Had enough of this lockdown am I the only person feeling like this?

CinemaGuy45

Ballso wrote: »

Another mouthbreather along to give us his outraged take, do you not have a protest with your pals Gemma and John today?

I am not outraged I was busy today working.

I am lucky to have my job and I hope as few people as possible find themselves unemployed at the end of all of this.

Have any of you given serious though to the longterm damage this lockdown will leave?

fawlty682

We are going to be last out of these measures as we historically cannot make hard decisions. Obviously, Dublin should have tighter rules than rural counties, where virus is minute. Good part is we can learn from other countries. However, we will all look like the people in Game of Thrones and many will never have a pint in a pub again.

CinemaGuy45

Zaph wrote: »

The OP seems to think that the "young and healthy" live in a bubble where it is impossible for them to come into contact with people who are vulnerable. Like your granny, I too have asthma and diabetes, and the last thing I need is a load of people running around not giving a sh*t how far and wide they spread the virus. Until transmission rates are negligible, everyone, whether they're clearly suffering from Covid-19 or are asymptomatic, needs to be treated as a potential carrier. And the only way to ensure that as few people become actual carriers is to continue the lockdown. The very obvious fact that those calling for restrictions to be lifted seem to be unable to grasp is that the more people that adhere to the restrictions now, the quicker the lockdown can be lifted. But if you keep insisting on flouting the rules then transmission rates are obviously going to remain higher than they need to be.

I went for ONE drive on my OWN and got out and walked for about 20 minutes on my OWN I did not get within 40 feet of anybody else.

Other than that I am in work since this started deemed essential in contact with many others for eight to ten hours a day.

Those people running around not giving a ****e like you say pay for government services.

Expect a lot of cutbacks when this situation is over.

endacl

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Have any of you given serious though to the longterm damage this lockdown will leave?

Well, it's not a world war, and we recovered from those. I'd say we'll be grand. People will still want to do the same things and buy the same stuff. This is a pause, not a full stop.

Loozer

Ballso wrote: »

Get it all out, there's a good boy. Yes, we know the damage the lockdown will cause. Grownups will manage that, you don't have to worry.

Dunno about grownups?

Money that's being handed out to workers to stay home could have been spent ensuring nursing homes were cocooned

The shutdown is is a blunt instrument, a hammer to break a nut

vibege

Zaph wrote: »

The OP seems to think that the "young and healthy" live in a bubble where it is impossible for them to come into contact with people who are vulnerable. Like your granny, I too have asthma and diabetes, and the last thing I need is a load of people running around not giving a sh*t how far and wide they spread the virus. Until transmission rates are negligible, everyone, whether they're clearly suffering from Covid-19 or are asymptomatic, needs to be treated as a potential carrier. And the only way to ensure that as few people become actual carriers is to continue the lockdown. The very obvious fact that those calling for restrictions to be lifted seem to be unable to grasp is that the more people that adhere to the restrictions now, the quicker the lockdown can be lifted. But if you keep insisting on flouting the rules then transmission rates are obviously going to remain higher than they need to be.

Exactly. I am lucky enough to work remotely, and I only leave the house to go shopping once a week (not got a big enough fridge/freezer for less often) and to walk my dog in the evening, and I'm still terrified of infecting people. I get so angry when I see people blatantly disregarding the welfare of others because they think that because they're not going to get sick, it doesn't matter if other people do.

I am fed up with this lockdown for sure - I want to see my family, I want to go to the shops and not feel scared that I might accidently touch something and spread the virus because you just don't know if you have it or not - but I'm not gonna **** about with this!

CinemaGuy45

vibege wrote: »

Exactly. I am lucky enough to work remotely, and I only leave the house to go shopping once a week (not got a big enough fridge/freezer for less often) and to walk my dog in the evening, and I'm still terrified of infecting people. I get so angry when I see people blatantly disregarding the welfare of others because they think that because they're not going to get sick, it doesn't matter if other people do.

I am fed up with this lockdown for sure - I want to see my family, I want to go to the shops and not feel scared that I might accidently touch something and spread the virus because you just don't know if you have it or not - but I'm not gonna **** about with this!

vibege

Rodin wrote: »

Irish death rate is worse than the USA.

Ireland has also been doing a hell of a let more testing, and reporting all Covid related deaths, unlike the US where they're testing no one and massively undertesting.

