Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
When will it all end?
Comments
-
Of course everyone wants to open up "as soon as is possible".
Full quote:Poll responses suggest that the country wants to get on with reopening as soon as possible and certainly before the summer – but not so quickly that it would pose a danger of a resurgence of the virus and a threat to those most vulnerable to it.
Moronic Poll.......would you like to be shot, beaten to death or burned at the stake....0 -
drunkmonkey wrote: »Of course we'll need boosters, they're hardly going to eradicate a trillion dollar industry, and replace it with just one injection.
More people should read this post!
0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »I think you mossed the point of my post. But that’s ok.
You should read your own post and question your own position as my conclusion from what you said seems like the better conclusion.0 -
HansKroenke wrote: »You should read your own post and question your own position as my conclusion from what you said seems like the better conclusion.
Ok0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »Ok
You seem to think that getting deaths and hospitalisations down 98% is not a reason to get rid of all restrictions, there is an error there. Your own post can be used to justify going back to normal in this context.0 -
Advertisement
-
Have ye that short a memory??Morries Wigs wrote: »Problem is no one in government has the balls to take on holohan and his crew.
They took them on. They took them on before Christmas when they said they won't be taking Holohan & Co's advise to lockdown there and then. They wanted to wait til the 4th of Jan ffs!!
How did that go?? The numbers went through the roof and we shut everything down at 3pm on Christmas Eve. Numbers rocketed as NPHET warned they would and today we're in the s**t we're in because "the gov had the balls to take on Holohan".
Holohan & Co have no powers. They don't dictate policy. All they do is advise. The gov can choose to take that advice or ignore it. We've seen what happens when they ignore it.
It's also not NPHET's job to consider the economic consequences of their advice. They advise on public health policy only.0 -
Another house party for the young lad tonight, great to see the social life return.0
-
Have ye that short a memory??
They took them on. They took them on before Christmas when they said they won't be taking Holohan & Co's advise to lockdown there and then. They wanted to wait til the 4th of Jan ffs!!
How did that go?? The numbers went through the roof and we shut everything down at 3pm on Christmas Eve. Numbers rocketed as NPHET warned they would and today we're in the s**t we're in because "the gov had the balls to take on Holohan".
Holohan & Co have no powers. They don't dictate policy. All they do is advise. The gov can choose to take that advice or ignore it. We've seen what happens when they ignore it.
It's also not NPHET's job to consider the economic consequences of their advice. They advise on public health policy only.
So you don't think Holohan's advice to shut down nearly everything for 6 weeks only opening 3 weeks before Christmas had any bearing on the situation in January?0 -
HansKroenke wrote: »You seem to think that getting deaths and hospitalisations down 98% is not a reason to get rid of all restrictions, there is an error there. Your own post can be used to justify going back to normal in this context.
Well, you're wrong about what I think. The process still takes time. And that's the part you missed. If we vaccinated those people today, there would still be a problem for the next few weeks or months.
I was posting in response to a poster who said the vaccine doesn't work because Israel has vaccinated 70% of the population and still has 3,000 cases per day. While I don't trust that person's figures, the point still stands that it will take time to get the numbers down as we reopen.0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »Yeah but it still takes time. And that's the part you missed. If we vaccinated those people today, there would still be a problem for the next few weeks or months.
This is the part that doesn't make sense. If we vaccinated those people today, they'd be protected today. Why then do we have to wait weeks or months to take advantage of that? If for instance we do achieve 80% vaccination (the oft-touted threshold for herd immunity) by September, what possible justification is there for not allowing people to have Christmas parties three months later?!0 -
Advertisement
-
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »Yeah but it still takes time. And that's the part you missed. If we vaccinated those people today, there would still be a problem for the next few weeks or months.
If we got them all done today the problem would be gone overnight. But it is only a case of a couple months to get the o60s and u60s with chronic conditions done, based on current vaccination projections. Combine that with lockdown for another month and that means that even the risk to those not yet vaccinated after those groups is minimal given hospital numbers and community transmission will be low.0 -
hatrickpatrick wrote: »This is the part that doesn't make sense. If we vaccinated those people today, they'd be protected today. Why then do we have to wait weeks or months to take advantage of that? If for instance we do achieve 80% vaccination (the oft-touted threshold for herd immunity) by September, what possible justification is there for not allowing people to have Christmas parties three months later?!
