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

PTH2009

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118099726#Comment_118099726

Tony is very concerned

JoChervil

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118099172#Comment_118099172

I am a Pole and you must be completely oblivious, who is ruling Poland now

Blut2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118099424#Comment_118099424

Our ICU capacity in Ireland reached 97-98% usage in bad winters in the last few years. The hospitals were at breaking point even without covid. As I posted earlier in the thread the HSE and Irish governments were told repeatedly between 2005 and 2015 that we needed approx 500 ICU beds for our population by the year 2020. Instead we had under 300 - half the EU per capita average, one quarter of Germanys. We had the lowest ICU per capita capacity of any 'rich' country. Its scandalous, and is only now very slowly coming to light thanks to corona.

So that article is absolute nonsense - throughout the entire crisis the main issue has been preventing our hospitals from being (even more) overrun. Of course having more ICU capacity would help. But if people start asking why our ICU capacity was so low to begin then heads will need to roll in FF & FG, and the HSE. So every effort is being made to obfuscate the issue.

Wolf359f

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100156#Comment_118100156

It's impossible to increase ICU capacity overnight. Isn't there wards closed in some hospitals? It's not the lack of equipment, it's lack of staff etc... Lot's of people banging on about our badly run healthcare system etc....

They are correct, but trying to fix that during a pandemic is not going to happen. You could definitely make it more efficient though, outpatient appointments via phone consultation (unless in person is needed) I'm sure helps. But all this is going on when scans etc... are spread out due to social distancing, lack of staff due to having to isolate etc...

There's definitely a framework on that to build upon. I don't like having to go to an outpatient appointment, queue for an hour just to have a quick back and forth with the consultant that everything is ok etc... It wastes my time, their time, and more importantly slows other's getting into the system etc...

Would be nice to see hospitals discharge on weekends as much as they do during the week. That does seem odd from an outsider.

And finally, I was surprised to learn NZ have the same, if not less ICU beds than we do. Guess they ain't a rich country though.

I certainly believe this will be a watershed moment for the health system to finally be put on the correct path in Ireland.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118099476#Comment_118099476

you should see my left arm, I had so many needles for blood donations that it looks like a junkie arm. It's pretty painless. And all in the mind. Fair play if you get over it.

Risteard81

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158282417262233&id=636752232

Risteard celebrating Hallowe'en.

Penfailed

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118099903#Comment_118099903

No, he's not. He wasn't concerned about the Mu variant you kept posting about either.

Lumen

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118099168#Comment_118099168

The maths isn't quite this simple. Many people that end up in ICU are from the age groups that have incredibly high vaccine uptake, but also where the vaccines are less effective (I posted an age stratified vaccine efficacy chart a week or so ago).

Median age in ICU was mid 80s last time I checked.

We're not told much about people in ICU any more, but the stories about ICUs being filled with people in their 40s and 50s have long gone. Assuming those stories were true, that's because that group are incredibly well protected by vaccines.

The question of how people in their 80s are becoming infected isn't told much either, for whatever reasons. The official response is basically just "careful now".

Despite the calls of "demonisation" on these threads, what has distinguished Ireland's official pandemic response has been a fear of demonising and of mixed messages, resulting in a thick fug of obfuscation. Good luck unpicking the stats, I've given up.

titan18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118099042#Comment_118099042

Pregnancy is a choice so if a place banned pregnant people, you'd be ok with that? Since you know it's solely down to a choice that you made.

PhoneMain

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118099476#Comment_118099476

Sorry to hear this, I've a friend who also was terrified of needles. Maybe talk to your GP and see if there's anything they could offer you for the severe anxiety you have getting this. A 1 off low dose tablet could settle you enough to get the vaccine.

I started feeling a bit crap on Saturday evening, went to bed early. Not feeling much better yesterday morning and took an antigen test which was positive. Awaiting swabs now. Feel like I've been hit by a train and really tired but breathing is ok thankfully. If I feel like this with the vaccine, I dont like to think what I'd be like without it (that said, maybe my immunity has wained, I would have got the vaccine early enough in the roll out).

mahoney_j

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118099042#Comment_118099042

Question for you ….how can a qr code offer any greater level of protection in a restaurant than a responsible unvaccinated person abiding by guidelines and doing antigen tests …I’m one of these who dosnt have an issue with doing a few antigen tests weekly ,socially distancing when out wearing a mask etc …I’d feel safer with a simillar person than a vaxed person …both can shed the virus …govt has made a balls of this mass antigen testing should be the norm

Don't Chute!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100156#Comment_118100156

Does that article not read as basically “we are not improving the health service because the restrictions are enough to get us out of this and if we improved the health service the peasants would stop following restrictions and doing what they are told”? It seems like a complete admission of their incompetence to me.

brickster69

Amid rising hospitalsations and cases it looks like Denmark are reconsidering bringing back restrictions. There will be nobody open on the mainland for Christmas at this rate unfortunately. The problem is the second wave of this never goes away, it started the end of July in the UK and it's still on the go now.

