When will it all end?

El_Duderino 09

Micky 32 wrote: »

Seriously people need to chill and ignore the waffling posts about why we’ll still be locked up for the winter. I guess it makes certain posters feel relevant.

The data emerging of the dramatic drop in cases with HCW’s and the death rate in older people plummeting due to the vaccines is hugely significant. You have NEPHET, HSE, even MM aknowledging it. Once the masses are vaccinated there will be little need for restrictions or lockdowns going forward.

Make no mistake, this will come to an end.

Oh yes. If someone telly you we'll definitely be locked down for the winter then they're overstating the case because we don't know what will happen in winter. Likewise, anyone who is telling you we definitely won't have restrictions this winter is overstating the case for exactly the same reason.

There was a poster a couple a few pages ago who was honest enough to say they were only willing to think about the best case scenario because they couldn't cope with thinking about any other scenarios. That's honest but it doesn't get any closer to working out what will likely happen in reality.

timmyntc

Micky 32 wrote: »

Seriously people need to chill and ignore the waffling posts about why we’ll still be locked up for the winter. I guess it makes certain posters feel relevant.

The data emerging of the dramatic drop in cases with HCW’s and the death rate in older people plummeting due to the vaccines is hugely significant. You have NEPHET, HSE, even MM aknowledging it. Once the masses are vaccinated there will be little need for restrictions or lockdowns going forward.

Make no mistake, this will come to an end.

We all know this - everyone bar the perpetually frightened realise that the end is in sight (or should be) - the problem is the people in charge dont seem to share the same view.

I know that normal life will resume and the virus will become just an inconvenience, however I dont know if the Irish govt will relax the restrictions any time soon - or that they wont abuse their new 'toy' of lockdowns come next Winter when normal service is resumed with flu season & HSE out of capacity.

El_Duderino 09

newuser99999 wrote: »

Nearly every time I’ve come on to read this thread you’re on about what happened last Christmas.

None of us know for certain what’s going to happen next month let alone next Christmas.

Let it go.

Yeah. None of us know what will happen next winter, It could go great without restrictions or it might not. I suppose that's why we're discussing it. If we knew then there wouldn't be much scope for discussion.

But the fact that we don't know isn't a reason to "Let it go". It's reason to discuss it as a possibility, the same as we're discussing the possibility of everythign going great adn going back to complete normal in the summer.

Plumbthedepths

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah. None of us know what will happen next winter, It could go great without restrictions or it might not. I suppose that's why we're discussing it. If we knew then there wouldn't be much scope for discussion.

But the fact that we don't know isn't a reason to "Let it go". It's reason to discuss it as a possibility, the same as we're discussing the possibility of everythign going great adn going back to complete normal in the summer.

Do you not get fed up repeating the same stuff every 15 to 20 minutes?

El_Duderino 09

Micky 32 wrote: »

So you’d propose that we keep them all closed permanently? Would you suggest that , seeing that you’re claiming the vaccines don’t work because the trials were done in lockdown. It doesn’t work that way and everything was taken into account. The rubbish being posted on here is actually making me laugh :pac:

If my memory serves me correctly ( forgive me if i’m wrong and i do apologise if i am wrong) didn’t you post one time something about pubs etc will never be reopening again?:D

Even though i feel like a parrot i’ll repeat. The end is in sight.

I'm pretty sure they didn't suggest keeping anything closed. They asked a pretty clear question which assumed that things will open. I certainly assume things will open and I have posed the same question. It doesn't assume things should stay closed, it actually assumed things will reopen and poses a question on that basis.

bucketybuck

timmyntc wrote: »

I know that normal life will resume and the virus will become just an inconvenience, however I dont know if the Irish govt will relax the restrictions any time soon - or that they wont abuse their new 'toy' of lockdowns come next Winter when normal service is resumed with flu season & HSE out of capacity.

Exactly.

Saying that "restrictions" have become normalised does not mean that I agree that they are needed. Saying that they could be used again in the future does not mean that I think they should be used again in the future. It just means that the possibility exists.

HansKroenke

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah. None of us know what will happen next winter, It could go great without restrictions or it might not. I suppose that's why we're discussing it. If we knew then there wouldn't be much scope for discussion.

