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

trixi001

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Are the hospitals unable to cope in the north west or something?

Is it a fantasy of some to punish people for doing what society is built upon?

Letterkenny Hospital is doing just fine -- no reports of it being at capacity etc. This is the important measure - as long as the hospitals can cope, case numbers are irrelevant - many people are now vaccinated and can still test positive for COVID, but it should be a mild or asymptomatic case for most people vaccinated

AS for a local lockdown for Donegal, Donegal is a massive county - and while Millford and Letterkenny may be high, one of the 7 regions (Donegal LEA) has only 41 cases per 100,000 and the Carndonagh and Lifford/Stranolar regions are sitting just above the national average.
Millford is a rural area and is actually reporting 93 actual cases over the last 14 days, which due to the size of the population gives it a high incidence rate.

Now Dublin - 4 LEA's are also reporting incidence rates of over 300 per 100k

Newbridge is also at near 400 per 100k

Nenagh is at 450 per 100k, but again this only translates as 96 cases.


No local lockdowns are necessary - Donegal isn't doing that much much worse than other areas when you try to look at the bigger picture..

High case numbers in rural areas are generally easy enough to get under control, i know my own local town, last summer, when high case numbers were reported around the town, by word of mouth mostly, the locals themselves took precautions, things didn't need mandated, nothing closed, people just wore their masks, many people got tested etc, and the businesses where cases were reported closed for a day for a deep clean and then re-opened

dalyboy

Sharpyshoot wrote: »

Was only three pup payments to you.

Pup payments ? What are they ?
Awaiting your experiential knowledge.....

gozunda

growleaves wrote: »

That author is correct. Someone dressed up like a train robber with half their face covered does not inspire trust.

Emotions and personality are conveyed in the eyes and mouth and other facial muscles.

That's why I say these lockdowns could only happen in a nihilist society. Only a nihilist would claim that not being able to see a person's whole face is a matter of indifference.

I'm sure nudists would heartily agree with the general sentiment that covering up hides our trueselves :pac:

Sharpyshoot

dalyboy wrote: »

Pup payments ? What are they ?
Awaiting your experiential knowledge.....

Purple prose.

bloopy

charlie14 wrote: »

What relevance would that have?
Incident rates are based on the number per 100K of population.

bloopy wrote: »

Because depending on the size of the population, a relatively small number might seem rather large when looked at per 100000 people.
Is the area a village, a town, a parish?

I found the figure in the end in case you were interested.
For the area referenced, 93 cases over two weeks is what gets your 675 per 100000 population.
One of those numbers are scary, the other is not so scary.
But I think you already new the number and opted to go with the fearmonger one. Is that why you were so reluctant to tell me?

Sobit1964

Boggles wrote: »

If you believe the lizard people are forcing us to wear masks because it stifles emotion and controls us or whatever scutter is peddled by the anti mask, anti vax, anti highspeed internet access brigade you need to purge your social media.

When called out on this - you claimed that you were referring to the author of the article:

Boggles wrote: »

Anyway it seems to apply to the author of the nonsense who claims wearing a mask is political. I'm guessing he is American.

Im not sure the following makes the author an antivaxer

In the last 12 months we have seen the pharmaceutical industry and its underlying capacity for scientific accomplishment at its best. The development of mRNA vaccines represents a breakthrough of real consequence......This ought to give pause to the political reflex to demonise pharmaceutical companies that is prevalent on both the Left and the Right.

This one is particularly relevant:

epistemic threats to institutional authority are resolved into moral conflicts between good people and bad people.

This is obvious in Ireland, its obvious with regard to this thread, and obvious where posters claim people are 'selfish', 'interested only in Pints', and then the cherry on top 'its really simple/its remedial/its not rocket science' to cement [in their minds only] the point.

As UK epidemiologist Neil Ferguson said to the Times last December: “It’s a communist one-party state [China], we said. We couldn’t get away with [lockdowns] in Europe, we thought… and then Italy did it. And we realised we could.” He added that “These days, lockdown feels inevitable.”

This is the very reason why this thread keeps moving along at pace. People who don't buy into the GoodPerson[tm] worldview see the range and duration of restrictions to be fundamentally wrong, and while opinions vary - talking about them is better than a blanket follow the 'science/dear leader' or you are a BadPerson[tm]

That said the restrictions are easing, vaccines look to be incredibly effective, and we look to be on our way out of this. The debate and investigation of how this period of our lives was handled is far from over. As much as some might like to suggest, incorrectly, that lockdown was longer due to bad behaviour - I counter that it was longer due to bad leadership and a spineless groupthink amongst the population enthralled by the medias nightly numbers - bad science, not good science.

hynesie08

dalyboy wrote: »

Pup payments ? What are they ?
Awaiting your experiential knowledge.....

You withdraw them from the atm machine with your pin number.

Boggles

Sobit1964 wrote: »

That said the restrictions are easing, vaccines look to be incredibly effective, and we look to be on our way out of this. The debate and investigation of how this period of our lives was handled is far from over. As much as some might like to suggest, incorrectly, that lockdown was longer due to bad behaviour - I counter that it was longer due to bad leadership and a spineless groupthink amongst the population enthralled by the medias nightly numbers - bad science, not good science.

Very few governance got the handling of pandemic spot on, ours is no different.

If you set an unrealistic bar or immerse yourself in grifters online who have all the easy solutions, you will only disappoint yourself.

Wear a mask, be sensible, take the vaccine when offered and hopefully by next Spring the data will be their to show the very worst is behind us.

FintanMcluskey

Boggles wrote: »

Very few governance got the handling of pandemic spot on, ours is no different.

If you set an unrealistic bar or immerse yourself in grifters online who have all the easy solutions, you will only disappoint yourself.

Wear a mask, be sensible, take the vaccine when offered and hopefully by next Spring the data will be their to show the very worst is behind us.

If you insist on an myopic approach to health and wellbeing then yes, Covid will be behind us

We will still have to face the consequences of delayed cancer screening and treatment and delayed diagnosis and treatment of many other health issues, postponed mental health treatment and diagnosis of autism etc

Likely much more dangerous than covid could ever be

bear1

Boggles wrote: »

You mean like in the shower and going to bed?

No.

And outside? Or will your quick wit also be a method of responding?

Fandymo

Boggles wrote: »

Do you distrust all motor cyclists?

Welders?

Surgeons?

Skiers?

Why aren't motorcyclists etc allowed wear helmets into banks, post offices, building societies and most other businesses with cash on the premises??

PCeeeee

paw patrol wrote: »

yeah cos thats what I meant.:rolleyes:

I'll bet you met the surgeon beforehand maskless .
which makes a mockery of your point.

Are you thick or just deliberately obtuse ?

I did meet him before. The rest of the team no as it happens but in fairness this is not a thing I wish to argue about, if you believe that the fact that I met the sugeon unmasked previously makes a mockery of my point then so be it.

That said I could have tried a couple of different examples but I picked the surgeon because he was wearing a mask for my safety, I thought that a reasonable parallel.

As for the thick or deliberately obtuse bit, I assume that's rhetorical. Or am I being obtuse?

charlie14

paw patrol wrote: »

yeah cos thats what I meant.:rolleyes:

I'll bet you met the surgeon beforehand maskless .
which makes a mockery of your point.

Are you thick or just deliberately obtuse ?

I can see the wisdom now in not trusting people who wear masks.

Whose to say that the lad you met beforehand didn`t take the day off and let his friend the plumber do the operation hidden behind a mask.:rolleyes:

charlie14

Fandymo wrote: »

Why aren't motorcyclists etc allowed wear helmets into banks, post offices, building societies and most other businesses with cash on the premises??

Face masks during a pandemic are for your protection and the protection of others.
Motorcyclists wear helmets for their own protection while riding their bikes. They do not ride their bikes into banks, post offices etc.

_Kaiser_

charlie14 wrote: »

Face masks during a pandemic are for your protection and the protection of others.
Motorcyclists wear helmets for their own protection while riding their bikes. They do not ride their bikes into banks, post offices etc.

The pandemic, or at least any significant level of risk in this country, is over - and has been for months (or arguably since the middle of last year)

That 0.1-0.3% of people who ARE at potential risk (and even then serious illness or death is far from certain) have now almost all been vaccinated, and the actual numbers of ICU cases and serious hospitalisations have fallen dramatically as the weather has gotten warmer as well, owing to the seasonal nature of the virus (as happened last summer too, and without masks or vaccines).

The only risk now is making an already bad situation regarding employment, business, mental health, community welfare, and the economy much worse while we pretend there's still a "lethal killer" out there.

charlie14

bloopy wrote: »

Because depending on the size of the population, a relatively small number might seem rather large when looked at per 100000 people.
Is the area a village, a town, a parish?

The incident rate for those two areas in Donegal is calculated on the same basis as every other in the country. On the electoral area and expressed as the number if the population of the area was 100K.

If you were to do what you appear to be suggesting, then the incident rate for a large populated area would have little or now meaning or relevance.
It would be the overall average and would mask areas with high incident rates.

Stormyteacup

charlie14 wrote: »

The incident rate for those two areas in Donegal is calculated on the same basis as every other in the country. On the electoral area and expressed as the number if the population of the area was 100K.

If you were to do what you appear to be suggesting, then the incident rate for a large populated area would have little or now meaning or relevance.
It would be the overall average and would mask areas with high incident rates.

Quite sure poster wasn’t advocating changing the reporting method.

Merely pointing out that the incidence rate needs more subtle interpretation. It puts a different slant on things if a total of 93 cases over two weeks was what led to such a high incidence rate.

charlie14

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The pandemic, or at least any significant level of risk in this country, is over - and has been for months (or arguably since the middle of last year)

That 0.1-0.3% of people who ARE at potential risk (and even then serious illness or death is far from certain) have now almost all been vaccinated, and the actual numbers of ICU cases and serious hospitalisations have fallen dramatically as the weather has gotten warmer as well, owing to the seasonal nature of the virus (as happened last summer too, and without masks or vaccines).

The only risk now is making an already bad situation regarding employment, business, mental health, community welfare, and the economy much worse while we pretend there's still a "lethal killer" out there.

The seasonal behaviour of this virus is not what will prevent us going in and out of lockdown. It`s the vaccines that are showing they are our best hope of doing that. For that to be effective then we need to have reached a certain level of vaccinations before staged opening.

The only known level that we have that is looking effective is that of the U.K.
Doing so at that level, and keeping numbers down until then will also give us wriggle room as we reopen. What we do not want or need is doing so like some countries at the wrong level with high numbers and have to apply an "emergency brake" going back into lockdown.

Jumping the gun on vaccination levels is not going to do much for the economy, peoples confidence, or that often touted mention of their mental health if we have to head back into lockdown.

charlie14

Stormyteacup wrote: »

Quite sure poster wasn’t advocating changing the reporting method.

Merely pointing out that the incidence rate needs more subtle interpretation. It puts a different slant on things if a total of 93 cases over two weeks was what led to such a high incidence rate.

There is nothing subtle about the incidence rate of those two areas. They are 5 times greater than the national average.
It`s not as if they are isolated pockets. They are two electoral areas that border each other in the geographical centre of the county, with one containing by far the largest town in the county.

FintanMcluskey

charlie14 wrote: »

The seasonal behaviour of this virus is not what will prevent us going in and out of lockdown. It`s the vaccines that are showing they are our best hope of doing that. For that to be effective then we need to have reached a certain level of vaccinations before staged opening.

The only known level that we have that is looking effective is that of the U.K.
Doing so at that level, and keeping numbers down until then will also give us wriggle room as we reopen. What we do not want or need is doing so like some countries at the wrong level with high numbers and have to apply an "emergency brake" going back into lockdown.

Jumping the gun on vaccination levels is not going to do much for the economy, peoples confidence, or that often touted mention of their mental health if we have to head back into lockdown.

The bold part is critical

We must stay in lockdown to avoid lockdown

KrustyUCC

This is the new normal according to the gospel of Leo

Life in Ireland will be 'relatively normal' by August, predicts Leo Varadkar

By August, life in Ireland will be “relatively normal” again, Tánaiste Leo Varadkar has said.

While he said most things will be back to normal by then, some restrictions will still remain longer term in relation to mass gatherings and international travel.

"Life in Israel is pretty much back to normal – they're welcoming tourists again and they're having, not very large gatherings, but they are having mass gatherings.


Kids going back to school as normal, and September, college happening on campus and September, October, all those things, and then a pretty normal Christmas in terms of seeing our friends and relations."

But Mr Varadkar caveated his comments by saying nobody can promise that timeline, adding this is the new virus, which is only around a year or so, and the vaccines aren't even around a year, and we just can't know for sure.

“It's possible that the efficacy of the vaccines could wear off after a certain point of time. We don't know what might happen in terms of variants that may be vaccine-resistant. We don't know what will happen when the winter comes,” he said.


https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40281917.html

Israel’s regulations now allow gatherings at sports and cultural events of up to 500 people indoors and 750 people outdoors. Gatherings of up to 1,000 people indoors and 1,500 outdoors can be held at stadiums with over 10,000 seats.

Can't see our gombeens getting anywhere near those numbers

charlie14

bloopy wrote: »

I found the figure in the end in case you were interested.
For the area referenced, 93 cases over two weeks is what gets your 675 per 100000 population.
One of those numbers are scary, the other is not so scary.
But I think you already new the number and opted to go with the fearmonger one. Is that why you were so reluctant to tell me?

Not really. I was well aware of the numbers. Just wondered how long it would take you to reveal your attempted conjuring trick with statistics.
I honestly didn`t believe you would go down the Donald Trump road of testing less would reduce the number, but gotta admit that part I got wrong.

Stormyteacup

charlie14 wrote: »

There is nothing subtle about the incidence rate of those two areas. They are 5 times greater than the national average.
It`s not as if they are isolated pockets. They are two electoral areas that border each other in the geographical centre of the county, with one containing by far the largest town in the county.

Really? A few moderate outbreaks will rocket incidence rate for lower density regions. And how do you know they are not isolated pockets?

5 times greater that the national average applies if one LEA has 20 cases and the national average is 4. So yes it does merit a more subtle analysis.

lee_baby_simms

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

The bold part is critical

We must stay in lockdown to avoid lockdown

We don’t like to use the word lockdown anymore.

It’ll be more of a ‘circuit breaker’ to avoid ‘extended restrictions’.

charlie14

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

The bold part is critical

We must stay in lockdown to avoid lockdown

Not what I said Fintan, but you could send that to the German authorities. Probably more apt for them.

charlie14

Stormyteacup wrote: »

Really? A few moderate outbreaks will rocket incidence rate for lower density regions. And how do you know they are not isolated pockets?

5 times greater that the national average applies if one LEA has 20 cases and the national average is 4. So yes it does merit a more subtle analysis.

1. I`m from the county and I have relation there working in health care in the area.
2. You are either just waffling or even now you have no idea how this virus spreads.

_Kaiser_

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The pandemic, or at least any significant level of risk in this country, is over - and has been for months (or arguably since the middle of last year)

That 0.1-0.3% of people who ARE at potential risk (and even then serious illness or death is far from certain) have now almost all been vaccinated, and the actual numbers of ICU cases and serious hospitalisations have fallen dramatically as the weather has gotten warmer as well, owing to the seasonal nature of the virus (as happened last summer too, and without masks or vaccines).

The only risk now is making an already bad situation regarding employment, business, mental health, community welfare, and the economy much worse while we pretend there's still a "lethal killer" out there.

Where is that nonsense pulled from?

Silentcorner

KrustyUCC wrote: »

This is the new normal according to the gospel of Leo


But Mr Varadkar caveated his comments by saying nobody can promise that timeline, adding this is the new virus, which is only around a year or so, and the vaccines aren't even around a year, and we just can't know for sure.

“It's possible that the efficacy of the vaccines could wear off after a certain point of time. We don't know what might happen in terms of variants that may be vaccine-resistant. We don't know what will happen when the winter comes,” he said.

We are going back into lock down next winter would be my take on that....

I wonder will we have to pretend that outdoor transmission is a danger, or that asymptomatic people transmit the virus or that masks are any good or will we just follow the science and admit there will be a danger during the seasonal surge outside of which restrictions let alone lock downs are a waste of time and money?

Stormyteacup

charlie14 wrote: »

1. I`m from the county and I have relation there working in health care in the area.
2. You are either just waffling or even now you have no idea how this virus spreads.

1. Perhaps you could address the points in my post. Anecdotal evidence not good enough.

2. You made an issue of ‘5 times the national average’, without qualification of circulation levels of virus in population.

KrustyUCC

KrustyUCC wrote: »

This is the new normal according to the gospel of Leo

Life in Ireland will be 'relatively normal' by August, predicts Leo Varadkar

By August, life in Ireland will be “relatively normal” again, Tánaiste Leo Varadkar has said.

While he said most things will be back to normal by then, some restrictions will still remain longer term in relation to mass gatherings and international travel.

"Life in Israel is pretty much back to normal – they're welcoming tourists again and they're having, not very large gatherings, but they are having mass gatherings.


Kids going back to school as normal, and September, college happening on campus and September, October, all those things, and then a pretty normal Christmas in terms of seeing our friends and relations."

But Mr Varadkar caveated his comments by saying nobody can promise that timeline, adding this is the new virus, which is only around a year or so, and the vaccines aren't even around a year, and we just can't know for sure.

“It's possible that the efficacy of the vaccines could wear off after a certain point of time. We don't know what might happen in terms of variants that may be vaccine-resistant. We don't know what will happen when the winter comes,” he said.


https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40281917.html

Israel’s regulations now allow gatherings at sports and cultural events of up to 500 people indoors and 750 people outdoors. Gatherings of up to 1,000 people indoors and 1,500 outdoors can be held at stadiums with over 10,000 seats.

Can't see our gombeens getting anywhere near those numbers

Its amazing the way a positive outlook, with the small caveat that nothing is certain yet, is spun on this thread to "we are locking down next winter".

Its like lives have now become defined by complaining about lockdown