I think a bigger question is - if we have 80% vaccinated by September, and we don't allow Christmas parties in December, what are we expecting to change in order for them to be allowed in December 2022?0 -
Have ye that short a memory??
They took them on. They took them on before Christmas when they said they won't be taking Holohan & Co's advise to lockdown there and then. They wanted to wait til the 4th of Jan ffs!!
How did that go?? The numbers went through the roof and we shut everything down at 3pm on Christmas Eve. Numbers rocketed as NPHET warned they would and today we're in the s**t we're in because "the gov had the balls to take on Holohan".
Holohan & Co have no powers. They don't dictate policy. All they do is advise. The gov can choose to take that advice or ignore it. We've seen what happens when they ignore it.
It's also not NPHET's job to consider the economic consequences of their advice. They advise on public health policy only.
THey are dictating policy as we have such a weak government and no one now has the balls to stand up to them.The christmas spike was a result of government policy allowing free entry into the state to who ever wanted to come in not even testing them ,saying holohan and co have no power is incorrect they are running the show due to a terrible government and horrendous oppostion parties0 -
It doesn't work like that. The body has to build up a defence against the virus. It's not instant protection.hatrickpatrick wrote: »If we vaccinated those people today, they'd be protected today.
We'll be lucky to achieve 65%.hatrickpatrick wrote: »If for instance we do achieve 80% vaccination (the oft-touted threshold for herd immunity) by September.
20% won't be offered it as they're under 18.
20-30% of remainder will refuse it.
That leaves 56-64% of population left to be vaccinated.
Vaccination efficacy ranges from 22% - 95% depending on brand and variant.
I really can't see us getting to herd immunity unless we have a huge campaign to convince those people who don't want it to take it OR... we introduce Vaccine Passports whereby people will not be allowed travel, attend gigs, sports, pubs without it.0 -
hatrickpatrick wrote: »This is the part that doesn't make sense. If we vaccinated those people today, they'd be protected today. Why then do we have to wait weeks or months to take advantage of that? If for instance we do achieve 80% vaccination (the oft-touted threshold for herd immunity) by September, what possible justification is there for not allowing people to have Christmas parties three months later?!
Are you factoring in the time take to reach 80% vaccination? Israel has vaccinated very quickly. So apart from the vaccine taking time to become effective, there is still lots of virus in the community. The people in ICU don't disappear when other people are vaccinated.
IF we achieved 80% vaccination in September AND IF 80% is actually enough for herd immunity, then I imagine we would have a relatively normal Christmas (But we almost certainly won't reach anything like 80% by September and we don't actually know if 80% wold be enough for herd immunity because we don't have any experience of it et, only predictive models)0 -
NPHET has been advising travel restrictions and quarantine since last May. Gov haven't implemented. You can't blame NPHET on the numbers when the Gov don't implement policy.Morries Wigs wrote: »THey are dictating policy as we have such a weak government and no one now has the balls to stand up to them.The christmas spike was a result of government policy allowing free entry into the state to who ever wanted to come in not even testing them ,saying holohan and co have no power is incorrect they are running the show due to a terrible government and horrendous oppostion parties0 -
I think a bigger question is - if we have 80% vaccinated by September, and we don't allow Christmas parties in December, what are we expecting to change in order for them to be allowed in December 2022?
This is literally what I've been asking for weeks, ever since Leo stated simultaneously in the same interview that he was confident in 80% by September and that we were looking at maintaining social distancing rules next Christmas. I've been very militant about not allowing governmental brain farts to damage my mental health but I'll admit that it took a nose dive at the time for this specific reason and I know of so, so many people who reacted in the same way.0 -
Have ye that short a memory??
They took them on. They took them on before Christmas when they said they won't be taking Holohan & Co's advise to lockdown there and then. They wanted to wait til the 4th of Jan ffs!!