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/denmark-considers-re-imposing-covid-restrictions/13608862

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100552#Comment_118100552

Because a vaccinated person can also do all those things or none of those things and be safer than an unvaccinated person. A vaccinated person is both less likely to get infected and less likely to be infectious for as long a period as the unvaccinated (even though peak viral load can be the same), you're also 12x more likely (based on hospitalisation numbers) to end up in hospital if you contract COVID vs. a vaccinated person.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100487#Comment_118100487

Pregnancy isn't always a choice unless you're going the forced abortion route.

However, unvaccinated pregnant people are some of the highest risk from COVID and shouldn't be going anywhere they are likely to be infected with SARS-COV2.

There is also lower risk to others from a vaccinated pregnant person.

timmyntc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100681#Comment_118100681

A recent study shows that vaccinated people pose an equal risk of transmission as unvaccinated people - so no, vaccinated person is not lower risk to others.

Unless you suddenly dont trust the science?

Russman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100778#Comment_118100778

Don't they clear the viral load quicker and therefore remain infectious for a shorter timeframe though ? I'd argue that puts them at lower risk.

Lumen

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100778#Comment_118100778

Which study?

seamus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100487#Comment_118100487

Pregnant people are frequently disallowed from accessing services or places where they would be at higher risk of injury or their presence would create safety complications.

You're basically proving the point that preventing people from accessing things on the basis of a higher risk is commonplace and perfectly acceptable.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100778#Comment_118100778

The same studies we've been talking about on the forum for days which does show reduced transmission even in the home environment when people are in contact with others for extended periods of time? (if you read past the clickbaity headline of course).

titan18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100818#Comment_118100818

Tbf some countries are barring people from work for being unvaccinated. Would you support the same for pregnant people, or smokers, or obese people? Barring people from doing things cos of choices like that is ridiculous, and it is the same for vaccination choices imo (I'm not even anti vax, I'm one of the few who'd get the flu vaccine here but I disagree with the tactics being used)

floorpie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100809#Comment_118100809

Here: Community transmission and viral load kinetics of the SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) variant in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in the UK: a prospective, longitudinal, cohort study - The Lancet Infectious Diseases

It shows an increased but non-significant risk for unvaccinated people transmitting to unvaccinated people, and describes a similar risk for all other configurations but does not cite significance tests (e.g., vaccinated people are more at risk from vaccinated people, than they are from unvaccinated people). These findings make Covid certs illegitimate imo.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100822#Comment_118100822

It doesn't show that, as you should know by now

seamus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100836#Comment_118100836

I have no real issue with someone being barred from a place - be that a restaurant, a gym or a workplace - based on choices that they make, IF the consequences of that choice place the individual themselves or others at risk.

Pregnancy we place in a semi-special bucket not only because having children is kind of essential for the human race, but also because it's a fundamental human right. Other choices like smoking, are not. Nevertheless we do restrict the ability of pregnant people within workplaces and other areas for the safety of the person and their colleagues and customers.

Whether being vaccinated in an office constitutes an exceptional risk is of course well up in the air. But certainly for a healthcare worker for example, or even someone working in the kitchen in a nursing home, it would seem like a no-brainer that if you refuse to get vaccinated, you can go find another job. It's far more nuanced than, "Nobody should ever have to be vaccinated for their job under any circumstances".

timmyntc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100876#Comment_118100876

But where do you draw the line? Banning immunocompromised people from going to any crowded places?

Banning the elderly? etc. Because in terms of absolute risk, these groups are all much higher even when vaccinated compared to younger people. I think its shown that unvaccinated 30 year olds have similar risk from covid as vaccinated 50/60 year olds - so if you want to bar people based on risk, it will mean barring a substantial portion of the elderly

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100940#Comment_118100940

You probably draw the line at the actions a person can take (i.e. get vaccinated) rather than telling a vaccinated 70 year old they can't go to a restaurant, but an unvaccinated 30 year old can.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100866#Comment_118100866

As you know, this reading is at the lower end of probability on the confidence interval :)

timmyntc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100960#Comment_118100960

So it isnt to protect people then? Seeing as we would be allowing the most at risk groups in these "risky" situations, while those who would be least likely to be affected are locked out due to an arbitrary criteria.

Vaccine coercion then.

Lumen

@floorpie wrote

Here

Thanks for the contribution, but I wasn't asking you, I was asking timmyntc

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118100990#Comment_118100990

Well, it is to protect people, unless you want to start banning people with underlying conditions from life? There are many actions people can take, by far the simplest and most effective is to get vaccinated, it's also the simplest to track.

People should also be mask wearing, hygiene, not going out if they feel sick as they introduce risk but they're also pretty impossible to track vs. a vaccine cert (unless you're a proponent of more surveillance of people?). The COVID cert is the least intrusive way of doing this, a few anti-vaxxers are getting all heated up about it (fine, they're loons anyway) and a few rights groups also (and they do have a point but actions during a pandemic to control spread are justified and vaccines are the best weapon against that bar lockdowns).

timmyntc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118101015#Comment_118101015

First, you say its about risk to the individual, and that we have to protect them by banning them from society.

Then you say the below:

and a few rights groups also (and they do have a point but actions during a pandemic to control spread are justified and vaccines are the best weapon against that bar lockdowns).

Is it to control the spread or to "protect" those at risk? Because vaccines do not control the spread as the studies mentioned earlier show.