Relaxation of Restrictions, Part III - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

Ginger n Lemon

Goldengirl wrote: »

No I don't need any of your links or information, I am quite capable of getting my own from reputable sources! Not sites like Ron Paul institute.
As you well know I have never said anything about 2nd deadly waves or barbers or any of that in my post.
I questioned that you were giving information from a NEO NAZI WEBSITE in case anyone missed that .
Stop trying to deflect from that .

You are not having a good today, whats wrong?

The link and Ron Paul website was in this thread 3 days ago... you arent paying attention which is worrying but not surprising. But feel free to blame me for genocides if you'd like, whatever rocks your boat.

What’s going to be magically different on June 8th, 29th or 10th August?

If we’re afraid to open or concerned every time somebody is admitted to ICU than we need to start looking at a plan to fund the country while leaving restrictions in place until a vaccine is available.

We’ll bankrupt generations but sure if we save one life it was well worth it. Right?

alta stare

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We’ll bankrupt generations but sure if we save one life it was well worth it. Right?

That damn sure seems to be the belief of alot of people.

growleaves

caveat emptor wrote: »

Let me guess.
OK Michael.
I mean Mr O’Leary
Or do I mean bord failte ?
Maybe Mr Vitners

I know now. It’s GemmaJohn isn’t it.

You're the (ex-?)soldier who wanted the army to round people up like cattle back in March. You should be glad now that nobody in authority was dumb enough to do anything like that.

It isn't just business interests and conspiracy theorists who are looking for the un-suspension of commerce and civil society.

Arghus

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

How do you contain a virus, with a net?

Would you not say that we've managed to contain the virus over the last few weeks, no? Are there more or less people being infected now than there was during March and April.

The virus is still out everywhere but most countries know and accept that. There are many countries ahead of us in easing restrictions but are not experiencing growth in cases. Containing the virus doesn't actually mean anything, it's just an unachievable, undefined goal used to push out the point where someone actually makes a decision nobody is willing to make.

Containing the virus means eliminating community transmission, that's not undefined. And other countries have achieved that.

Far too early to be calling it definitively whether countries have achieved anything. There doesn't appear to be a noticeable growth in cases so far - which is encouraging - but most countries are really only dipping their toes into getting back into normal life. They've only just began to open up. Everyone is living with a certain amount of restrictions still.

SusieBlue

Arghus wrote: »

I don't agree with your opinion that it's been treated as a national tragedy and no regard is given to anyone else.

There's coverage everyday in the media about lack of access to cancer screening, surgeries, the toll on mental health. It's clearly an issue, a massive issue.

We had 73 confirmed cases today, 60% of those were attributed to community transmission. So the virus is still not fully contained in the community - a lot has been achieved, but it's still out there.

And considering that hospitals are already known for being hot-spots in transmission and infection and the virus has a much more dangerous impact on those already ill or requiring treatment, then you have to be sure that hospitals are safe places to be for patients. If the virus is spreading in the community, it's going to spread in hospitals. You can't just throw open the gates immediately at let all these potentially immunocompromised people into a situation where they can pick up a potentially lethal infection.

So you have to do all you can to suppress the virus. And that means in practice that procedures don't take place, that wards are closed. If covid is spreading freely these people won't be getting treated in hospital, or they'll be picking up the infection in hospital and being put at greater risk.

And, yes, there will be suffering and there will be people who die on account of procedures and screening etc being mothballed - and that is truly horrible, but there's no good outcomes to our approach here: there's just options that are less worse than the others. You have to think about what approach ultimately saves more lives.

EUROMOMO are a pan-European organisation who look at data relevant to rates of excess mortality across Europe. They use good quality data.

https://euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps

I urge you to look at this. It clearly shows the massive increase across Europe in 2020 of excess mortality, compared to other years, that can be directly attributed to Covid. This disease has killed so many people - the graphs speak for themselves - and most of these people are the ones that already sick or requiring treatment. It cuts through these people like butter. People will die as a result of a lack of access to treatment, but so many more will eventually die if you don't suppress the disease as much as you possibly can.

But at what cost? Where do we draw the line?
We have no cure and no vaccine, so do we continue on this fruitless endeavour to ‘suppress the virus’ indefinitely, at the expense of the quality of life of 99.9% of the population of the country?
How is that fair?