How did that go?? The numbers went through the roof and we shut everything down at 3pm on Christmas Eve. Numbers rocketed as NPHET warned they would and today we're in the s**t we're in because "the gov had the balls to take on Holohan".
Holohan & Co have no powers. They don't dictate policy. All they do is advise. The gov can choose to take that advice or ignore it. We've seen what happens when they ignore it.
It's also not NPHET's job to consider the economic consequences of their advice. They advise on public health policy only.
You find a very strange phenomenon where the people who despise Holohan and NPHET and the power they have, also wish the government listened to Holohan and NPHET earlier and locked down harder before christmas.
In short, they're whinging about whatever they do, whenever they do it. If they had locked down early and we avoided any problem around Christmas, the same posters would be giving out about lockign down for nothing and ruining Christmas for no reason.0 -
hatrickpatrick wrote: »This is literally what I've been asking for weeks, ever since Leo stated simultaneously in the same interview that he was confident in 80% by September and that we were looking at maintaining social distancing rules next Christmas. I've been very militant about not allowing governmental brain farts to damage my mental health but I'll admit that it took a nose dive at the time for this specific reason and I know of so, so many people who reacted in the same way.
Yeah but do you believe they will vaccinate anything like 80% by September?0 -
I am fairly optimistic about the whole thing, as naive as I may be. I feel that we are going to get out of this by the end of Summer and even throughout the summer we will be seeing much lower cases and things will be opened up. I think the communications piece needs to be re-visited and 'Coming out of Covid' should be the main message, not 'Living with Covid'. If people are optimistic, they will knuckle down for another few months. If people are pessimistic, they will get fed up and break restrictions.0
-
Advertisement
-
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »Are you factoring in the time take to reach 80% vaccination? Israel has vaccinated very quickly. So apart from the vaccine taking time to become effective, there is still lots of virus in the community. The people in ICU don't disappear when other people are vaccinated.
IF we achieved 80% vaccination in September AND IF 80% is actually enough for herd immunity, then I imagine we would have a relatively normal Christmas (But we almost certainly won't reach anything like 80% by September and we don't actually know if 80% wold be enough for herd immunity because we don't have any experience of it et, only predictive models)
This makes more sense. Personally I don't believe that we'll reach 80% by September, but my point all along has been that Leo stated that he still felt that we probably would - and in the same interview, that we'd need another lockdown after achieving this, to avoid a fourth wave next Winter. Does. Not. Compute.
My issue with Leo's comments (and those of the likes of McConkey and other fanatics lately) is that they seem to be implying that even mass vaccination won't allow us to return to having decent social outlets because of the threat of variants, etc - which has led me to repeatedly ask the question as to what the f*ck the exit strategy is, if mass vaccination is no longer good enough.
The commentary around this in recent weeks has been profoundly irresponsible, and in all honesty I can foresee last night's leaking of emails (involving some of the key names who have been driving the horrifically pessimistic "we won't be allowed to have mass gatherings again until the mid 2020s" sh!te) becoming a massive, massive news story once it's corroborated by literally any voice or news source which people don't have a negative connotation with like they do Gript. It's an absolute disgrace that fanatics such as these are given so much air time and that RTE in particular has spent so much time focused on pedalling the disturbing, dystopian takes on how we're all going to have to live in zorbs and having pints in isolation booths once restrictions are eased.
I've been saying this for months at this stage, but for young, single people, or younger folks who haven't yet formed an established group of friends and instead tend to mix with others in large scale settings such as sporting events, nightclubs, college, gigs etc, social distancing rules combined with a ban on social gatherings is essentially a sentence of open-ended loneliness both social and sexual, and for this particular demographic, the idea that it could be two or three more years before people are allowed to share a couch with their friends from another household or go out to a concert or dancefloor, or even go on a Tinder date and get the shift, are more soul destroying than can be easily quantified in a post like this. It's completely and totally f*cking with peoples' psyches, and I know the mental health thing and self-harm/suicide is a controversial issue to mention on this thread in recent pages, but it's the truth.
