When will it all end?

GazzaL

the kelt wrote: »

More than just one unfortunately.

This is the thing, leaders in other countries wouldn’t get away with it. They demand more from their leaders, some actual leadership and plans. Here in the eyes of many to even ask for clarity is akin to heresy.

“Mustn’t question the man with power”

You see it in the constant defence of everything, literally everything. There are some of course who have an issue with everything, they’re wrong also yet those who constantly defend everything can’t even see how wrong they are themselves

It stood out for me when we started vaccinating, the amount of people many on this thread and others who didn’t feel it necessary or right that we should have updates in regards to vaccination numbers and how that was going, daily deaths and case numbers, pile that on but good news in regards to vaccinations “not appropriate “ “waste of valuable time” of course because that’s a number people in power could be held accountable for.

They needn’t have worried.

Even worse were the bare-faced liars amongst the defenders of all. They had the neck to claim we were getting daily vaccination numbers when we were getting nothing of the sort.

ujjjjjjjjj

pjohnson wrote: »

Well some THINK they are capable and know best. That is why everyone has to endure restrictions to make up for the "independent" thinkers.

Same way drink driving is illegal, most know naturally not to do it but some decide they know better after analysing risk for themselves.

No I know I can read and analyse data and evaluate risk myself. Boils down to ultimately whether you trust your own judgment and risk analysis over Tony Holohan etc. Personally I do and a year into this have seen nothing to think I didn't make the right call. Is there a risk yes, does it justify the damage being caused by the restrictions, no in my opinion. Have firmly believed since day one all that was needed was health advice to the higher risk groups.

If you have evaluated the risk differently and think the restrictions are necessary or would prefer to defer to Tony Holohan that's fine. Just not what I have done.

the kelt

pjohnson wrote: »

Well some THINK they are capable and know best. That is why everyone has to endure restrictions to make up for the "independent" thinkers.

Same way drink driving is illegal, most know naturally not to do it but some decide they know better after analysing risk for themselves.

Thats really not the case though!

The fact you and others seem to think we are only under restrictions because not everybody obeyed restrictions is kinda worrying to be honest.

LessOutragePlz

It's really hilarious how this blaming and finger pointing has been going on since the beginning of this whole thing. We're just going round and round in circles.

When we all know whose to blame for this mess and that is the Government.

What do people expect people to do when they've given us no clear indication of when the majority of the restrictions will be lifted?.

Of course people are going to go visit family they haven't seen in months or head out for a for a walk outside their 5km.

To suggest otherwise is naive and shows how out of touch with reality some people on here really are.

pjohnson

pjohnson wrote: »

Well some THINK they are capable and know best. That is why everyone has to endure restrictions to make up for the "independent" thinkers.

Same way drink driving is illegal, most know naturally not to do it but some decide they know better after analysing risk for themselves.

And some think that one otherwise-isolating household meeting another otherwise-isolating household poses a risk, and a sip of champagne on New Years' eve should keep a driver away from a car for 12 hours.

If we ran society according to the risk tolerance of those people we'd never do anything.

The only possible vector of transmission on my restriction-breaking trips, FYI, would be a garda checkpoint. So down with that sort of thing. Too risky.

Scotty #

Deleted User wrote: »

This reminds me of the mentality of some of our elder generations. The type who thought inter county travel was reckless on December 17th but perfectly safe on December 18 because the man on the TV said so.

Some of us are capable of thinking and analysing risk for ourselves.

Did you just claim you're smart enough to analyse your own safety in a global pandemic in the sentence after you referred to NPHET as yer man on the telly? :D:D

Scotty #

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

No I know I can read and analyse data and evaluate risk myself.

Jaysus, we're all virologists and immunologists this morning.

ELM327

Time to open up. Simples.

Scotty #

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Well it's not exactly rocket science...

Did you not get the memo?? That phrase means you don't know what you are talking about... apparently.

Sharpyshoot

ELM327 wrote: »

Time to open up. Simples.

Nphet says no.

Scotty #

the kelt wrote: »

The fact you and others seem to think we are only under restrictions because not everybody obeyed restrictions is kinda worrying to be honest.

You don't think that if EVERYONE who could be working from home actually was, if people didn't actually mix households, have huge funerals, if people didn't visit shebeens, gyms, their barbers and hair dressers, go to Spain, etc, etc etc, that the numbers wouldn't be any lower than they are today? Maybe even low enough that we could lose some of the restrictions? Is that genuinely hand on heart what you believe?

ujjjjjjjjj

Scotty # wrote: »

Jaysus, we're all virologists and immunologists this morning.

No just someone who trusts their own analytical skills and intelligence.

pjohnson

the kelt wrote: »

Thats really not the case though!

The fact you and others seem to think we are only under restrictions because not everybody obeyed restrictions is kinda worrying to be honest.

Not as worry as some still thinking covid is just a flu and thinking that the analysis they did justifies and supercedes any and all experts.

ujjjjjjjjj

Scotty # wrote: »

Did you not get the memo?? That phrase means you don't know what you are talking about... apparently.

:) But the reality is it isn't exactly that tricky to read data about the actual risk of this virus. I certainly have no issue backing myself to do this and with the damage being done by lockdown restrictions to the many the protection to the few being afforded by lockdown just isn't worth it in my opinion.

spaceHopper

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

It's really hilarious how this blaming and finger pointing has been going on since the beginning of this whole thing. We're just going round and round in circles.

When we all know whose to blame for this mess and that is the Government.

What do people expect people to do when they've given us no clear indication of when the majority of the restrictions will be lifted?.

Of course people are going to go visit family they haven't seen in months or head out for a for a walk outside their 5km.

To suggest otherwise is naive and shows how out of touch with reality some people on here really are.

Roads were very busy yesterday with everybody visiting their Mammy. Expect a spike to follow. It's gone on to long and we all need a break from it. The shortages in vaccine is the biggest challenge if we could only get the older and weaker vaccinated. Then open up.

the kelt

Scotty # wrote: »

You don't think that if EVERYONE who could be working from home actually was, if people didn't actually mix households, have huge funerals, if people didn't visit shebeens, gyms, their barbers and hair dressers, go to Spain, etc, etc etc, that the numbers wouldn't be any lower than they are today? Maybe even low enough that we could lose some of the restrictions? Is that genuinely hand on heart what you believe?

The fact you are asking that question speaks volumes.

I mean the actual simplicity in the first place of believing we could be in a situation where everyone completly follows every single rule to the letter is kinda worrying.

Every single government in the entire world realises you cant get total buy in for every single rule "its called human nature" They dont expect there to be because only an idiot would!

Did you genuinely hand on heart expect every single person in the country to follow restrictions to the letter of the law???

If so have you ever emm, i dont know, met other human beings?

Scotty #

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

:) But the reality is it isn't exactly that tricky to read data about the actual risk of this virus. I certainly have no issue backing myself to do this and with the damage being done by lockdown restrictions to the many the protection to the few being afforded by lockdown just isn't worth it in my opinion.

You and I might be smart enough but can you imagine the mess if you let everyone decide for themselves?? It'd be like removing all speed limited from the roads and letting people decide their own limits.

AdamD

Scotty # wrote: »

You don't think that if EVERYONE who could be working from home actually was, if people didn't actually mix households, have huge funerals, if people didn't visit shebeens, gyms, their barbers and hair dressers, go to Spain, etc, etc etc, that the numbers wouldn't be any lower than they are today? Maybe even low enough that we could lose some of the restrictions? Is that genuinely hand on heart what you believe?

Do you not think there's a disconnect here? If we had lower social activity we could reduce restrictions to allow more social activity?

Scotty #

the kelt wrote: »

Did you genuinely hand on heart expect every single person in the country to follow restrictions to the letter of the law???

No. Nor did I claim it would ever happen. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make?

Scotty #

AdamD wrote: »

Do you not think there's a disconnect here? If we had lower social activity we could reduce restrictions to allow more social activity?

lol, yea, good point.

I guess that's why we'll keep yo-yoing in and out of levels.

pjohnson

pjohnson wrote: »

Not as worry as some still thinking covid is just a flu and thinking that the analysis they did justifies and supercedes any and all experts.

Is that as worrying as when us dullards were wearing masks early last year while "any and all experts" were saying not to, or different?

the kelt

pjohnson wrote: »

Not as worry as some still thinking covid is just a flu and thinking that the analysis they did justifies and supercedes any and all experts.

But you will always get idiots, thats the point.

For example you're point about the drunk driving where someone does it and thinks there ok. We have laws in place where theyre punished for taking that risk and analysing the risk incorrectly.

They dont just ban everyone in the country from driving because of it!!

Id have more respect for our leaders etc if they ahd the balls to call out and prosecute, punish people who give 2 fingers to the rest of the country rather than having a go at some family for being at a beach outside their 5k.

There will be plenty of condascedning talk about breaching 5k or visiting a friends house etc yet will any of our leader come out and condemn the huge traveller funerals and weddings???

No they wont touch that but will scold Mary for visiting a friends house for a cup of tea!

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This reminds me of the mentality of some of our elder generations. The type who thought inter county travel was reckless on December 17th but perfectly safe on December 18 because the man on the TV said so.

Some of us are capable of thinking and analysing risk for ourselves.

There's a big difference between 'thinking' for ourselves and sticking the head in the sand

And tbf don't think its 'elder generations' giving the proverbial finger and saying 'let it rip' or wtte

the kelt

Scotty # wrote: »

You and I might be smart enough but can you imagine the mess if you let everyone decide for themselves?? It'd be like removing all speed limited from the roads and letting people decide their own limits.

No youre missing the point.

Speed limits are there for a reason, you break the speed limit you suffer the consequences.

You dont just stop everyone from driving because people are breaking the spped limit.

Scotty #

Scotty # wrote: »

You and I might be smart enough but can you imagine the mess if you let everyone decide for themselves?? It'd be like removing all speed limited from the roads and letting people decide their own limits.

Why do people who are "pro-restriction" (for want of a better word - I know you don't want restrictions) seem to think that there is level five lockdown, open-up-let-'er-rip, and nothing in-between?

gozunda

ujjjjjjjjj wrote: »

Well it's not exactly rocket science at this stage to read through primary data sources and realise that the vast majority of our population is at little or no risk from this virus or to look at history and wonder why we have never reacted like this before or to wonder even when we have vaccines which massively mitigate this already low risk is anyone even considering any restrictions post vaccine roleout to the section of our population actually at any significant risk from this virus.

Firstly - it's a virus that whilst having the greatest impact on the elderly and anyone with an underlying condition of any age - infects many people and has a high level of transmissibility.

Secondly - the biggest issue is that as a disease Covid-19 makes enough people sick (when unmanaged) to potentially cripple our health resources. With on average 50% of those being admitted to hospital with Covid-19 being under 65 years if age.

And yes we know our health care system has serious issues.

And if some can't understand that we require a critical mass of people vaccinated - then we're really on a road to nowhere...

So yeah definitely too many self qualified rocket scientists out there imho

Scotty #

Oh I think there is plenty in between. That's what we're aiming for. I was looking forward as much as anyone to heading down the country for a few days come May.

But I just don't think we're at the right place for lowering restrictions just yet.

the kelt

Deleted User wrote: »

Why do people who are "pro-restriction" (for want of a better word - I know you don't want restrictions) seem to think that there is level five lockdown, open-up-let-'er-rip, and nothing in-between?

This is the thing, its like there cant be any in between.

I recognise the need for restrictions but some seem to think that if everyone followed the rules to the letter like robots then there would no more virus!!

Like the virus only reacts to people breaking the restrictions and ignores everyone else in a country in the middle of a global pandemic with no control on airports, no proper track and trace system etc etc

El_Duderino 09

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This reminds me of the mentality of some of our elder generations. The type who thought inter county travel was reckless on December 17th but perfectly safe on December 18 because the man on the TV said so.

Some of us are capable of thinking and analysing risk for ourselves.

People might be capable of calculating their own risk, but that doesn't mean they can calculate the accumulative risk. So everyone might judge themselves at low risk (which they are on average) and if everyone then goes ahead and does whatever they want, within reason based on their low risk, they all remain at low individual risk. But they wont be calculating the risks around whether their collective behaviour will generate enough cases and acute cases to overrun the health service.

Individuals might (or might not) calculate risk at an individual level but they don't calculate risk at a national level. It's unreasonable to expect them to do so. That's why we collect nationwide stats. Everyone calculated their risk at Christmas and behaved accordingly. That resulted in a lockdown ever since. All those people were at low individual risk, but accumulatively we needed a national lockdown. Did people calculate that risk accurately? I don't think they did.

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

if some can't understand that we require a critical mass of people vaccinated

What, specifically, is that critical mass, and what is your source for that figure?