I think that covid is less likely to be the dominant cause of reintroduced guidance (not law, just guidance is my guess) at winter to wear masks and avoid crowds and public transport. Instead, the massive strain the health service is due to come under from covid-restrictions-caused postponed treatments combined with the normal seasonal surge in the winter is what will lead to the reintroduced guidance.

I would really like to see obesity treated as a big public health issue to resolve post-covid, with public awareness campaigns about the dangers of being overweight combined with health guidelines on eating better, maybe some initiatives to promote healthier lifestyles etc. It is far more sustainable and would be more effective to target the problem rather than by telling people to just socially distance and wear masks every winter.

El_Duderino 09

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Do you not get fed up repeating the same stuff every 15 to 20 minutes?

I could ask you the same question or you could ask Micky the same question.

I'm just posting the actual scenarios which remain and the major outstanding question which remains unanswerable until next winter. it make little sense to ignore the likely outcomes.

El_Duderino 09

HansKroenke wrote: »

I think that covid is less likely to be the dominant cause of reintroduced guidance (not law, just guidance is my guess) at winter to wear masks and avoid crowds and public transport. Instead, the massive strain the health service is due to come under from covid-restrictions-caused postponed treatments combined with the normal seasonal surge in the winter is what will lead to the reintroduced guidance.

I would really like to see obesity treated as a big public health issue to resolve post-covid, with public awareness campaigns about the dangers of being overweight combined with health guidelines on eating better, maybe some initiatives to promote healthier lifestyles etc. It is far more sustainable and would be more effective to target the problem rather than by telling people to just socially distance and wear masks every winter.

Sure. Obesity is a big health issue. You're free to advocate for that if you want.

stefanovich

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sure. Obesity is a big health issue. You're free to advocate for that if you want.

A big health issue that is the result of marketing garbage as food.

Plumbthedepths

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I could ask you the same question or you could ask Micky the same question.

I'm just posting the actual scenarios which remain and the major outstanding question which remains unanswerable until next winter. it make little sense to ignore the likely outcomes.

You can check my post history on this thread, the count is very low.
You are just on a loop at this stage.
So you constantly repeat something that neither you or anyone else can answer without the aid of a crystal ball. Yeah makes sense.

El_Duderino 09

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

You can check my post history on this thread, the count is very low.
You are just on a loop at this stage.
So you constantly repeat something that neither you or anyone else can answer without the aid of a crystal ball. Yeah makes sense.

I only post it because it's relevant to the thread title and the question about when this will end.

It's clear that some people only want to consider the best case scenario. Only one poster was honest enough to say that's what they're doing.

What's your issue with discussing the fact that we don't know what will happen next winter. You don't seem to have any issue with posters who say it will definitely end this summer, even though you acknowledge in the post above that we don't know. Why is that?

ypres5

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I only post it because it's relevant to the thread title and the question about when this will end.

It's clear that some people only want to consider the best case scenario. Only one poster was honest enough to say that's what they're doing.

What's your issue with discussing the fact that we don't know what will happen next winter. You don't seem to have any issue with posters who say it will definitely end this summer, even though you acknowledge in the post above that we don't know. Why is that?

because we are currently rolling out 3 highly effective vaccines soon to become 4. theres a basis behind his argument while you're just waffling about a what if scenario

El_Duderino 09

ypres5 wrote: »

because we are currently rolling out 3 highly effective vaccines soon to become 4. theres a basis behind his argument while you're just waffling about a what if scenario

Well the poster acknowledged that we would need a "crystal ball" to know what will happen next winter. So they certainly don't think it's that clear cut.

The question about what happens next winter is based on having most of the adult population vaccinated and no restrictions. What happens? We don't know yet. The urge to dismiss anything except the best case scenario is tempting and understandable , but not sensible.

Plumbthedepths

ypres5 wrote: »

because we are currently rolling out 3 highly effective vaccines soon to become 4. theres a basis behind his argument while you're just waffling about a what if scenario

Ignorance of previous pandemics springs to mind aswell.

Micky 32

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Do you not get fed up repeating the same stuff every 15 to 20 minutes?