Hell, I myself battled with the thought of departing the world by my own hand almost ten years ago, and not once in the intervening years did those demons even almost gain a foothold in my head until late last year when the idea of not being able to see a concert or even just have a house party with even a small group of mates until I was in my mid thirties was raised as a legitimate possibility towards the end of the summer (this was around the time the likes of Mike Ryan, Sam McConkey etc started talking about two-metre social distancing being quasi-permanent) - but when the dip happened, it happened with terrfying rapidity and potency. It wasn't a dip, it was a plunge. I'm fairly sure it was within a 72 hour time-frame around mid-September that I went from being the pillar of optimism who many of my close friends were leaning on, to spiralling down that hideously familiar, bottomless well of "So, life kinda sucks now. Wait, are you seriously entertaining this sh!te again? You're not going anywhere FFS! Ah well sure, it's nice to know you at least have the option. Put a pin in it anyway! ...How would you actually do it, incidentally? Jesus Christ Paddy, get a f*cking hold of yourself, dafuq is this :eek: "
The realisation that I was having this conversation with myself after ten years of freedom scared the sh!t out of me. I channelled it into writing posts and articles on FB and elsewhere essentially telling those I know that the normally 100% extroverted, optimistic, happy go lucky guy they knew was strugglling with this and that therefore, literally nobody is immune and nobody should feel weird for feeling this way or that they have to suffer in silence. But I was lucky in that I spent most of my 20s building a serious legion of coping mechanisms for myself since that one brush with contemplating cutting my story off in mid-chapter. Many others are experiencing this kind of loneliness for the first time, and take it from me as someone who experienced it before and knows the signs, they are not coping.
Look, I wish I could agree with others on this thread that it's hyperbole, a cop out, or using mental health as a political football. But as a survivor of this sh!t I can categorically tell you that it's not. I don't know if the year we've just been through has led to an uptick in self-harm and suicide among young people, but unfortunately I feel totally confident in saying with 100% certainty that if left unchecked and unchallenged, this recent discourse of "even with mass vaccination you won't be able to mingle with strangers or groups of existing friends" is going to get people killed.
It's very very easy for those of us who are older and are established in relationships, peer groups, or both, to forget what it was like when interacting with strangers at social gatherings was the only way you were able to make friends or met partners. But for those who are entering that stage of life now, this recent commentary translates directly to "you're going to spend the next few years in more or less complete isolation, talking to the friends you have over the internet, not meeting any new people, watching romantic comedies and jacking it to PornHub." There is a very small cohort of extremely lucky people who are introverted enough that this is a fulfilling way to live, but for the vast majority of humans, it's a living death.
And for the final time, I am not suggesting that we should be given dates for reopening or anything like that. I'm saying that those in charge need to get their f*cking story straight and make it absolutely clear whether or not mass vaccination will allow people to have social lives again. Real social lives, not social lives in f*cking hamster balls, or waving from opposite sides of a room, or tiny metal boxes with glass panes and cameras on them.
And if mass vaccination is no longer that answer, they need to very quickly make up their f*cking minds about what the answer is. Because for the specific demographic I've outlined above, who don't yet have a close circle to even have Zoom chats with and who don't have anyone to be physically close with, another year or more of this is not sustainable. They are already at breaking point, and they are going to crack. Based on my own experiences, they are going to crack far, far sooner than anybody seems to be willing to acknowledge, and if it happens, it's going to be absolutely horrific.0 -
hatrickpatrick wrote: »This makes more sense. Personally I don't believe that we'll reach 80% by September, but my point all along has been that Leo stated that he still felt that we probably would - and in the same interview, that we'd need another lockdown after achieving this, to avoid a fourth wave next Winter. Does. Not. Compute.
My issue with Leo's comments (and those of the likes of McConkey and other fanatics lately) is that they seem to be implying that even mass vaccination won't allow us to return to having decent social outlets because of the threat of variants, etc - which has led me to repeatedly ask the question as to what the f*ck the exit strategy is, if mass vaccination is no longer good enough.
