to it

If I'm being honest. A vaccine trialed and deployed to enough people would nearly be 2 years.

I can only see 2 longterm prospects

1. Catch and release: if we get it under control we follow what some have been muting where we lift restrictions and lockdown when a certain number are infected again. I've seen a 1 month off and 2 month lockdown muted don't see how that is practical economic wise. Can't see shops, etc opening for a month and closing for two long with hiring staff. Solution seems to be "print more money" according to some

2. Cocooning: the elderly and vulnerable are asked to self isolate as Leo and Boris announced and they'll try and get the rest of us back out there to work. I'm convinced the fact Leo came out with this is a drip feed that's this what they know they'll have to eventually do IMO can't see how they can do step 1 for 2 years and keep paying dole, pensions and expect the HSE without them taking dramatics drops in standard.

Peregrinus

To be blunt, if people who normally work aren't working then we are, as a community, getting poorer, and no amount of borrowing or printing money will get around this. You can give people all the free money you like to buy bread with but if farmers aren't planting and harvesting, millers aren't milling and bakers aren't baking there will be no bread to buy. Obviously we have to keep the basics of the economy going - we have to feed, clothe and shelter the community and of course also provide medical care - but because so many people are working less or not at all we will have fewer resources with which to do that. Inevitably this means a transfer of resources from those who have them to those who need them on a greater scale than is usual, and once you accept that - and you had better accept it, because it is inevitable - we are only arging about the optimal mechanism for effecting that transfer.

Realistically, we are 18 months to 2 years away from having a vaccinated population. The challenge in that time is to balance (a) the need for enough people to work to generate the resources we need as a community with (b) the need for isolation/social distancing to prevent spikes in infections from overwhelming our capacity to care for people.

But over that time there is some reason to hope that the experience of CV19 will become less awful. Two things may help here"

First, over time a new virus tends to become less virulent. Less lethal stains of the virus tend to crowd out more lethal strains (because they are, in a Darwinian sense, better adapted to their environment).

Secondly, even before a vaccine arrives, we may find more effective ways of treating those infected with CV19, so that few of them become critically ill, and fewer die.

So there is merit to deferring as many infections for as long as possible, and it's worth paying a signficant economic price to do that. Many lives wil be saved.

sydthebeat

Peregrinus wrote: »

To be blunt, if people who normally work aren't working then we are, as a community, getting poorer, and no amount of borrowing or printing money will get around this.

On a global scale, if everyones economy is slowly down, then "poorer" just becomes a relative term to describe where we were, rather than where we are.

Farmers are still planting, processing plants are still processing. Supply lines are still open. All that has changed has been the social aspect of purchasing.

The heath service has, or will in the coming weeks, basically become a front line in fighting covid, and all the non essential and electoral procedures with, unfortunately, have to be postponed until schedules clear.

The main point that everyone needs to realise is the the stricter EVERYONE adheres to the distancing, the less people will die AND the quicker we will come out of this.

Doodah7

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Not a cloud in the sky morning, what a beautiful spring day after an endless winter of incessant rain and storms!
But remember folks - lock up your children, plonk them in front of a screen and do not let them outdoors .. all that vitamin D might even boost their immune systems!

Send them out to the garden and stop being so overly dramatic!!

sydthebeat

Doodah7 wrote: »

Send them out to the garden and stop being so overly dramatic!!

Whoosh

The sarcasm is literally dripping off Elmers post

jmayo

trapp wrote: »

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/16/asia/coronavirus-xi-wuhan-anger-intl-hnk/index.html

What is your agenda around here ?

dartboardio wrote: »

Thank you for this.

Some Load of fecking eejits around the place shouting 'lockdown, lockdown!' when they haven't a clue what something like that would take, or how it would probably put us on our arse ten times worse than any crash would.

As opposed to the fooking eejits that think everyone and anyone should just wander around the place, infect everyone and totally overwhelm the health systems, the morgues, the crematoriums and ultimately lead to bodies being shoved into mass graves.
But you usually find the proponents of doing jack sh** are young enough and believe they are healthy enough to withstand the virus and it will be some other poor bastard that will be doing the dying.

God help us if the virus were to mutate.

Then again it might do us a favour and mutate into something that targets self entitled fooking eejits.

Alf Veedersane

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Most people won't need to be "forced" to stay in their homes, if the measures are aimed at saving huge amounts of lives....

Most will comply by choice... especially if we have the very scary Italian type numbers developing!

So you won't need that many guards or army in reality.

You may need more old school style enforcement for certain people, like the OP... there will always be a few who will completely lose their heads, and start rebelling. But most people will be sensible and comply!

Therein lies the problem. If people need to see the numbers escalate to the level of Italy then it's already too late.

Too many being complacent because the numbers are not yet at that level and missing the point that if they continue largely as normal then they increase the risk of getting to that point.

jmayo

Peregrinus wrote: »

To be blunt, if people who normally work aren't working then we are, as a community, getting poorer, and no amount of borrowing or printing money will get around this. You can give people all the free money you like to buy bread with but if farmers aren't planting and harvesting, millers aren't milling and bakers aren't baking there will be no bread to buy. Obviously we have to keep the basics of the economy going - we have to feed, clothe and shelter the community and of course also provide medical care - but because so many people are working less or not at all we will have fewer resources with which to do that. Inevitably this means a transfer of resources from those who have them to those who need them on a greater scale than is usual, and once you accept that - and you had better accept it, because it is inevitable - we are only arging about the optimal mechanism for effecting that transfer.

