Relaxation of restrictions

Stateofyou

easypazz wrote: »

And for a lot of people they won't be able for it, and so they are being let die because another section of society can be saved.

We need to live with this, accept that it will kill people, the same as cancer and heart attacks kill people.

Have you never heard of "flatten the curve?" The point is that if we all go back to normal, our health care systems will be overrun. More people will die, and even more people will suffer or die from knock on effect of being unable to be treated for whatever their health urgency is. It's about saving as many lives as possible, getting the spread under control in as much as possible for our health system to cope. Then we can look at re-opening with restrictions until we have a treatment/vaccine. What do you not understand about this very simple concept.

skallywag

KrustyUCC wrote: »

They can't keep extending the lockdown after that

We can't run from the virus long term either as a vaccine might never work unfortunately

I would imagine that the hope will be that by that stage the health system will be under less stress then. E.g. take a look at Austria, who have started opening up again already. They currently have 250 ICU beds occupied out of a total of 1,250 or so.

Hence they can absorb the rise in cases which will come with opening up.

KiKi III

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah I think that's what we're doing right now. If we thought we could kill the disease we would have a complete month long stay at home order for everyone except medical staff. but that's very impractical as there might not be a month's supply of food for everyone.

Instead, we're building up hospital capacity and trying to keep the rate of infection at or below hospital capacity. The only way through this is through a managed herd immunity over the course of the next year or two.

As the rate of infection slows, they will reduce restrictions to speed up infections, then tighten restrictions to keep them manageable, then rinse and repeat until we have herd immunity

As has been discussed at length on the thread, herd immunity requires 60% of the population to become infected, about 3 million people in Ireland's case. It is not and never has been the government's strategy to pursue herd immunity because even spread over two years (or five), 3 million cases would absolutely decimate our health system.

Thelonious Monk

Stateofyou wrote: »

Have you never heard of "flatten the curve?" The point is that if we all go back to normal, our health care systems will be overrun. More people will die, and even more people will suffer or die from knock on effect of being unable to be treated for whatever their health urgency is. It's about saving as many lives as possible, getting the spread under control in as much as possible for our health system to cope. Then we can look at re-opening with restrictions until we have a treatment/vaccine. What do you not understand about this very simple concept.

Because if we don't get everything back to normal right now everyone will kill themselves or something

khalessi

I would not be surprised if lockdown was extended to encompass the June bank holiday weekend

CtevenSrowder

KiKi III wrote: »

It's not at all. It's the truthful answer, and I've been consistent on it through the thread.

Can you not think for yourself, no?

SusanC10

pgj2015 wrote: »

could you not just go see her and wear a mask?

It's a 7 hour round-trip driving to see her so not at the moment, No.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

KiKi III wrote: »

It's not at all. It's the truthful answer, and I've been consistent on it through the thread.

So if not 5th of May, what needs to happen statistically for you to be happy with easing restrictions? How long is too long?

KiKi III

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Can you not think for yourself, no?

I can. And having thought it through for myself I realised that I'm not a doctor or an epidemiologist or an economist so it's best to take my guidance from such people.

SusanC10

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Can you not see her when the 2Km restrictions are lifted? You just have to maintain your social distance so no hugging for example as awful as it is.

Do you think that the 2km will be lifted before a Vaccine?
I suppose I have been thinking that these restrictions will continue until there is a Vaccine but who knows ?

CtevenSrowder

KiKi III wrote: »

I can. And having thought it through for myself I realised that I'm not a doctor or an epidemiologist or an economist so it's best to take my guidance from such people.

There is a difference between guidance and blindly following. You are doing the latter.

skallywag

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

So if not 5th of May, what needs to happen statistically for you to be happy with easing restrictions? How long is too long?

The daily death rate needs to either plateau or better significantly drop for starters. I can only assume that you are aware that it is currently actually heading North?

KiKi III

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

So if not 5th of May, what needs to happen statistically for you to be happy with easing restrictions? How long is too long?

Honestly, I don't know. As I said a few pages ago, I don't find it helpful to ruminate on "What if this happens on May 5?" or "What if that happens?"

I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. I'm cautiously optimistic we'll see some restrictions lifted, though I don't know which ones, so I'm going to continue adopting a wait-and-see approach.

I know people are craving certainty at the moment but it's impossible to provide that right now so I think the attitude I'm adopting is the most sensible one.

CtevenSrowder

SusanC10 wrote: »

Do you think that the 2km will be lifted before a Vaccine?
I suppose I have been thinking that these restrictions will continue until there is a Vaccine but who knows ?

Noone can say for definite but I say it will be gone long before a vaccine comes about. The 2km is unlikely in the extreme to be with us for the next 2 years.

El_Duderino 09

KiKi III wrote: »

As has been discussed at length on the thread, herd immunity requires 60% of the population to become infected, about 3 million people in Ireland's case. It is not and never has been the government's strategy to pursue herd immunity because even spread over two years (or five), 3 million cases would absolutely decimate our health system.

They haven't said it's the policy but it's absolutely the policy they'll pursue. The alternative is to keep infections as low as possible and cross our fingers that a vaccine is created in the next 5 years - or maybe a vaccine will never be created in which case... what do we do?

The sensible thing to do it keep infections to the max rate where the health service can deal with it and get 2/3 of us infected over the next year or 2. Obviously the vulnerable people will need to be cocooned until herd Immunity is achieved.

skallywag

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Noone can say for definite but I say it will be gone long before a vaccine comes about. The 2km is unlikely in the extreme to be with us for the next 2 years.

I can see the 2km restriction being relaxed, now that people are starting to get with the program. In fact I do not think that it would have been brought in at all if some folk had not acted the complete bollox some weeks ago, as seen on the images from weekend activities etc.

Cork Boy 53

khalessi wrote: »

I would not be surprised if lockdown was extended to encompass the June bank holiday weekend

That will depend on the rate of ICU cases and deaths over the next few weeks. The authorities will be playing a waiting game during this period.

CtevenSrowder

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

They haven't said it's the policy but it's absolutely the policy they'll pursue. The alternative is to keep infections as low as possible and cross our fingers that a vaccine is created in the next 5 years - or maybe a vaccine will never be created in which case... what do we do?

The sensible thing to do it keep infections to the max rate where the health service can deal with it and get 2/3 of us infected over the next year or 2. Obviously the vulnerable people will need to be cocooned until herd Immunity is achieved.

The problem is that herd immunity has become such a dirty phrase, and is associated with just sitting back and letting thousands die, when this is not what it is about.

SusanC10

SusanC10 wrote: »

Do you think that the 2km will be lifted before a Vaccine?
I suppose I have been thinking that these restrictions will continue until there is a Vaccine but who knows ?

Nothing will be in place until a vaccine, because an effective vaccine might simply never arrive.

As soon as non essential business can reopen and tradespeople can operate again (whenever that is, and subject to whatever mitigating measures remain in place) the 2km (or indeed any distance rule) will naturally be unworkable and be removed

KiKi III

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

They haven't said it's the policy but it's absolutely the policy they'll pursue. The alternative is to keep infections as low as possible and cross our fingers that a vaccine is created in the next 5 years - or maybe a vaccine will never be created in which case... what do we do?

The sensible thing to do it keep infections to the max rate where the health service can deal with it and get 2/3 of us infected over the next year or 2. Obviously the vulnerable people will need to be cocooned until herd Immunity is achieved.

Our hospitals are under pressure with the current 10,000 cases.

You're proposing 3 million cases over the next two years. At the most optimistic mortality rate of 0.5% that's 150,000 deaths, 15,000 of them in people under 65 plus a devastated health system

El_Duderino 09

khalessi wrote: »

I would not be surprised if lockdown was extended to encompass the June bank holiday weekend

Oh definitely. The lockdown.on social things is here to stay for months or years. But if the infection rates are looking good, they might loosen restrictions on some jobs to get production up and keep infection rates up close to health service capacity.

The sensible way to do it is to get transmissions rates up through economic activity. Best of both worlds.

Downlinz

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

100% this.

There are some people on this thread who seem to think we should all collectively suffer for months on end so that those who need to isolate don't feel 'left out' or something. Completely disregarding not only what that would do to the economy but also everyone else's lives.

If I were 85 and in ill health, I certainly wouldn't want or expect to be anyone's priority. That's not meant in a callous way, but some people need to understand there are no winners here. The way it's going, the young are going to be sacrificed for the old. People who are elderly have lived their lives already. They've had their weddings and their careers and raised their kids, and now all that is being taken away from young people. There's a generation of teenagers having their education ruined, enormous stress put on families which will lead to family breakdown and even violence, weddings being cancelled, long distance relationships breaking up, surgery cancelled, people with poor mental health suffering enormously.

I really hate the narrative that the protective measures are implemented only to protect the elderly and vulnerable.

Yes, people like us probably won't die but it's still a horrifying illness to be inflicted which can involve several weeks of agony struggling to breath, a potential hospital stay and an equally long recovery time as you're very susceptible to secondary infections after tremendous toll from your immune system to fight this thing.
Then there's the possibility of no immunity, HIV type reactivation, indications of permanent lung damage and shortened lifespan. There's so much we don't know about this virus and a worrying amount of evidence to indicate it's not just a "one and done" kind of thing.

When you're weighing that up against the likes of "weddings being cancelled" then I wonder if you've thought your priorities through.

yosemitesam1

KiKi III wrote: »

Our hospitals are under pressure with the current 10,000 cases.

You're proposing 3 million cases over the next two years. At the most optimistic mortality rate of 0.5% that's 150,000 deaths, 15,000 of them in people under 65 plus a devastated health system

Check your maths

skallywag

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Check your maths

Ah, it is only out by one order of magnitude :pac:

@KiKi, you are not working in statistics for the HSE I hope?

El_Duderino 09

KiKi III wrote: »

Our hospitals are under pressure with the current 10,000 cases.

You're proposing 3 million cases over the next two years. At the most optimistic mortality rate of 0.5% that's 150,000 deaths, 15,000 of them in people under 65 plus a devastated health system

Yes. That's what I'm saying (maths and optimistic death rate not withstand). This is a disease which kills people. We all know that. And actually looking at the numbers is uncomfortable, but that's what it will take to achieve herd Immunity and get back to some kind of normality.

The only thing I'd say is that the vulnerable will need to stay cocooned for that period. So they should be less likely to be the ones infected than the people who are more likely to fight it successfully. So I'd expect certain restrictions to be relaxed but cocooning of vulnerable people to expand.

I get that you don't think that's what we're going to do. What do you think we're going to do?

KiKi III

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Check your maths

Looks right to me but I’ll admit it’s not my strongpoint - what’s wrong as you see it?

skallywag

KiKi III wrote: »

Looks right to me but I’ll admit it’s not my strongpoint - what’s wrong as you see it?

It is wrong by a factor of 10!

Loafing Oaf

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Obviously the vulnerable people will need to be cocooned until herd Immunity is achieved.

As many people have pointed out, this would be extremely difficult to implement in practice. Huge numbers of elderly and other vulnerable living with low-vulnerability family members. Do you think it's possible for these people to 'self-isolate' within the family home for a prolonged period?

CtevenSrowder

KiKi III wrote: »

Looks right to me but I’ll admit it’s not my strongpoint - what’s wrong as you see it?

0.5% mortality rate gives 15000 deaths not 150,000.

seamus

Downlinz wrote: »

This is a problem everyone has to deal with and nobody is dismissing the challenge involved. However, anyone with concerns for friends and family at the forefront should hold the desire to maintain distance to keep them safe and respect the lockdown as a measure enforcing this.

Cork Boy 53 wrote: »

Very few would deny this is the case. Unfortunately the virus doesn`t give a **** about any of that.

This is all rhetoric in reality. Meaningless appeals to sentiment.

The fact is that there is a limit to which we can push this. A point at which people will have had enough.
And all the bland statements in the world about saving lives cannot maintain it.

There are many reasons, practical, social and financial, why this current state of lockdown cannot continue in the medium-term.

That's even if people were willing to stick with it. Are people willing to stick with it for 12 months? 6 months? 3 months?

The main reason it cannot continue is because it will not. Because people are people, fatigue will set in, and people will start agreeing, collectively but unconsciously, to let their guard down and ignore the restrictions. Bit by bit, little by little, until the Gardai are spending their days breaking up groups of people who will just congregate again five minutes after the Guards leave.

It's not a case of whether we have to relax the restrictions, but when and in what order.

I personally feel that we are pushing the limit right now. What is currently a broad state of acceptance and understanding, is starting to fray. If Leo was to turn around on 1st May and say that we needed another 3 weeks of this, anger and frustration would begin to supplant our solidarity. Compliance would start to drop. Criticism of the government response would ramp up massively - especially when other countries are lifting their restrictions.

And the last thing we want is for the lockdown to collapse chaotically. Whatever chance we had of managing fatalities long-term is lost.

So if concern for family and friends is at the forefront of your mind, then you should be looking to the government for an exit plan. For a reasonable expectation of what to expect over the next 1,3,6,12 months. Because looking for indefinite continuation of the lockdown, is looking for disaster.