Yeah there’s an obsession of restrictions next winter, it’s like they are hoping there is. iMO lockdowns will be over once vaccinated. Some people don’t want to let that go.

I’ll never eat waffles again, this thread has put me off them :pac:

HansKroenke

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/immunity-from-covid-19-lasts-up-to-six-months-after-infection-hiqa-1.4504198

Immunity after Covid-19 infection can last up to six months, the State’s health watchdog has advised.

This is twice the 12-week period that currently applies as guidance in Ireland.

“We have advised Nphet presumptive immunity should be extended to six months post-infection. The risk of re-infection with Sars-CoV-2 is low and no evidence was found to suggest that immunity wanes over this period,” said Dr Máirín Ryan, Hiqa’s deputy chief executive and director of health technology assessment.

It is of course qualified by what might happen with new variants but what is also important to note is that the 6 month period they have stated is a minimum period. There is no evidence that after 6 months a whole lot changes. As such, this really puts into perspective that the actual number of infections being far higher than our official tally should create even more momentum towards reopening. It potentially reduces vaccination targets and creates an incentive to push for widespread Antigen testing in order to see how many less people might need to be vaccinated than have been planned for.

El_Duderino 09

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Ignorance of previous pandemics springs to mind aswell.

I was told to "get over" what happened this Christmas just gone, as if it was irrelevant.

Lads I get that you're reluctant to consider anything except the best case scenario. It's clear that's what's happening because you're taking no issue with people speculating or pretending to know things you want to believe (best case scenario where things will go back to normal in the summer and remain normal) but when I suggest that we don't actually know whether things will be great in winter or if things won't go well, then it's dismissed by various posters as "speculation" "waffle" and needing a "crystal ball" to know what will happen so not worth considering. But none of these defences are used when someone says things will go back to normal and restrictions will never be needed again.

It's fine to not want to think about anything except the best case scenario, but why bother top engage in a discussion if you're going to dismiss anything except the best case?

El_Duderino 09

Micky 32 wrote: »

Yeah there’s an obsession of restrictions next winter, it’s like they are hoping there is. iMO lockdowns will be over once vaccinated. Some people don’t want to let that go.

I’ll never eat waffles again, this thread has put me off them :pac:

I certainly don't want restrictions next winter. But that doesn't mean I discount the possibility of them happening. It's a matter of distinguishing between what I want to happen from the reality of the possibilities of what might happen. And at the moment we don't know whether things will go to the best case scenario or not.

Plumbthedepths

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I was told to "get over" what happened this Christmas just gone, as if it was irrelevant.

Lads I get that you're reluctant to consider anything except the best case scenario. It's clear that's what's happening because you're taking no issue with people speculating or pretending to know things you want to believe (best case scenario where things will go back to normal in the summer and remain normal) but when I suggest that we don't actually know whether things will be great in winter or if things won't go well, then it's dismissed by various posters as "speculation" "waffle" and needing a "crystal ball" to know what will happen so not worth considering. But none of these defences are used when someone says things will go back to normal and restrictions will never be needed again.

It's fine to not want to think about anything except the best case scenario, but why bother top engage in a discussion if you're going to dismiss anything except the best case?

My only suggestion to you is to try to learn a little pandemic history. They don't last forever, people move on.
As for Christmas not discussing other than to say locking down people and depriving them of socialisation for 6 weeks and then reopening with the caveat of closing again less than a month later. I'm amazed people were shocked at what happened.
Nothing further to say about it.

Micky 32

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I certainly don't want restrictions next winter. But that doesn't mean I discount the possibility of them happening. It's a matter of distinguishing between what I want to happen from the reality of the possibilities of what might happen. And at the moment we don't know whether things will go to the best case scenario or not.

Yes but the data emerging suggests that once the masses are inoculated restrictions are unlikely to continue going forward, by next autumn/winter there won’t be too many people getting sick especially if it’s true about the transmission cut by 60/70%. We should know more about that soon when we get more data.

El_Duderino 09

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

My only suggestion to you is to try to learn a little pandemic history. They don't last forever, people move on.
As for Christmas not discussing other than to say locking down people and depriving them of socialisation for 6 weeks and then reopening with the caveat of closing again less than a month later. I'm amazed people were shocked at what happened.
Nothing further to say about it.

Have you mistaken me for someone who suggested this pandemic will last forever or that people will not go back to normal?

PTH2009

When we do reopen we don't need big mouths like Leo coming out saying stuff again like 'another full lockdown could be weeks away' etc

Kermit.de.frog

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

As for Christmas not discussing other than to say locking down people and depriving them of socialisation for 6 weeks and then reopening with the caveat of closing again less than a month later.

The price of Christmas is where we are now as you well know because you were warned in advance, even by the govt.

Best case and worst case scenarios. I can Google too and am well aware of the challenges ahead. For me considering a situation where the virus mutates to such an extent that it evades the vaccines and we are in and out of lockdown is just......I can't. It's something I can discuss intellectually but I can't dwell on that outcome.

Instead I focus on being positive restrictions will ease late this year to such an extent that our lives are almost normal. In 2022 we will see a return to 2019 life.

El_Duderino 09

Micky 32 wrote: »

Yes but the data emerging suggests that once the masses are inoculated restrictions are unlikely to continue going forward, by next autumn/winter there won’t be too many people getting sick especially if it’s true about the transmission cut by 60/70%. We should know more about that soon when we get more data.

You're extrapolating too much from the data we have. The data doesn't say anything about restrictions likelihood, it's about transmissions and hospitalisations and deaths, for countries while in lockdown conditions.

When you say that "by next autumn/winter there won’t be too many people getting sick. What exactly is "too many" and do you think your "too many" is the same as Micheal Martin's too many?

Fact is that I doubt you and MM would agree on the meaning of "too many" and we don't know how it will work out when most adults are vaccinated in winter and we don't have any restrictions. Maybe it will be fine and the relevant numbers will stay low. Maybe it won't.

El_Duderino 09

PTH2009 wrote: »

When we do reopen we don't need big mouths like Leo coming out saying stuff again like 'another full lockdown could be weeks away' etc

When did he say that?

El_Duderino 09

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Best case and worst case scenarios. I can Google too and am well aware of the challenges ahead. For me considering a situation where the virus mutates to such an extent that it evades the vaccines and we are in and out of lockdown is just......I can't. It's something I can discuss intellectually but I can't dwell on that outcome.

Instead I focus on being positive restrictions will ease late this year to such an extent that our lives are almost normal. In 2022 we will see a return to 2019 life.

That's fine. It really is fine. Do whatever helps to get you through this tough time.

But why go to a thread dedicated to discussing the situation if you can only intellectually consider one of the possible outcomes?

Plumbthedepths

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The price of Christmas is where we are now as you well know because you were warned in advance, even by the govt.

Nphet bounced the government into a 6 week closure 9 weeks before Christmas. It was beyond stupid and neither you or anyone else will convince me otherwise.
As I said to the other poster. I'm discussing it no further.

JDD

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Have you mistaken me for someone who suggested this pandemic will last forever or that people will not go back to normal?

Tell me this though, what makes you think that we will have restrictions next winter?

A. Do you expect that, come October, a good chunk of the population will yet be offered a vaccine?

Or

B. If they are offered a vaccine, do you think a good chunk will not take it up?

Or

C. In a situation where 80%+ of the country is vaccinated, do you foresee that the virus will continue to circulate among the unvaccinated population (which will majority be under-18s) entailing hospitalisations to the point that restrictions will need to be introduced?

Or

D. Do you think that the virus will continue to circulate among both the vaccinated and unvaccinated entailing hospitalisations from both cohorts to the point that restrictions will need to be introduced?

Or

E. If it is none of the above, are you basing your middle-case/worst-case scenario on vaccine resistant variants?

Just interested. I don't think I'm immediately going to a best-case scenario. Everything that has happened so far, apart from the ****show that is the vaccine supply, has been telegraphed a mile off to all but the most blinkered. I'm wondering why now - after researching the vaccines and possibility of variants - that what I see as a realistic end to this is considered the best case scenario. I feel my view is very much grounded in reality, but I'm open to being educated.