Go figure.

theological

vibege wrote: »

So because the guy that recommended lockdown went against his own advice, no one should be in lockdown? That doesn't make sense to me.

Since the UK has been in lockdown, the number of cases has reduces dramatically. Countries that went into lockdown early are doing better than those that didn't. Yes, it's frustrating that young people can't go out to work or go down the pub, but I also don't want to spread it to my father who's immunocompromised from the steroids for his arthritis, or my granny with diabetes and asthma.

Anyone who thinks that the lockdown was a bad idea needs to look at the astronomical death rate in the US, and how much worse it's going to get there now that states are re-opening.

You do realise that the position that we should have gone into lockdown and the position that we should no longer be in lockdown are not inconsistent positions to hold together?

vibege

theological wrote: »

You do realise that the position that we should have gone into lockdown and the position that we should no longer be in lockdown are not inconsistent positions to hold together?

For sure. But do you think that we're now at a point where we should open up the country altogether because we're bored?

I'm not an epidemiologist, but until we have a vaccination, we're not going to be able to go back to life as normal until everyone is vaccinated. So let's unite as a society and do whatever we can to protect our vulnerable.

Rodin

vibege wrote: »

Ireland has also been doing a hell of a let more testing, and reporting all Covid related deaths, unlike the US where they're testing no one and massively undertesting.

Go figure.

Death rate.
Not cases rate.

Jim_Hodge

Rodin wrote: »

Death rate.
Not cases rate.

The death rate suffers from the same reporting variances. We're reporting deaths outside hospital setting plus suspected Covid involvement, unlike some.

CinemaGuy45

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

The death rate suffers from the same reporting variances. We're reporting deaths outside hospital setting plus suspected Covid involvement, unlike some.

CinemaGuy45

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

or maybe he died of excessively thin ankles ???;)

Alf Veedersane

Loozer wrote: »

The shutdown is is a blunt instrument, a hammer to break a nut

Blunt doesn't mean it's not effective. And it's not the same as using a hammer to break a nut either.

NZ being held up as the poster boys for dealing with it. Lockdown. Australia similarly, lockdown.

Rodin

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

The death rate suffers from the same reporting variances. We're reporting deaths outside hospital setting plus suspected Covid involvement, unlike some.

We're also reporting deaths from Covid based on clinical suspicion which have never even had a test.
That's hardly accurate.

Rodin

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Blunt doesn't mean it's not effective. And it's not the same as using a hammer to break a nut either.

NZ being held up as the poster boys for dealing with it. Lockdown. Australia similarly, lockdown.

NZ probably has the greatest geographical advantage of almost any country.
Given that though, they still carried out the correct measures in locking down. Just quite easy to do there

Alf Veedersane

Rodin wrote: »

NZ probably has the greatest geographical advantage of almost any country.
Given that though, they still carried out the correct measures in locking down. Just quite easy to do there

Don't disagree with any of that.

I just disagree with the notion that a lock down can't be effective because it's blunt nor is it analogous to using a hammer to break a nut

weldoninhio

Ballso wrote: »

I'd heard Supermacs had reopened alright

Edgy. Who writes your material?

begbysback

Zaph wrote: »

The OP seems to think that the "young and healthy" live in a bubble where it is impossible for them to come into contact with people who are vulnerable. Like your granny, I too have asthma and diabetes, and the last thing I need is a load of people running around not giving a sh*t how far and wide they spread the virus. Until transmission rates are negligible, everyone, whether they're clearly suffering from Covid-19 or are asymptomatic, needs to be treated as a potential carrier. And the only way to ensure that as few people become actual carriers is to continue the lockdown. The very obvious fact that those calling for restrictions to be lifted seem to be unable to grasp is that the more people that adhere to the restrictions now, the quicker the lockdown can be lifted. But if you keep insisting on flouting the rules then transmission rates are obviously going to remain higher than they need to be.

This is the problem right here, people now believe the purpose of lockdown is to make transmission rates negligible, that’s never going to happen.

The lockdown merchants believe the fallacy that if we stay isolated for long enough then the virus will somehow magically disappear.

Remember that term “flattening the curve”? This means the same amount of people are infected, just over a longer period of time.

Alf Veedersane

begbysback wrote: »

This is the problem right here, people now believe the purpose of lockdown is to make transmission rates negligible, that’s never going to happen.

The lockdown merchants believe the fallacy that if we stay isolated for long enough then the virus will somehow magically disappear.

Remember that term “flattening the curve”? This means the same amount of people are infected, just over a longer period of time.

Not quite. It's about managing the transmission rate so that it doesn't increase too much too soon hence the phased basis for reopening. Slowing the spread rather than stopping it.

If people ignore the fact the virus is still live and act like it's not, they run the risk of increasing the rate it spreads at, which is where you run into problems.

The fact that X number of people will get it over time doesn't mean people have to go out and actively spread it as soon as they can. People still need to exercise some cop on

theological

vibege wrote: »

For sure. But do you think that we're now at a point where we should open up the country altogether because we're bored?

I'm not an epidemiologist, but until we have a vaccination, we're not going to be able to go back to life as normal until everyone is vaccinated. So let's unite as a society and do whatever we can to protect our vulnerable.

No. I think we should open up because we've managed to bring the R0 below 1 and we should begin to see what impact loosening the measures slightly would have. For example I think allowing people to meet outdoors at the required range is a good start.

Staying locked down indefinitely isn't a good shout at this stage because there is only so long we can keep these measures for both in terms of how long people can handle it, and in terms of how long the economy can sustain it. If there is the possibility to begin to reboot the economy and allowing some personal freedom safely it should be done while monitoring the results.

Benimar

theological wrote: »

No. I think we should open up because we've managed to bring the R0 below 1 and we should begin to see what impact loosening the measures slightly would have. For example I think allowing people to meet outdoors at the required range is a good start.

Staying locked down indefinitely isn't a good shout at this stage because there is only so long we can keep these measures for both in terms of how long people can handle it, and in terms of how long the economy can sustain it. If there is the possibility to begin to reboot the economy and allowing some personal freedom safely it should be done while monitoring the results.

Nobody, apart from the nutters (for balance the 'open up everything tomorrow morning lads are in the same category) thinks there should be an indefinite lockdown.

Restrictions for some could ease as soon as May 18th, for others it will go on a good bit longer. We all want to see our version of a lockdown ended ASAP, but we want it done safely, so that we aren't back here in 6-8 weeks time moaning that the country had to be shut down again.

I noticed a change in tone with the various official communications yesterday. The word 'possible' is very obviously been mentioned now with regard to lifting restrictions. This is no done deal. If people don't continue to adhere to the restrictions, not only might we fall at the first hurdle, we might not even make it out of the starting gate!

We can blame the Government and CMO all we like (and some of it may be justified) but it doesn't absolve Joe Public from criticism if he/she can't stick to their end.

niallo27

Benimar wrote: »

Nobody, apart from the nutters (for balance the 'open up everything tomorrow morning lads are in the same category) thinks there should be an indefinite lockdown.

Restrictions for some could ease as soon as May 18th, for others it will go on a good bit longer. We all want to see our version of a lockdown ended ASAP, but we want it done safely, so that we aren't back here in 6-8 weeks time moaning that the country had to be shut down again.

I noticed a change in tone with the various official communications yesterday. The word 'possible' is very obviously been mentioned now with regard to lifting restrictions. This is no done deal. If people don't continue to adhere to the restrictions, not only might we fall at the first hurdle, we might not even make it out of the starting gate!

We can blame the Government and CMO all we like (and some of it may be justified) but it doesn't absolve Joe Public from criticism if he/she can't stick to their end.

So what are we aiming for to open, have we been given any figures or do they just decide on the 18th. We were told we need to flatten the curve, we did that, we need to not overwhelm the hospital services, we did that, we need to get the icu numbers down, we did that. Whats the plan now.

GazzaL

Benimar wrote: »

Nobody, apart from the nutters (for balance the 'open up everything tomorrow morning lads are in the same category) thinks there should be an indefinite lockdown.

Restrictions for some could ease as soon as May 18th, for others it will go on a good bit longer. We all want to see our version of a lockdown ended ASAP, but we want it done safely, so that we aren't back here in 6-8 weeks time moaning that the country had to be shut down again.

I noticed a change in tone with the various official communications yesterday. The word 'possible' is very obviously been mentioned now with regard to lifting restrictions. This is no done deal. If people don't continue to adhere to the restrictions, not only might we fall at the first hurdle, we might not even make it out of the starting gate!

We can blame the Government and CMO all we like (and some of it may be justified) but it doesn't absolve Joe Public from criticism if he/she can't stick to their end.

