Relaxation of restrictions

terrydel

housemouse wrote: »

You should talk to people who make decisions about how to spend money on healthcare. You'll find that they sometimes use a spreadsheet.

Are you being deliberately idiotic?

Cyrus

Daycare nurseries, kindergartens and primary schools will reopen in Denmark from 15 April, its prime minister has said, making it the second European country after Austria to unveil its plans for a gradual easing of restrictions.

According to a report on AFP, Mette Frederiksen said that according to health authorities “it is appropriate and justified to start a slow opening. But on condition that everyone keeps their distance and washes their hands.”

Bars, restaurants, nightclubs, shopping centres, hairdressers and massage parlours will remain closed, and gatherings of more than 10 people are still prohibited.

“Daily life is not going to return as before for the moment. We will live with many restrictions for many more months,” the prime minister warned.

terrydel

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Did you ever hear of a professional called an Actuary? Guess what purpose they serve for the insurance industry ?
Revenue regards citizens as 'economic units'.

So I'll ask again, if your parent is on the wrong end of a decision based on the category of 'economic unit' they are in, you are personally fine with that?
A simple yes or no will suffice.

Its so easy for you to comment like you have, in the abstract, but the people dealing with and making these decisions now can effectively see the faces of the people their decisions will effect. They had a choice between allowing what happened in italy to happen here, massive numbers of avoidable deaths and a health system completely overwhelmed to the point it was not fit for purpose, or the choice they took, there was little to no other option open.

Plumbthedepths

terrydel wrote: »

So I'll ask again, if your parent is on the wrong end of a decision based on the category of 'economic unit' they are in, you are personally fine with that?
A simple yes or no will suffice.

Actually a simple yes or no does not suffice. The reasons are I'm not the one who prioritises resources. Whether I'm fine or not is irrelevant.
Life is not black or white as much as you'd like to protray it is.

terrydel

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Actually a simple yes or no does not suffice. The reasons are I'm not the one who prioritises resources. Whether I'm fine or not is irrelevant.
Life is not black or white as much as you'd like to protray it is.

You failure to answer is so telling.

Harry Palmr

Cyrus wrote: »

Daycare nurseries, kindergartens and primary schools will reopen in Denmark from 15 April, its prime minister has said, making it the second European country after Austria to unveil its plans for a gradual easing of restrictions.

According to a report on AFP, Mette Frederiksen said that according to health authorities “it is appropriate and justified to start a slow opening. But on condition that everyone keeps their distance and washes their hands.”

Universities are marked in for May I believe

Also from that report

Not all sections of the Danish economy have suffered from the lockdown. The country’s biggest retailer of sex toys says that sales have doubled since Danes were told to stay at home, Reuters reports.

In the first week of April, sales at Sinful rose 110% in Denmark, where it estimates it commands three-quarters of the total market, while the country’s biggest sex toy review website Eroti.dk said traffic has more than tripled during the lockdown compared with the same period last year.

In particular demand for sex games and toys for couples has spiked. Sinful said sales of a 10-day love challenge for couples rose more than four-fold since mid-March compared with the same period before the lockdown.

Queasy Tadpole

I'm going up the wall. The restrictions are now really starting to get me. I've already been hit terribly financially, socially... it's getting to the stage now where I'm caring less and less about people I don't know dying and that is just horrible to think about.

I've lost many loved ones and know the pain and never ending grief but I feel myself becoming quite cold towards others now.

begbysback

Queasy Tadpole wrote: »

I'm going up the wall. The restrictions are now really starting to get me. I've already been hit terribly financially, socially... it's getting to the stage now where I'm caring less and less about people I don't know dying and that is just horrible to think about.

I've lost many loved ones and know the pain and never ending grief but I feel myself becoming quite cold towards others now.

Desensitization, very normal

Plumbthedepths

terrydel wrote: »

You failure to answer is so telling.

I did answer you, problem is I didn't give you the answer you wanted.

Cyrus

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Universities are marked in for May I believe

Also from that report

Norway is to lift some of its restrictions imposed to curb the spread of coronavirus, its prime minister has told a press conference.

“Together we have taken control of the virus, therefore we can open up society little by little,” Erna Solberg was quoted as saying by Reuters.

It joins Denmark and Austria in making plans to emerge from the lockdown conditions that have been imposed by governments across Europe.

terrydel

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I did answer you, problem is I didn't give you the answer you wanted.

You didnt, at all. But thats alright, your refusal betrayed you.

Cyrus

So it looks like the more proactive countries are now looking at relaxing some of the restrictions,

im presuming we wont be as quick but im hoping 2 weeks after this will see some movement.

terrydel

terrydel wrote: »

You failure to answer is so telling.

You don't expect the individual concerned to be happy with the decision.

But you can and should be aware, if you want to have a conversation about health policy, that these decisions are made all the time and in fact all health spending and investment is completely impossible without making them.

If, for example, an Irish child has a rare disease and the government estimates that an investment of 20bn euro will find a cure, I would expect that child's parents to want that to happen.

However, the government will almost certainly not spend that money because there are other ways it can be allocated that will deliver a greater benefit to a greater number.

Please tell me you understand this? You can't have a sensible conversation about health policy if you don't.

acequion

Queasy Tadpole wrote: »

I'm going up the wall. The restrictions are now really starting to get me. I've already been hit terribly financially, socially... it's getting to the stage now where I'm caring less and less about people I don't know dying and that is just horrible to think about.

I've lost many loved ones and know the pain and never ending grief but I feel myself becoming quite cold towards others now.

Thank you for your honesty and I really feel for you.

This post highlights the problem with an indefinite enforced lockdown and that has to be taken into account.

While, we may have no alternative currently, the lockdown fetishists and totalitarianists need to realise that for many the situation is becoming intolerable and ultimately will be unsustainable.

I don't have an alternative and can only put my trust and hope in the scientists working flat out to find a treatment and a vaccine, but let's all be honest and let's allow all opinions.

Pete_Cavan

terrydel wrote: »

So I'll ask again, if your parent is on the wrong end of a decision based on the category of 'economic unit' they are in, you are personally fine with that?
A simple yes or no will suffice.

You are over-simplifying things. It is not a case of saving any individual person or not. There are many other implications of any decision made. How many people are missing out on other medical procedures not being carried out (not necessarily life saving ones but certainly life changing ones)? How many are suffering mental health issues from lack of social contact, financial issues due to losing job, etc? I know of young children who are really struggling to cope with lack of interaction forced by something they don't understand and are showing personality changes. Any reasonable person will consider these people too, not just the one person you want to look at.

The virus kills some people, that is unavoidable (most likely because the damage caused by the virus is compounded by another medical issue). Our health service is coping, ICUs are well within capacity, everyone who needs treatment is getting it, yet some are still dying. Deaths, while tragic, are not the only factor here.

Those in high risk categories can substantially reduce the risk to themselves by continuing to isolate and take precautions. The fastest way for them to then return to normality is if immunity is built up in the general population. The virus will still exist so continued lockdown achieves little.

In terms of the actual issue, it is totally unclear how we can relax restrictions given that we have had a very small number of cases and the virus is still out there and can be introduced by travellers at any time.

To relax restrictions we will have to have quarantine for all travellers into the country in place and I assume a very aggressive testing and isolation program. Are we in a position to do this? The idea that there is a 'peak' and once it passes, even though only a few thousand people had the disease, we get back to normal seems like a complete fantasy to me.

Plumbthedepths

terrydel wrote: »

You didnt, at all. But thats alright, your refusal betrayed you.

Of course I didn't answer the way you wanted. As I said I'm not the person who will be tasked with the allocation of scant resources. What part do you not understand?

Loafing Oaf

Deleted User wrote: »

In terms of the actual issue, it is totally unclear how we can relax restrictions given that we have had a very small number of cases and the virus is still out there and can be introduced by travellers at any time.

To relax restrictions we will have to have quarantine for all travellers into the country in place and I assume a very aggressive testing and isolation program.

One of the many areas crying out for a quick-turnaround test

Cyrus

Deleted User wrote: »

In terms of the actual issue, it is totally unclear how we can relax restrictions given that we have had a very small number of cases and the virus is still out there and can be introduced by travellers at any time.

To relax restrictions we will have to have quarantine for all travellers into the country in place and I assume a very aggressive testing and isolation program. Are we in a position to do this? The idea that there is a 'peak' and once it passes, even though only a few thousand people had the disease, we get back to normal seems like a complete fantasy to me.

the idea that the country will remain locked down indefinitely is fantasy, as you can see several countries are starting to relax restrictions.

The plan here isnt to eradicate the disease its to slow the spread which has been achieved so far.

the only way to eradicate it is wait until we are sure no one else in the country has it and then close the borders until no where else has it either,

not going to happen.

Cyrus

Cyrus wrote: »

the idea that the country will remain locked down indefinitely is fantasy, as you can see several countries are starting to relax restrictions.

The plan here isnt to eradicate the disease its to slow the spread which has been achieved so far.

the only way to eradicate it is wait until we are sure no one else in the country has it and then close the borders until no where else has it either,

not going to happen.

Sure. I agree with most of that.

I suppose what I am saying is when we relax restrictions we can expect a much bigger surge than any we have had to date. I hope people are aware of that.

kippy

Cyrus wrote: »

the idea that the country will remain locked down indefinitely is fantasy, as you can see several countries are starting to relax restrictions.

The plan here isnt to eradicate the disease its to slow the spread which has been achieved so far.

the only way to eradicate it is wait until we are sure no one else in the country has it and then close the borders until no where else has it either,

not going to happen.

All "Non essential" movement in and out of the country needs to be restricted before the majority of the current restrictions are eased. This probably has to happen for minimum 4-6 months I would say. It's a fairly easy thing to do when it comes to getting off the island. The issue, as others have said is with Northern colleagues.

scamalert

Deleted User wrote: »

In terms of the actual issue, it is totally unclear how we can relax restrictions given that we have had a very small number of cases and the virus is still out there and can be introduced by travellers at any time.

To relax restrictions we will have to have quarantine for all travellers into the country in place and I assume a very aggressive testing and isolation program. Are we in a position to do this? The idea that there is a 'peak' and once it passes, even though only a few thousand people had the disease, we get back to normal seems like a complete fantasy to me.

thats the problem most population haven't been infected so takes couple people and few weeks and what then, do we announce lockdown every second month and fork out dole while closing off from entire world until some vaccine is found in year or two that's a fantasy right there.

Idbatterim

Deleted User wrote: »

In terms of the actual issue, it is totally unclear how we can relax restrictions given that we have had a very small number of cases and the virus is still out there and can be introduced by travellers at any time.

To relax restrictions we will have to have quarantine for all travellers into the country in place and I assume a very aggressive testing and isolation program. Are we in a position to do this? The idea that there is a 'peak' and once it passes, even though only a few thousand people had the disease, we get back to normal seems like a complete fantasy to me.

the travel issue, is one I dont really deem essential personally. I know people travel for other reasons. As nice a holiday would be, just being able to get back out and socialise, play football etc, would be great. If we get to that point, not too concerned about not being able to spend week in spain etc...

Cyrus

kippy wrote: »

All "Non essential" movement in and out of the country needs to be restricted before the majority of the current restrictions are eased. This probably has to happen for minimum 4-6 months I would say. It's a fairly easy thing to do when it comes to getting off the island. The issue, as others have said is with Northern colleagues.

id agree with that, but as you saw the north needs to be in on it,

although the brits may be thinking a little differently now

Cyrus

Deleted User wrote: »

Sure. I agree with most of that.

I suppose what I am saying is when we relax restrictions we can expect a much bigger surge than any we have had to date. I hope people are aware of that.

im presuming thats being planned for as there isnt really any alternative,

we will be able to see what happens in scandanavia as we will be a few weeks behind it seems.

Idbatterim

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

No, it isn't massive. Things may well change, but as it stands, there is only the tiniest percentage more chance of dying in Sweden compared to Denmark. You can do the knee jerk 'every life is important' thing if you like, but it's ridiculously simplistic.

What about the people in Denmark who are going to die of other things because they can't access proper healthcare during the lockdown? Suicides? Self harm? Domestic violence? I'd bet there is not such a huge difference when you factor this stuff in, not to mention the damage to the economy as a whole. It's all well and good to say lives are more important than money, but who is going to fund all this if nobody is working?

one interesting thing about this. Is it just the most at risk in sweden being sensible and avoiding harms way?... That must account for a part of the reason, as to the lower deaths that you would expect. If so, this is what many of us are proposing here...

stephenjmcd

kippy wrote: »

All "Non essential" movement in and out of the country needs to be restricted before the majority of the current restrictions are eased. This probably has to happen for minimum 4-6 months I would say. It's a fairly easy thing to do when it comes to getting off the island. The issue, as others have said is with Northern colleagues.

Travel wont be restricted anymore than it already is, realistically airlines aren't in a position to start flying anyway before June and even when they do you won't see people wanting to travel until say late summer at the earliest.

lastusername

My feeling is it'll be July before things start to really open up again (bars, cafes, etc - but with restrictions and elements of social distancing), and September before things feel back to normal (being able to travel freely to most places).

Cyrus

A bit of common sense analysis which it seems we are being purposely being deprived of to heighten the hysteria:

https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2020/04/02/the-vital-contexts-of-coronavirus/

n all the millions of words written about how many people have died in each country each day, no coverage appears to have given the baseline daily death rate before the outbreak began. Take Scotland: here, the death rate had averaged between 6 and 8 people per day before increasing to 16 on the 1st of April. But the typical death rate in Scotland is 160 people per day, with about a quarter of them dying of cancer. This means that the virus is currently increasing the daily rate by 10% (and before that around 5%) – a substantial increase, but not as massive as many members of the public are probably assuming, given the press coverage. Reporting the increasing number of deaths in isolation without this context is likely to increase people’s stress about the virus, because people are unaware of how many people normally die each day.

tuxy

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

No, it isn't massive. Things may well change, but as it stands, there is only the tiniest percentage more chance of dying in Sweden compared to Denmark. You can do the knee jerk 'every life is important' thing if you like, but it's ridiculously simplistic.

If you look at the death rates as of yesterday

Deaths per 1M population
Sweden: 59
Denmark: 35

I think that's a significant increased chance of death from COVID-19