The needs of many should always outweigh the needs of the few.
That’s why we went into lockdown, because 100-250k deaths was unacceptable, too high a number, and we had to do something to try to stop it.
We succeeded yet we are still being asked to sacrifice another 12 weeks of our lives, for no clear cause because the goalposts keep moving.
That just isn’t acceptable and it isn’t sustainable.
Keeping certain industries closed for almost half a year with a negligible amount of cases and deaths is absolute insanity.

retro:electro

Arghus wrote: »

I'm not trying to be antagonistic when I ask you this, but when you say "we are all over all of this sh1te now" what do you mean exactly?

You're tired of hearing about the whole situation? You aren't too concerned about the virus anymore? A mixture of both?

We are over sacrificing our own wellbeing, mental health, relationships and important family moments nearly three months down the line for a virus that never peaked in the first place. Never peaked never surged, and should it do so down the line, then we are more than capable of putting restrictions on ourselves, modifying our own behaviour and using good judgement without the need of the finger wagging, the patronising and insincere speeches and the whole country shutting up shop.

We are all still being responsible and taking necessary precautions but the same fear just isn’t there anymore. You can’t expect people to keep themselves away from the people they love for nigh on five months, all while community transmission is suppressed and hospital capacity is actually down on this time last year.
That isn’t reasonable.

It is not the fault of the general public that we have a health system so shamefully inadequate that we have to lock ourselves away for half a year in the midst of this in order to prevent it from feeling even the slightest bit of pressure and collapsing.

So we are moving on. And other people can do what they like.

growleaves

Goldengirl wrote: »

No I don't need any of your links or information, I am quite capable of getting my own from reputable sources! Not sites like Ron Paul institute.
As you well know I have never said anything about 2nd deadly waves or barbers or any of that in my post.
I questioned that you were giving information from a NEO NAZI WEBSITE in case anyone missed that .
Stop trying to deflect from that .

Ron Paul isn't a Neo-Nazi you space cadet. He was a Senator for Texas for years, a state far more famous and significant than Ireland.

RobitTV

Can't believe Ron Paul is being called a Neo-Nazi. If you watch his videos from his 2008 primary run he is the most sensible, moderate and anti-war Republican out there. Even if some think the Republicans are crazy.

Even people like Bill Maher have great respect for Ron Paul.

Arghus

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

You mean our healthcare system is our main concern along with ICU beds, thats why we flattened the curve in the first place, as to not overwhelm it?

But now you are saying our main concern is how many infections there could be in the future?

I don't understand the distinction your trying to make there.. Those things are all related to each other.

Ginger n Lemon

Arghus wrote: »

I don't understand the distinction your trying to make there.. Those things are all related to each other.

The distinction is that the only reason we went into lockdown is to flatten the curve. Not to eradicate a virus. Please provide a link of CMO or Leo or anyone talking about eradicating a virus or getting to low single digits before life can resume as normal if that wasnt the case.

We have achieved the former.

Why do you want cases to be single digits before thinking its appropriate to open barber shops in June? Given that curve has been flattened

Because New Zealand have done this?

Tenzor07

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Saw it.

The government wheeled out Richmond who really crashed and burned trying to answer the questions Cooper was firing at him.

He looks like someone who's in the at risk group due to obesity... and could have been replaced with an Alexa speaker...

Tenzor07

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Why do you want cases to be single digits before thinking its appropriate to open barber shops in June? Given that curve has been flattened

Because New Zealand have done this?

Good point...

Trying to conflate Ireland with NZ is just crazy, we're a member of the EU which is fundamentally about free movement plus we have an open border with the UK, not an Island at the end of the earth away from pretty much everywhere...

The Virus will never be at Zero without a cure that may never come, having the R0 figure at 0.4 is probably the best we can hope for under the circumstances, so it's time to come out of the Lockdown and at the same time protect the most vulnerable..

Arghus

SusieBlue wrote: »

But at what cost? Where do we draw the line?
We have no cure and no vaccine, so do we continue on this fruitless endeavour to ‘suppress the virus’ indefinitely, at the expense of the quality of life of 99.9% of the population of the country?
How is that fair?