The public did their job, R0 has been at around 0.5 for weeks. The public aren't the ones who failed to hit testing targets, the public aren't the ones who failed to achieve rapid contact tracing, the public are the ones who crippled nursing homes. The rest of Europe is opening up, the black economy is roaring into life while we live under regressive measures, and the horse is bolting.

theological

Benimar wrote: »

Nobody, apart from the nutters (for balance the 'open up everything tomorrow morning lads are in the same category) thinks there should be an indefinite lockdown.

Restrictions for some could ease as soon as May 18th, for others it will go on a good bit longer. We all want to see our version of a lockdown ended ASAP, but we want it done safely, so that we aren't back here in 6-8 weeks time moaning that the country had to be shut down again.

I noticed a change in tone with the various official communications yesterday. The word 'possible' is very obviously been mentioned now with regard to lifting restrictions. This is no done deal. If people don't continue to adhere to the restrictions, not only might we fall at the first hurdle, we might not even make it out of the starting gate!

We can blame the Government and CMO all we like (and some of it may be justified) but it doesn't absolve Joe Public from criticism if he/she can't stick to their end.

It isn't nutty to desire that lockdown measures are eased even slightly whilst monitoring the R0.

Again, there's only so much that individuals and the economy can take. (In the UK it is estimated that the cost of furloughing workers is the same as the cost of running the NHS)

I'm living in the UK and I'm hopeful that the reports of slight easing that are being mentioned will take effect on Monday. We need to begin learning how to live with this virus. Easing the measures slightly and slowly will be able to allow us to measure the impact on the R0 and allow us to edge ever slowly to normality.

That is much much better than insisting that we must remain locked down indefinitely and it is indefinitely if you don't provide clarity as to when that will be.

Benimar

niallo27 wrote: »

So what are we aiming for to open, have we been given any figures or do they just decide on the 18th. We were told we need to flatten the curve, we did that, we need to not overwhelm the hospital services, we did that, we need to get the icu numbers down, we did that. Whats the plan now.

Yes, we have flattened the curve, but it now has to stay flat. Do people not see that?

There will, almost certainly, be small spikes every time we open up more, so the aim is to keep these manageable. Hence the slow approach.

I have no idea what the numbers need to be, unlike some around here I don't claim to be an expert. However, based on what the numbers were just prior to March 27th, I'd say they want daily cases in the low 100s and deaths in single digits across a 5-7 day average.

That would give room for a small spike without having to shut anything back down.

Benimar

GazzaL wrote: »

The public did their job, R0 has been at around 0.5 for weeks. The public aren't the ones who failed to hit testing targets, the public aren't the ones who failed to achieve rapid contact tracing, the public are the ones who crippled nursing homes. The rest of Europe is opening up, the black economy is roaring into life while we live under regressive measures, and the horse is bolting.

The public are the ones paying €150 for haircuts, the public are the ones not social distancing (we have all seen the slacking off), the public are the ones out working on the 2 building sites (private ones) that I walked past this morning, the public are the ones having the house parties. The existence of the black economy you mention is the reason why the public have to take their share of the blame.

The majority of the public are doing whats asked of us, but those that aren't cannot be absolved from blame.

GazzaL

Benimar wrote: »

The public are the ones paying €150 for haircuts, the public are the ones not social distancing (we have all seen the slacking off), the public are the ones out working on the 2 building sites (private ones) that I walked past this morning, the public are the ones having the house parties. The existence of the black economy you mention is the reason why the public have to take their share of the blame.

The majority of the public are doing whats asked of us, but those that aren't cannot be absolved from blame.

R0 has been below 1 for well over a month at this stage, and at around 0.5 for weeks. You can't blame the public any more. Even the HSE copped onto that. You can't expect the public to sit on their hands indefinitely, particularly when our reopening plans lag behind our neighbours.

iamwhoiam

Benimar wrote: »

The public are the ones paying €150 for haircuts, the public are the ones not social distancing (we have all seen the slacking off), the public are the ones out working on the 2 building sites (private ones) that I walked past this morning, the public are the ones having the house parties. The existence of the black economy you mention is the reason why the public have to take their share of the blame.

The majority of the public are doing whats asked of us, but those that aren't cannot be absolved from blame.

I agree with that but the issue is there is no enforcement .There should be a specific number to ring if you see a major breech of the restrictions