The commentary around this in recent weeks has been profoundly irresponsible, and in all honesty I can foresee last night's leaking of emails (involving some of the key names who have been driving the horrifically pessimistic "we won't be allowed to have mass gatherings again until the mid 2020s" sh!te) becoming a massive, massive news story once it's corroborated by literally any voice or news source which people don't have a negative connotation with like they do Gript. It's an absolute disgrace that fanatics such as these are given so much air time and that RTE in particular has spent so much time focused on pedalling the disturbing, dystopian takes on how we're all going to have to live in zorbs and having pints in isolation booths once restrictions are eased.
I've been saying this for months at this stage, but for young, single people, or younger folks who haven't yet formed an established group of friends and instead tend to mix with others in large scale settings such as sporting events, nightclubs, college, gigs etc, social distancing rules combined with a ban on social gatherings is essentially a sentence of open-ended loneliness both social and sexual, and for this particular demographic, the idea that it could be two or three more years before people are allowed to share a couch with their friends from another household or go out to a concert or dancefloor, or even go on a Tinder date and get the shift, are more soul destroying than can be easily quantified in a post like this. It's completely and totally f*cking with peoples' psyches, and I know the mental health thing and self-harm/suicide is a controversial issue to mention on this thread in recent pages, but it's the truth.
Hell, I myself battled with the thought of departing the world by my own hand almost ten years ago, and not once in the intervening years did those demons even almost gain a foothold in my head until late last year when the idea of not being able to see a concert or even just have a house party with even a small group of mates until I was in my mid thirties was raised as a legitimate possibility towards the end of the summer (this was around the time the likes of Mike Ryan, Sam McConkey etc started talking about two-metre social distancing being quasi-permanent) - but when the dip happened, it happened with terrfying rapidity and potency. It wasn't a dip, it was a plunge. I'm fairly sure it was within a 72 hour time-frame around mid-September that I went from being the pillar of optimism who many of my close friends were leaning on, to spiralling down that hideously familiar, bottomless well of "So, life kinda sucks now. Wait, are you seriously entertaining this sh!te again? You're not going anywhere FFS! Ah well sure, it's nice to know you at least have the option. Put a pin in it anyway! ...How would you actually do it, incidentally? Jesus Christ Paddy, get a f*cking hold of yourself, dafuq is this :eek: "
The realisation that I was having this conversation with myself after ten years of freedom scared the sh!t out of me. I channelled it into writing posts and articles on FB and elsewhere essentially telling those I know that the normally 100% extroverted, optimistic, happy go lucky guy they knew was strugglling with this and that therefore, literally nobody is immune and nobody should feel weird for feeling this way or that they have to suffer in silence. But I was lucky in that I spent most of my 20s building a serious legion of coping mechanisms for myself since that one brush with contemplating cutting my story off in mid-chapter. Many others are experiencing this kind of loneliness for the first time, and take it from me as someone who experienced it before and knows the signs, they are not coping.
Look, I wish I could agree with others on this thread that it's hyperbole, a cop out, or using mental health as a political football. But as a survivor of this sh!t I can categorically tell you that it's not. I don't know if the year we've just been through has led to an uptick in self-harm and suicide among young people, but unfortunately I feel totally confident in saying with 100% certainty that if left unchecked and unchallenged, this recent discourse of "even with mass vaccination you won't be able to mingle with strangers or groups of existing friends" is going to get people killed.
It's very very easy for those of us who are older and are established in relationships, peer groups, or both, to forget what it was like when interacting with strangers at social gatherings was the only way you were able to make friends or met partners. But for those who are entering that stage of life now, this recent commentary translates directly to "you're going to spend the next few years in more or less complete isolation, talking to the friends you have over the internet, not meeting any new people, watching romantic comedies and jacking it to PornHub." There is a very small cohort of extremely lucky people who are introverted enough that this is a fulfilling way to live, but for the vast majority of humans, it's a living death.
And for the final time, I am not suggesting that we should be given dates for reopening or anything like that. I'm saying that those in charge need to get their f*cking story straight and make it absolutely clear whether or not mass vaccination will allow people to have social lives again. Real social lives, not social lives in f*cking hamster balls, or waving from opposite sides of a room, or tiny metal boxes with glass panes and cameras on them.