But it isn't a fruitless endevour? We've actually got pretty close to eliminating community transmission. If you consider how much the daily rates of infection have declined week on week, there is a clear pattern there of a gradual, but steady decline in the prevalence of the virus in the community. It's still out there, but clearly the measures work - they take time - but they work.

I don't agree that this has to continue indefinitely. Where do we draw the line? If I said we could properly and permanently suppress the virus after another 3 to 4 weeks, would you think it was worth the sacrifice?

thebaz

Arghus wrote: »

Nobody said we should expect deaths of 100000.

We had 73 cases today, roughly the same amount as Paddy's day. We're getting there but we're not out of the woods yet.

How many deaths were we warned of on Paddys day unless we flattened the curve ??? -
We did flatten the curve - the hospitals were not over-run - today we have 73 cases in a population of over 5 million (with a death rate of about .3%) - Meanwhile tens of thousands with other (serious) illness are not being treated - the mental toll will be in the 100s of thousands , meanwhile some just love being nanny stated by Simon and Tony as if the only problem in the wolrld is Covid infection - whilst the people actually dictating these obsessive lockdown are on permanent big salaries unaffected about paying ther rent - Im sick of it.

Arghus

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

The distinction is that the only reason we went into lockdown is to flatten the curve. Not to eradicate a virus. Please provide a link of CMO or Leo or anyone talking about eradicating a virus or getting to low single digits before life can resume as normal if that wasnt the case.

We have achieved the former.

Why do you want cases to be single digits before thinking its appropriate to open barber shops in June? Given that curve has been flattened

Because New Zealand have done this?

Yes, I would want cases in single digits before we open up a lot more of the country - or at least we move quicker than what is laid out in the road map. I think it's the safest and secure way of knowing that you've mortally wounded the virus.

Flattening the curve is only your first objective. The main thing is keeping it flat. Flattening the curve once means nothing if you can't maintain it.

JRant

Arghus wrote: »

I don't agree with your opinion that it's been treated as a national tragedy and no regard is given to anyone else.

There's coverage everyday in the media about lack of access to cancer screening, surgeries, the toll on mental health. It's clearly an issue, a massive issue.

We had 73 confirmed cases today, 60% of those were attributed to community transmission. So the virus is still not fully contained in the community - a lot has been achieved, but it's still out there.

And considering that hospitals are already known for being hot-spots in transmission and infection and the virus has a much more dangerous impact on those already ill or requiring treatment, then you have to be sure that hospitals are safe places to be for patients. If the virus is spreading in the community, it's going to spread in hospitals. You can't just throw open the gates immediately at let all these potentially immunocompromised people into a situation where they can pick up a potentially lethal infection.

So you have to do all you can to suppress the virus. And that means in practice that procedures don't take place, that wards are closed. If covid is spreading freely these people won't be getting treated in hospital, or they'll be picking up the infection in hospital and being put at greater risk.

And, yes, there will be suffering and there will be people who die on account of procedures and screening etc being mothballed - and that is truly horrible, but there's no good outcomes to our approach here: there's just options that are less worse than the others. You have to think about what approach ultimately saves more lives.

EUROMOMO are a pan-European organisation who look at data relevant to rates of excess mortality across Europe. They use good quality data.

https://euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps

I urge you to look at this. It clearly shows the massive increase across Europe in 2020 of excess mortality, compared to other years, that can be directly attributed to Covid. This disease has killed so many people - the graphs speak for themselves - and most of these people are the ones that already sick or requiring treatment. It cuts through these people like butter. People will die as a result of a lack of access to treatment, but so many more will eventually die if you don't suppress the disease as much as you possibly can.

So 43 cases in the community is not fully containing it?
That's just not the right mindset at all. How can you think that 0.0009% of the general population having this is anything other than complete suppression.

Arghus

thebaz wrote: »

How many deaths were we warned of on Paddys day unless we flattened the curve ??? -

Well, it wasn't a hundred thousand anyway - I don't know where you getting that figure.

growleaves

Arghus wrote: »

Well, it wasn't a hundred thousand anyway - I don't know where you getting that figure.

Doctor warns coronavirus could ‘transform our society’ and claim up to 120,000 Irish lives

‘So it could be 2–3% of those four million people will die — that’s 80,000 to 120,000 deaths.’

Arghus

JRant wrote: »

So 43 cases in the community is not fully containing it?
That's just not the right mindset at all. How can you think that 0.0009% of the general population having this is anything other than complete suppression.

Well if it's 43 cases it isn't complete suppression. Are you suggesting that 43 is actually the same as zero?

It's close to complete suppression, with not a whole lot more effort - compared to what we've already put in - you could properly eradicate community transmission.

growleaves

Up to 85,000 Irish people could die from coronavirus in worst-case scenario, Taoiseach indicates, as three more diagnosed

SusieBlue

Arghus wrote: »

But it isn't a fruitless endevour? We've actually got pretty close to eliminating community transmission. If you consider how much the daily rates of infection have declined week on week, there is a clear pattern there of a gradual, but steady decline in the prevalence of the virus in the community. It's still out there, but clearly the measures work - they take time - but they work.

I don't agree that this has to continue indefinitely. Where do we draw the line? If I said we could properly and permanently suppress the virus after another 3 to 4 weeks, would you think it was worth the sacrifice?

Right so we stay like this until we get community transmission down to 0, however long that takes, and then all it will take is one asymptomatic person to raise that number and restart community transmission again at a future date.

So what’s the point of doing it when we’re already down as low as 0.4? Is it really worth the continued monumental sacrifice it will take to get it down to 0 when the number is sure to rise again regardless? How does that even make any sense?

You keep saying 60% of today’s cases were down to community transmission.
If we had 73 cases, that means only 44 of them were from community transmission.
In a country with a population of just under 5 million, you think 44 cases of community transmission justifies having over 1 million people unemployed & out of work, and another 12 weeks of restrictions?

That’s literally the biggest overstretching overreaction I’ve ever heard. The actions simply aren’t proportionate to the risks. The mind truly boggles.

Tenzor07

Arghus wrote: »

Yes, I would want cases in single digits before we open up a lot more of the country - or at least we move quicker than what is laid out in the road map. I think it's the safest and secure way of knowing that you've mortally wounded the virus. .

Trying to get the cases into single digits with open borders is sounding more like a fantasy.. Ireland had the chance to shut the borders months ago, now it's like we're going in reverse to tackle the new cases which are in the tens, not the hundreds, and we still don't have a system to track where these new cases are coming from!

We house refugees in country hotels all practically on top of each other, many of us will have a lovely steak on the BBQ this weekend, and that juicy steak comes from slaughter houses where the workers all travel in vans to homes where you could share a bedroom with 4 strangers, we discharge from hospitals our old and sick into private care homes staffed again by low paid workers with little PPE, many of whom share bedsits and flats where self isolation is impossible...

Time to stop hitting the people with blunt instrument Lockdowns and flying blind to stop new cases without proper tracing... not to mention testing!

Arghus

growleaves wrote: »

Doctor warns coronavirus could ‘transform our society’ and claim up to 120,000 Irish lives

That's his worst case scenario. He mentions in the report that 20,000 is more likely. I don't think a death toll of 100 000 was a widely held consensus view.

And all these figures were based on potential outcomes where there were no restrictions put in place in order to fight the spread of the virus. But we enacted measures - that's the whole point of the restrictions.

CruelSummer

Here are some facts, if NPHET had their way the over 70's would still be inside and wouldn't be allowed out for a measly 2km walk....what a JOKE.

We haven't been given any criteria as to why the restrictions are being lifted painfully slowly and after every other European country, how much extra this will cost each and every one of us, and who is going to pay for this cost? Our European neighbours will NOT, despite what RTE Spin might say, why would they pay for us to sit on our backsides while they get back to work?

We have not been given any justification whatsoever as to why the citizens of Ireland are effectively being punished and imprisoned within a 5km zone over a beautiful bank holiday weekend, after everyone so dutifully following the restrictions for so long. Tony's threats today saying it is 'illegal' to travel outside this zone is pathetic and once again talking down to the Irish people that for so long worked so hard to follow the instructions and guidelines. He SHOULD be saying, thank you all so much for your help during this crisis, hope you all enjoy the fine weather and stay safe/social distance.

Michael O'Leary was slow to come out and criticise the government but I'm glad he did, I wish others would take a stand against them and NPHET also. He has highlighted that our 'leaders' are completely at odds with international recommendations on a number of fronts, the ECDC and others.

Pete_Cavan

Arghus wrote: »

Would you not say that we've managed to contain the virus over the last few weeks, no? Are there more or less people being infected now than there was during March and April.

I would say we have managed to contain the virus, hence why we can move forward with easing restrictions.

Containing the virus means eliminating community transmission, that's not undefined. And other countries have achieved that.

The first part of your post reads to me like you think we've managed to contain the virus, the number of people being infected now compared to during March and April seems to be the yardstick. Yet in the second part of your post, eliminating community transmission is the definition for containment. This is exactly what I was referring to in the post you quoted, containment can mean anything at any time. We have nothing to measure pro by, all we get is general terms and the time is right when the time is right. People are losing faith which is only going to hamper efforts if this dreaded second wave does materialise. The Second Wavers are the boy who cried wolf.

Far too early to be calling it definitively whether countries have achieved anything. There doesn't appear to be a noticeable growth in cases so far - which is encouraging - but most countries are really only dipping their toes into getting back into normal life. They've only just began to open up. Everyone is living with a certain amount of restrictions still.

No, other countries have had cafes, barbers, pubs, schools, etc open for more than two weeks now. If Ireland was planning to open these in early June, we would have a full month of data from elsewhere and if cases did shoot up in those countries we would be justified in not opening them. Instead we have a drawn out timeframe for doing things others are already doing with no justification.

thebaz

Arghus wrote: »

Well, it wasn't a hundred thousand anyway - I don't know where you getting that figure.

See link above 85,000 deaths warned - this has not happened - the country responded - the curve was flattened - What about addressing (and caring) for the 10s of thousands with other non Covid but more life threatening illness , not forgetting the Mental health tsunami that is out ther - instead of focusing on 100 or less cases of Covid now in the community.

growleaves

Arghus wrote: »

That's his worst case scenario. He mentions in the report that 20,000 is more likely. I don't think a death toll of 100 000 was a widely held consensus view.

And all these figures were based on potential outcomes where there were no restrictions put in place in order to fight the spread of the virus. But we enacted measures - that's the whole point of the restrictions.

Given what we now know about the age profile of the victims, the recovery rate, the likely CFR etc. there is no way that lockdown prevented 120,000 deaths.

The official estimate (at first) was 85,000 deaths, hugely overestimated.

Boards-Twitter-social media predictions were that a cykotine storm mutation reminiscent of 1918-19 would wipe out tens or hundreds of millions worldwide. The less said the better! (A lot of the spoofers offering these predictions have now fled these threads.)

The point is that the general atmosphere of terror was conjured by these stories throwing around very high death-rate estimates.

Anyway you asked where the 100,000 figure came from so I supplied a link.

JRant

Arghus wrote: »

Well if it's 43 cases it isn't complete suppression. Are you suggesting that 43 is actually the same as zero?

It's close to complete suppression, with not a whole lot more effort - compared to what we've already put in - you could properly eradicate community transmission.

Statistically that number is so small that it may as well be zero.

It's complete folly trying to get the number to zero when we still have flights, ferries, and an open border with another jurisdiction on this island.

You seem to have taken the CMO's mantra of the "numbers are not where we want them to be" a little to seriously.

Arghus

SusieBlue wrote: »

Right so we stay like this until we get community transmission down to 0, however long that takes, and then all it will take is one asymptomatic person to raise that number and restart community transmission again at a future date.

So what’s the point of doing it when we’re already down as low as 0.4? Is it really worth the continued monumental sacrifice it will take to get it down to 0 when the number is sure to rise again regardless? How does that even make any sense?

You keep saying 60% of today’s cases were down to community transmission.
If we had 73 cases, that means only 44 of them were from community transmission.
In a country with a population of just under 5 million, you think 44 cases of community transmission justifies having over 1 million people unemployed & out of work, and another 12 weeks of restrictions?

That’s literally the biggest overstretching overreaction I’ve ever heard. The actions simply aren’t proportionate to the risks. The mind truly boggles.

The mind truly does boggle, but I'm not arguing in favour of indefinite restrictions or even another 12 weeks of restrictions. Where do I say I want those things?


I actually asked you a question in it: If you could eradicate community transmission with another 3-4 weeks, would you think it was a sacrifice worth making?