Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

timmyntc

gozunda wrote: »

You missed the main point - its the significant risk of people from all over the country all going to distant locations, mingling together, using shared facilities, queuing at supermacs or wherever.

The current restrictions help stop people from areas of high infection- spreading that infection to others.

Its really not that difficult to understand.

Interestingly Dublin has more public amenities per capita than elsewhere in the country. No reason for everyone to all go to the park etc only at the most popular times as seems to have been happening.

The risk is the same, unless you think the virus will dictate to its hosts that they all congregate together. :rolleyes:

Graham wrote: »

More people moving around = more virus spreads.

It's not rocket science.

Its not rocket science I agree. People will interact and move around just as much if not more when they are confined to a smaller area. Given a bigger radius to travel in, they can move to less-dense areas and will actually have less chance to spread, not more.

Graham

Stormyteacup wrote: »

No, this is redundant now. More congregations indoors = more virus spread.

Cool, you've discovered the indoors only variant now. You've had some busy afternoon.

gozunda

Stormyteacup wrote: »

Ok I get that you can’t imagine it, but people are doing that anyway.

Why not be clear on how risk of transmission is greatly reduced with basic precautions outside in small gatherings and how much greater the risk is indoors?

The message is long overdue a change. As regards controlling it - same way they have used throughout their policing by consent campaign - your own community will monitor you and you’ll be moved on eventually if you’re acting in flagrant disregard of guidelines.

Those already complying in public will continue to comply in public and most responsible citizens given a choice between secret indoor meetings or lawful outdoor meetings will choose the latter.

Those irresponsible will continue to be so.

So you believe those meeting up friends atm and disregarding restrictions are in fact being very conscientious and observing social distance whilst doing so :pac:

It remains close proximity and close contact whether indoor or out pose a significant risk of transmission.

As stated outdoor activities are practically impossible to regulate or police.

timmyntc

Graham wrote: »

Cool, you've discovered the indoors only variant now. You've had some busy afternoon.

Nobody said it only transmits indoors, how did you conjure that little gem?

You're really going to pretend you don't see the logic for allowing people to meet outdoors rather than indoors to stop it spreading around?

TonyMaloney

TonyMaloney wrote: »

You're forgetting a rather famous one

Thanks, Tony.

Do you know if this was the only time those people were in semi-close proximity in those few days?

If not, were they together indoors at any point?

Were they the only people infected?

It does seem odd that out of all those people, the ones infected were also in meetings together or worked closely together in the time surrounding the infection.

Was there any data from protests, for example? Or from the celebrations that occurred after the US election was settled, perhaps? Or maybe from our own protests or the UK's?

Graham

timmyntc wrote: »

Nobody said it only transmits indoors, how did you conjure that little gem??

It's redundant apparently.

Something to do with the self-propelling indoors only variant or something like that.

gozunda

timmyntc wrote: »

The risk is the same, unless you think the virus will dictate to its hosts that they all congregate together.

Again missing the point. The 5 km restriction helps prevent those from areas of high infection mingling or meeting up with those from other areas that are not. A melting pot of increased risk of transmission if you will.

timmyntc wrote: »

Its not rocket science I agree. People will interact and move around just as much if not more when they are confined to a smaller area. Given a bigger radius to travel in, they can move to less-dense areas and will actually have less chance to spread, not more.

Again a bit of organising with regards to public facilities like parks wouldn’t go amiss.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/223/4/550/6009483?login=true

This would seem to suggest it can be a problem.

"Existing evidence supports the wide-held belief that risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is lower outdoors"

Cool thanks.

Graham

Deleted User wrote: »

"Existing evidence supports the wide-held belief that risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is lower outdoors"

Cool thanks.

emphasis added

The HorsesMouth

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeaaaaah. Been hearing this for a year.

"You have no reason or evidence to say restrictions won't be lessened by [date]."

Said date passes.

Crickets.

Prediction.

"You have no reason or ev..."

It gets old.

Vaccines...vaccines are the difference here. There weren't any a year ago.

Stormyteacup

Graham wrote: »

Cool, you've discovered the indoors only variant now. You've had some busy afternoon.

Okay well ignore the science all you like. Message is gradually changing - apparently we will all enjoy an outdoor Summer.

On a serious note it would be good to see a campaign to highlight all the places on our miles of coastline, our lakes and parks to promote awareness of being outdoors with fewer crowds.

We have been used to travelling to beauty spots with dining, hotel and toilet facilities but much can be done to encourage exploring the country without these, ahead of reopening indoor activities.

Would greatly help to lessen feelings of helplessness and hopelessness.

FintanMcluskey

The HorsesMouth wrote: »

Vaccines...vaccines are the difference here. There weren't any a year ago.

Will you tell NPHET that

R.Glynn doesn’t think this Summer will be any different to last Summer

Graham

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Will you tell NPHET that

R.Glynn doesn’t think this Summer will be any different to last Summer

Weren't restrictions fairly low for much of last summer?

SAMTALK

timmyntc wrote: »

Contact tracing is done at a national level, so that point is moot.

If restrictions are to be based on county level numbers, then there would be some merit in county-wide restrictions on travel. But 5,10,20km limits have no merit. Totally nonsensical.

Only justification seems to be hypotheticals about people travelling and meeting people far away - nonsense

I do think it should be county level at this stage and not 5km

But the further you travel the more likely you are to meet more people, stop somewhere on the way for food / coffee, organise get togethers etc

You get a fine day and the 1st thing is people travelling to the nearest beach, mountain etc. This has been seen already

FintanMcluskey

Graham wrote: »

Weren't restrictions fairly low for much of last summer?

Not if you lived in the capital or a county where Larry had a business

Or if you compare Ireland to every other European nation from about May 2020 until March 2021 the restrictions were very severe

People need to start to grasp the length of time and cataclysmic effects of that unnecessary suppression

Because when the last restriction lifts in Ireland, then the crisis starts

Penfailed

scamalert wrote: »

are people breaking limit of course no sane mobile person will sit in 5km range for a year and live to tell it.

Where are you getting the 5km range for a year from? We haven't been.

Graham

Graham wrote: »

emphasis added

18.7 times lower, no less. Most people would take their chances. The rest can stay indoors and do whatever they want.

But sure let's keep everyone locked up because you're alright.

The number of my friends suffering recently and reaching the end of their rope is notable.

The mental health issues, the cancers, the heart disease, the missed screenings, the people who have died alone after a year of isolation, the children who will be left to pay back this debt in a world where we have utterly failed as the custodians of the liberties we inherited... it's so much more than "pints" but by God propaganda is effective.

timmyntc

gozunda wrote: »

Again missing the point. The 5 km restriction helps prevent those from areas of high infection mingling or meeting up with those from other areas that are not. A melting pot of increased risk of transmission if you will.

That would only be the case if there were so many cases in one area as to lower the chance of transmission - i.e. there were so many infected people that there werent many left to get infected. This just isnt happening here - as likely a scenario as herd immunity and letting it rip.

The reality is that travel limits actively increase risk of transmission - letting people go to the beach, go hiking etc are all low-risk activities and we should be encouraging that, not punishing people for daring to drive away from crowded cities.

average_runner

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Not if you lived in the capital or a county where Larry had a business

Or if you compare Ireland to every other European nation from about May 2020 until March 2021 the restrictions were very severe

People need to start to grasp the length of time and cataclysmic effects of that unnecessary suppression

Because when the last restriction lifts in Ireland, then the crisis starts

I lived in the capital and alot was back to normal last summer.

Plenty of pubs open, didn't have to order food either

timmyntc

Graham wrote: »

It's redundant apparently.

Something to do with the self-propelling indoors only variant or something like that.

If thats your comprehension then its on you

robbiezero

gozunda wrote: »

Again missing the point. The 5 km restriction helps prevent those from areas of high infection mingling or meeting up with those from other areas that are not. A melting pot of increased risk of transmission if you will.



Again a bit of organising with regards to public facilities like parks wouldn’t go amiss.

How does the person in the low transmission area who catches it from the person in the high transmission area, spread it all around his area in a Level 5 lockdown?

FintanMcluskey

average_runner wrote: »

I lived in the capital and alot was back to normal last summer.

Plenty of pubs open, didn't have to order food either

All Summer they were open?

TobyHolmes

Penfailed wrote: »

Where are you getting the 5km range for a year from? We haven't been.

it feels like a year though doesnt it

2 months limited to 5km may as well be a year

average_runner

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

All Summer they were open?

Last week of June, July and August. So May and June are technically summer. So we missed that part.

average_runner

TobyHolmes wrote: »

it feels like a year though doesnt it

2 months limited to 5km may as well be a year

Same way 20 euro may as well be 100 euro!!!!

Graham

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

All Summer they were open?

Should we get out of the way while you move goalposts?

FintanMcluskey

TobyHolmes wrote: »

it feels like a year though doesnt it

2 months limited to 5km may as well be a year

For the last 6 months how many of them were we allowed past 5km?

TobyHolmes

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

For the last 6 months how many of them were we allowed past 5km?

i have no idea at this stage. its groundhog day.


maybe time passes fast for you - me im stuck here listening to the children of the corn run riot every night
yes 5km restrictions whether 2 months or 6 months feels like a lifetime

timmyntc

average_runner wrote: »

I lived in the capital and alot was back to normal last summer.

Plenty of pubs open, didn't have to order food either

Maybe that was your experience, but that was in contravention of the restrictions.
The substantial meal was in effect all Summer, once we finally did open in June

The HorsesMouth

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Will you tell NPHET that

R.Glynn doesn’t think this Summer will be any different to last Summer

Ronan Glynn can say what he wants...if the North, UK, scotland and wales have nightclubs open you can be sure we won't be making do with outside pints with a €9 meal.