And if mass vaccination is no longer that answer, they need to very quickly make up their f*cking minds about what the answer is. Because for the specific demographic I've outlined above, who don't yet have a close circle to even have Zoom chats with and who don't have anyone to be physically close with, another year or more of this is not sustainable. They are already at breaking point, and they are going to crack. Based on my own experiences, they are going to crack far, far sooner than anybody seems to be willing to acknowledge, and if it happens, it's going to be absolutely horrific.
Vaccines are the answer man. We'll get out of this, either by reducing hospitalisations due to the vaccine, or if that turns out not to be the silver bullet it looks to be, by civil disobedience if they try to make lockdowns a permanent fixture. This is temporary.
Edit: If you want to see where we'll be soon enough, look at the US. They're rolling out vaccines, they're opening up previously closed cities and states, people are vacationing, visiting their families, going to bars and restaurants. Live comedy shows are happening. They're "Living with Covid". The healthcare system hasn't collapsed. I have friends that say they basically haven't thought about the virus in months (that's obviously an exaggeration.)0 -
Claire Byrne not liking what Nabarro is saying here!
He is being too positive!!0 -
All Irish polls suggest uptake will be far better than thatIt doesn't work like that. The body has to build up a defence against the virus. It's not instant protection.
We'll be lucky to achieve 65%.
20% won't be offered it as they're under 18.
20-30% of remainder will refuse it.
That leaves 56-64% of population left to be vaccinated.
Vaccination efficacy ranges from 22% - 95% depending on brand and variant.
I really can't see us getting to herd immunity unless we have a huge campaign to convince those people who don't want it to take it OR... we introduce Vaccine Passports whereby people will not be allowed travel, attend gigs, sports, pubs without it.0 -
Yes, about 14% I think?All Irish polls suggest uptake will be far better than that
The problem seems to be a lot of people refusing it at the last minute. Lots of nursing home owners on the radio last week complaining that they can't sack people for refusing, some with 40% refusal. One of them was offering cash rewards to try and coax staff to take the vaccine. Another, who provided accommodation to staff, said they'd no longer be providing it to those who were not vacc'ed. The problem for nursing home owners is they now have staff that the patients refuse to be served by and that they can't sack but still have to pay.
The rate in France is 28.8% refusal so far.0 -
Yes, about 14% I think?
The problem seems to be a lot of people refusing it at the last minute. Lots of nursing home owners on the radio last week complaining that they can't sack people for refusing, some with 40% refusal. One of them was offering cash rewards to try and coax staff to take the vaccine. Another, who provided accommodation to staff, said they'd no longer be providing it to those who were not vacc'ed. The problem for nursing home owners is they now have staff that the patients refuse to be served by and that they can't sack but still have to pay.
The rate in France is 28.8% refusal so far.
Could adopt similar policy to Israel. If you get vaccinated you are issued with green card which permits you to enter indoor venues like gyms etc.0 -
Yes, about 14% I think?
The problem seems to be a lot of people refusing it at the last minute. Lots of nursing home owners on the radio last week complaining that they can't sack people for refusing, some with 40% refusal. One of them was offering cash rewards to try and coax staff to take the vaccine. Another, who provided accommodation to staff, said they'd no longer be providing it to those who were not vacc'ed. The problem for nursing home owners is they now have staff that the patients refuse to be served by and that they can't sack.
The rate in France is 28.8% refusal so far.
Can you explain why it matters if a nursing home employee does or does not take the vaccine? As far as I understand it, the vaccine only prevents the severity of symptoms when one contracts the virus. It doesn't prevent the virus from being transmitted.
It should only matter if the nursing home patients take the virus. Am I wrong in my understanding?0 -
-
ninebeanrows wrote: »Claire Byrne not liking what Nabarro is saying here!
He is being too positive!!
UK NHS are out of level 5 "danger level of being overwhelmed" and are into level 4 now.
Claire wont like that0 -
Advertisement
-
Doesn't fit the RTE negativity though.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement