Relaxation of restrictions

road_high

Jenbach110 wrote: »

I thinks its more idotic not to understand the dangers of NOT going back to normality

The longer this goes on the more lives will be lost in countless other ways such as suicide, health cuts, poor nutrition, mental illness. The measures being taken now have their risks to human life as well. It not simply money vs lives we are considering here, it’s lives vs lives

trapp

History Queen wrote: »

Social distancing is very difficult if not impossible in schools. Classrooms aren't big enough for it. Most of my classes are between 25 and 30 students. Staggered break times presents a supervision issue as well.

Teachers only have one staff room (in most schools) to access photocopiers/IT equipment/have lunch, they need to access this room. It isn't big enough for social distancing either.

What about the movement of 700 or so students through the corridors from classroom to classroom? How do you enforce social distancing there? Students in my school come from 3 different counties.

I appreciate that we need to think outsode the box but with so many older buildings with small rooms and narrow corridors as well as prefabs and shared bathroom/canteen facilities it is very difficult for me to see social distancing working in a school setting.

Alternative is schools closed for another year or two.

Educators are going to have to think outside the box.

Staggered timetables with each child attending school for 1 day per week perhaps which will give more focus to work at home on the other days.

Forget the staffroom. Eat lunch on your own. Hardly an insurmountable issue.

iamwhoiam

alwald wrote: »

The part in bold is what makes it impossible and dangerous at the moment anyway.

We all know it’s impossible but I genuinely can’t see the harm in wanting life as we know back ? Can we not wish it was ?!

Cupatae

road_high wrote: »

The longer this goes on the more lives will be lost in countless other ways such as suicide, health cuts, poor nutrition, mental illness. The measures being taken now have their risks to human life as well. It not simply money vs lives we are considering here, it’s lives vs lives

well if you wanna go lives vs lives i think alot more will die to the virus than suicide so are we on the right track then?

trapp

Cupatae wrote: »

well if you wanna go lives vs lives i think alot more will die to the virus than suicide so are we on the right track then?

Everybody counts or nobody counts.

We have to find a middle ground where the numbers getting the virus are kept low but some sort of life can resume.

Difficult but has to be done.

Expect everybody to sacrifice their lives for 2 years and sit at home and non compliance will cause numbers to rise anyway.

alwald

Lord Trollington wrote: »

I don't think most reasonable people would have any issue with 3 months of restrictions if they new there was a road map to exiting.

This is like asking how long is a piece of string.

Cupatae

trapp wrote: »

Everybody counts or nobody counts.

We have to find a middle ground where the numbers getting the virus are kept low but some sort of life can resume.

Difficult but has to be done.

Expect everybody to sacrifice their lives for 2 years and sit at home and non compliance will cause numbers to rise anyway.

Everybody does count thats why we are doing the lockdown, to protect the most vulnerable, If you can find a middle ground where everybody is safe and we rapidly get back to normal by all means throw it out.

easypazz

road_high wrote: »

The longer this goes on the more lives will be lost in countless other ways such as suicide, health cuts, poor nutrition, mental illness. The measures being taken now have their risks to human life as well. It not simply money vs lives we are considering here, it’s lives vs lives

This doesn't suit the lockdown forever brigade.

We have to lift the restrictions soon and ease back to a level we can cope with.

There are loads of possible scenarios to reduce social distancing.

Pubs and restaurants allowed 50% capacity, and no standing / congregating at the bar.

Maybe schools have 50% of students study from home every second week.

Instead of a creche having say 30 kids mingling they split into 3 groups of 10.

Lots and lots of testing capacity.

So if it breaks out somewhere test and trace.

the kelt

alwald wrote: »

The part in bold is what makes it impossible and dangerous at the moment anyway.

Completely and for quite a while in all probability.

But what's the point of all this if it's not to get back to normality and surely people yearning and wanting that isn't dangerous, rather its necessary.

Otherwise what's the point.? People need to want it

trapp

Cupatae wrote: »

Everybody does count thats why we are doing the lockdown, to protect the most vulnerable, If you can find a middle ground where everybody is safe and we rapidly get back to normal by all means throw it out.

If you lockdown for two years or however long a vaccine might take then everybody does not count equally.

Because that will destroy more lives than you could imagine.

easypazz

Cupatae wrote: »

Everybody does count thats why we are doing the lockdown, to protect the most vulnerable, If you can find a middle ground where everybody is safe and we rapidly get back to normal by all means throw it out.

What about the people who are not getting medical procedures, thinking about suicide and the homeless who need houses by next winter.

We can't go all in on this "everybody does count" with the virus.

There are other issues out there that need to be dealt with but can't be if we are in lockdown.

Cupatae

easypazz wrote: »

This doesn't suit the lockdown forever brigade.

We have to lift the restrictions soon and ease back to a level we can cope with.

There are loads of possible scenarios to reduce social distancing.

Pubs and restaurants allowed 50% capacity, and no standing / congregating at the bar.

Maybe schools have 50% of students study from home every second week.

Instead of a creche having say 30 kids mingling they split into 3 groups of 10.

Lots and lots of testing capacity.

So if it breaks out somewhere test and trace.

The problem with the "lets go back to normal instantly!" brigade is they dont see it ll make the whole lockdown pointless. Everyone is roaring to go back to normal, but no one has a concrete way on how to do it..any sane person would take normality back, but most understand that right now its not realistic

Plus we need to have some sort of control of the first wave, in order to contain other outbreaks.

Cupatae

trapp wrote: »

If you lockdown for two years or however long a vaccine might take then everybody does not count equally.

Because that will destroy more lives than you could imagine.

Where did i say lockdown for 2 years?

Xertz

I'd also just remind people that a significant % of the economy still is running:

Food supply, essential retail, a large % of manufacturing, financial services and a lot of office-based businesses are working with remote working strategies, the IT sector is largely working remotely, telecommunications companies are extremely busy and working, broadcasters and media, a very large % of public servants are working, obviously healthcare is extremely busy and working flat out, logistics companies and transport services and quite a lot of other areas of the economy are still functioning as normal or even are busier than normal.

The fact we've had food on the table, supermarkets to go to and are still able to post on boards.ie means a lot of services are up and running.

So, while we are on a lock down it's not an absolute stop of the entire economy, but it is very significant.

road_high

Cupatae wrote: »

well if you wanna go lives vs lives i think alot more will die to the virus than suicide so are we on the right track then?

Possibly but that’s only one aspect of what I’ve outlined. The consequences will be a more far reaching than possibly solely increasing suicide rates. We need to face up to the consequences of the lockdown rather than brushing than them under the carpet

easypazz

Cupatae wrote: »

The problem with the "lets go back to normal instantly!" brigade is they dont see it ll make the whole lockdown pointless. Everyone is roaring to go back to normal, but no one has a concrete way on how to do it..any sane person would take normality back, but most understand that right now its not realistic

I don't think anybody expects the old "normal"

We can make changes that reduce the risk to a level that can be managed.

Cupatae

easypazz wrote: »

What about the people who are not getting medical procedures, thinking about suicide and the homeless who need houses by next winter.

We can't go all in on this "everybody does count" with the virus.

There are other issues out there that need to be dealt with but can't be if we are in lockdown.

Where do you go then? you cant have it all... its a no win situation.

The reality is everyone wont be saved, but we are clearly trying to save as many as possible.

VinLieger

easypazz wrote: »

Instead of a creche having say 30 kids mingling they split into 3 groups of 10.

Most creches already only have groups of 10 - 15 max due to how many carers are required.
Making these even smaller would be impossible because the facilities for each group could not be divided in a way that would work.

Cupatae

easypazz wrote: »

I don't think anybody expects the old "normal"

We can make changes that reduce the risk to a level that can be managed.

I dont think anyone wants a "lockdown forever"

That is the goal, but we need the lockdown to make that possible. You cant manage something that is rampant, kill off the first wave, then implement measures like that.

road_high

Cupatae wrote: »

The problem with the "lets go back to normal instantly!" brigade is they dont see it ll make the whole lockdown pointless. Everyone is roaring to go back to normal, but no one has a concrete way on how to do it..any sane person would take normality back, but most understand that right now its not realistic

Plus we need to have some sort of control of the first wave, in order to contain other outbreaks.

I think many people have offered sensible suggestions here. Gradual reopening of garden centres, DIY stores under order and collect and or strict social distancing. No one is advocating a rush back to life as we knew it in February last

alwald

the kelt wrote: »

Completely and for quite a while in all probability.

But what's the point of all this if it's not to get back to normality and surely people yearning and wanting that isn't dangerous, rather its necessary.

Otherwise what's the point.? People need to want it

The point is to survive, protect and help the nation/society go through these tough and unprecedented events.

Wanting normality without the virus is a wish just like wishing to win the Euromillion. Accepting life with the virus as well as the unknown next steps, which will be based on data/figures/"new normality", is like playing the Euromillion knowing that there is 1 chance out of X to win...it's reality VS fantasy/dream.

Diairist

Let's watch Spain over the next week. It's a very brave decision to tell your country, let's ease up on the lockdown.

And we're still not properly counting covid19 deaths in nursing homes.

trapp

Xertz wrote: »

I'd also just remind people that a significant % of the economy still is running:

Food supply, essential retail, a large % of manufacturing, financial services and a lot of office-based businesses are working with remote working strategies, the IT sector is largely working remotely, telecommunications companies are extremely busy and working, broadcasters and media, a very large % of public servants are working, obviously healthcare is extremely busy and working flat out, logistics companies and transport services and quite a lot of other areas of the economy are still functioning as normal or even are busier than normal.

The fact we've had food on the table, supermarkets to go to and are still able to post on boards.ie means a lot of services are up and running.

So, while we are on a lock down it's not an absolute stop of the entire economy, but it is very significant.

What about the human cost of lockdown for a long time?

Forget the economy it's the human cost I'd be more worried about.

robinph

History Queen wrote: »

Social distancing is very difficult if not impossible in schools. Classrooms aren't big enough for it. Most of my classes are between 25 and 30 students. Staggered break times presents a supervision issue as well.

Teachers only have one staff room (in most schools) to access photocopiers/IT equipment/have lunch, they need to access this room. It isn't big enough for social distancing either.

What about the movement of 700 or so students through the corridors from classroom to classroom? How do you enforce social distancing there? Students in my school come from 3 different counties.

I appreciate that we need to think outsode the box but with so many older buildings with small rooms and narrow corridors as well as prefabs and shared bathroom/canteen facilities it is very difficult for me to see social distancing working in a school setting.

Yep, it will be difficult and schools are one of the trickiest environments that must be re-opened but are the most difficult to do it with due to the fact you are dealing with kids.

The teachers maybe just have to manage without accessing the staff room. Someone else prints stuff out for them and drops it to them, or buy more printers. Primary schools the kids stay in the same class all day, just keep them in the classes and they eat their packed lunches there.
Secondary schools the teachers have to learn some new subjects and teach each others lessons to the same class all the time.
Or kids have to go to more local schools, open up new ones in each town and no kid travels out of their town. Massively reduce class sizes. OK there isn't the teacher numbers, but cold have kids in supervised "schools" no more than 1 mile from their home and all working remotely with a teaching assistant for each group of mixed age classes.

This is something that is going to be potentially years before it's sorted, and we are likely to have a similar issue again. To get things restarted, and if schooling isn't restarted then the economic impact will be felt for decades to come as those kids currently in school get older, things need to be drastically rethought. The kids need to be back at school so that the parents can get back to working and running things, but they also need to have some form of education so that they can work the jobs in 15-30 years time.

I don't have an answer, but the answer is 100% not "it can't be done".

Xertz

Densely congregated settings are going to present a huge challenge though no matter what way you look at it and the only thing I could suggest is that we minimise the number of them to absolutely essential stuff like trying to get schools back up and running on some basis using blended learning (minimising time needed in class rooms and using a lot of other online resources etc)

One thing we should definitely do however is remove superfluous ones from the mix for now. I don't think anyone in their right mind should be contemplating things like festivals, gigs, getting drunk and the pub and accidentally giving everyone a big hug or anything like that for quite some time.

The other issue is public transport. The more people can avoid commuting or at least stagger it to keep numbers down the better.

There's going to have to be a hierarchy of what's needed and what's not and we've a lot of things that are fun, but could go on hold until it's safe to run them again.

Hmmzis

Cupatae wrote: »

Where do you go then? you cant have it all... its a no win situation.

Exactly.
The most we can do is keep the hospitals and ICUs from being overloaded.

Barring a useful treatment regime/drugs, it'll be a balancing act.

scamalert

Diairist wrote: »

Let's watch Spain over the next week. It's a very brave decision to tell your country, let's ease up on the lockdown.

And we're still not properly counting covid19 deaths in nursing homes.

hoping the restrictions on canaries are off as seems ryanair has flights ready come start of May, since travel isnt prohibited this might give people chance to escape to some normal, then gloom over whats inevitable eventually anyway.

zerosugarbuzz

Cupatae wrote: »

That is the goal, but we need the lockdown to make that possible. You cant manage something that is rampant, kill off the first wave, then implement measures like that.

How long are you prepared to wait and after that period in time how do you see the economy functioning. I personally know a lot of SME's that will not financially survive another 4 weeks of this. The aftermath of this long lockdown could make Corona Virus look like childs play.

Xertz

I'd caution one thing about Spain is the difference in climate.

Spain could easily open a lot of things into outdoor spaces with loads of social distancing in a way that Ireland realistically can't do because of the climate, certainly not until mid summer anyway, and even then it's challenging with rain showers.

Outdoor restaurants and so on might not be that high risk if they can be spread quite far apart. We could actually look at maybe allowing more use of outdoor spaces. City / County councils can be pretty draconian about use of it as it is.

trapp

Xertz wrote: »

Densely congregated settings are going to present a huge challenge though no matter what way you look at it and the only thing I could suggest is that we minimise the number of them to absolutely essential stuff like trying to get schools back up and running on some basis using blended learning (minimising time needed in class rooms and using a lot of other online resources etc)

One thing we should definitely do however is remove superfluous ones from the mix for now. I don't think anyone in their right mind should be contemplating things like festivals, gigs, getting drunk and the pub and accidentally giving everyone a big hug or anything like that for quite some time.

There's going to have to be a hierarchy of what's needed and what's not and we've a lot of things that are fun, but could go on hold until it's safe to run them again.

Exactly festivals, big matches and so on are not safe for now.

We need to look at what's essential first.

If schools are essential is the question?

If they are then educators need to spend the next few months finding suitable arrangements that are not all focused on online learning, particularly at primary level and look to reopen in January 2021 and work through the summer next year.