Actually we are learning who is really important to life.

It is not the fooking overpaid pre-madonnas playing sports, the gombeens in offices needlessly shoveling paper to each other, the media types, the gombeens doing unnecessary jobs, but the people who provide us with food, medicines, health care and security.

It probably irritates some around here no end that farmers for instance will still be out working in the countryside providing the raw materials to keep us alive.

I think it's important to differentiate a lockdown with enforced social distancing/isolation. A lockdown won't occur because Irish people wouldn't or couldn't accept a lockdown the same way an Asian culture could. So, a complete lockdown just isn't going to happen unless we have people dying in the streets.

Instead, it's more likely to be an enforcement of social distancing. No groups interacting. People are allowed outside but only as singles.. individuals walking the dog, or going to the supermarket. Enforcing people to be alone, drastically cuts down the risk of accidental transmission of the virus outside, because it makes it easier for people to avoid each other. Paired people take up too much space on footpaths.

For those who believe that a lockdown couldn't occur because of a lack of manpower.. placing checkpoints at certain intersections, and having roving patrols would effectively lock down movement in Ireland. As others have said, the use of documentation to be checked by the roving patrols with fines or deferred sentencing would be effective in cutting down those breaking the containment.

The point is to reduce the speed of the spread.. I don't really understand why many posters can't accept this. As for the lockdown brigade... Sure, I guess I am one now, although enforced distancing would be more accurate. Previously I hoped that Irish people would have the cop on to social distance, but I don't any longer. I've just seen too many people making half-hearted gestures towards social distancing... It seems Irish people need a nanny to remind them when they're right or wrong in how they behave.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Therein lies the problem. If people need to see the numbers escalate to the level of Italy then it's already too late.

Too many being complacent because the numbers are not yet at that level and missing the point that if they continue largely as normal then they increase the risk of getting to that point.

Which "people" are you referring to though?

Most of the population of this country will comply with the instructions of our leaders... if it's in the interest of the country and saving lives.

But if those orders never come, or come too late... there is nothing for the people to follow or comply with!

Nermal

Has the government released details of the modelling that led to us selecting the particular mix and timing of restrictions we have put in place?

Alf Veedersane

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Which "people" are you referring to though?

Most of the population of this country will comply with the instructions of our leaders... if it's in the interest of the country and saving lives.

But if those orders never come, or come too late... there is nothing for the people to follow or comply with!

The people who haven't complied by choice already...that we saw disregarding the advice on distancing at the weekend, for example.

The instructions on distancing, in order to reduce the spread, have been clear since long before the weekend. But it wasn't being heeded. Any lockdown will still rely on people taking responsibility for their own actions and following the advice that has been given for a number of weeks.

listermint

Nermal wrote: »

Has the government released details of the modelling that led to us selecting the particular mix and timing of restrictions we have put in place?

Yes they are emailing it to you personally as we speak

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

The people who haven't complied by choice already...that we saw disregarding the advice on distancing at the weekend, for example.

The instructions on distancing, in order to reduce the spread, have been clear since long before the weekend. But it wasn't being heeded. Any lockdown will still rely on people taking responsibility for their own actions and following the advice that has been given for a number of weeks.

You'll never get everybody in any country to comply... some countries will be better than others.

But I think we are somewhere in the middle in terms of how our citizens are co-operating. Most are doing okay.

If you want less movement of people in the country, and hence less chance of virus spread, it needs to come from the leaders at the top. They need to make that decision to put in place stricter curfews, consent documents for being outdoors etc etc.

And again, most of our people will comply with those stricter measures... if it's in the interests of saving lives!

Alf Veedersane

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

You'll never get everybody in any country to comply... some countries will be better than others.

But I think we are somewhere in the middle in terms of how our citizens are co-operating. Most are doing okay.

If you want less movement of people in the country, and hence less chance of virus spread, it needs to come from the leaders at the top. They need to make that decision to put in place stricter curfews, consent documents for being outdoors etc etc.

And again, most of our people will comply with those stricter measures... if it's in the interests of saving lives!

My point was really that a lot of people who should know better don't. There's no excuse for it and it really only takes one instance of being blasé to set off a chain of events. It needs to be more than 'doing okay' when it comes to following the advice. 'Patient 31' in South Korea is a perfect example.

The crowds on Salthill prom, at Glendalough etc weren't isolated incidents and the problem is that people don't realise how serious it is until it's too late.

I think there is an element of "aren't we doing a great job all the same! Look how quickly we acted and look at the omnishambles in the UK. We're doing so well" while being oblivious to the fact that the single biggest factor in flattening the curve is heeding the advice that's been out there for weeks.

All that said, I don't think we're terrible or anywhere near it. Just need to be better than okay to avoid pushing healthcare capacity beyond the tipping point. We can't always blame the government for people spreading when the people spreading know full well they're going against fairly clear advice.