Time to end corona virus restrictions

[Rossfan]

There was one at the Custom House in Dublin yesterday.
Usual neo Nazi sh1tebags it seems.
The yokes that got 0.8% of the vote in the GE.

[imtommygunn]

To be fair I don't think that was all "right wing".  There were a good few who weren't. There was a gp speaking and other doctors there.

I am not defending it in any way shape or form but it isn't just "right wingers" protesting.

It's just another thing which looks it will really polarise society.

[6th sam]

To be fair I don't think that was all "right wing".  There were a good few who weren't. There was a gp speaking and other doctors there.

I am not defending it in any way shape or form but it isn't just "right wingers" protesting.

It's just another thing which looks it will really polarise society.

The narrative about the dangers of the virus has been mostly  effective, perhaps over effective at times , in terms of over exaggerated anxieties.
The poor science narrative peddled by Trump types , incredibly also gets dangerous traction ,
However , like most things in a modern day society of unsolicited social media, there is a middle ground narrative which isn't being heard over the dominating, high expressed emotion of the extremes.

With absolute respect and empathy to those affected or bereaved by the virus, the first wave didn't see as many deaths as feared. Initially , especially in England etc , early complacency proved catastrophic and we really "dropped the ball" throughout these islands in terms of protecting nursing homes etc.
Now we have more testing, more knowledge and more treatments. Importantly we are now more infection aware and know the importance of protecting the vulnerable, which will hopefully reduce sickness and death overall, going forward. Hopefully we are now better placed to prevent spread and deal with the direct effects of the virus.
The effects of restrictions however have massive long term implications for the economy, society and thereby health which though not accurately quantifiable , are inevitable .
Here's a quick list: economical effects on health and society, diseases of poverty, isolation, inactivity, delayed diagnoses and treatment. Increased alcohol consumption and its effects, increased mental health issues, less enjoyable activities, less community involvement, lack of respect for elderly/vulnerable  and their wishes.

To minimise deaths and sickness going forward, there is a responsibility of health leaders right up to WHO level to seek quality evidence comparing the direct effect of the virus against the effect of restrictions . Can we manage the risks of the disease whilst ensuring we minimise the significant damage of restrictions.
The simple messages of hygiene , distancing , social responsibility, protecting the vulnerable are a given but we must protect the economy and society going forward 

[sid waddell]

To be fair I don't think that was all "right wing".  There were a good few who weren't. There was a gp speaking and other doctors there.

I am not defending it in any way shape or form but it isn't just "right wingers" protesting.

It's just another thing which looks it will really polarise society.

The narrative about the dangers of the virus has been mostly  effective, perhaps over effective at times , in terms of over exaggerated anxieties.
The poor science narrative peddled by Trump types , incredibly also gets dangerous traction ,
However , like most things in a modern day society of unsolicited social media, there is a middle ground narrative which isn't being heard over the dominating, high expressed emotion of the extremes.

With absolute respect and empathy to those affected or bereaved by the virus, the first wave didn't see as many deaths as feared. Initially , especially in England etc , early complacency proved catastrophic and we really "dropped the ball" throughout these islands in terms of protecting nursing homes etc.
Now we have more testing, more knowledge and more treatments. Importantly we are now more infection aware and know the importance of protecting the vulnerable, which will hopefully reduce sickness and death overall, going forward. Hopefully we are now better placed to prevent spread and deal with the direct effects of the virus.
The effects of restrictions however have massive long term implications for the economy, society and thereby health which though not accurately quantifiable , are inevitable .
Here's a quick list: economical effects on health and society, diseases of poverty, isolation, inactivity, delayed diagnoses and treatment. Increased alcohol consumption and its effects, increased mental health issues, less enjoyable activities, less community involvement, lack of respect for elderly/vulnerable  and their wishes.

To minimise deaths and sickness going forward, there is a responsibility of health leaders right up to WHO level to seek quality evidence comparing the direct effect of the virus against the effect of restrictions . Can we manage the risks of the disease whilst ensuring we minimise the significant damage of restrictions.
The simple messages of hygiene , distancing , social responsibility, protecting the vulnerable are a given but we must protect the economy and society going forward

We didn't see as many deaths as feared because we locked down

That hasn't stopped the crazy narratives like the vilification of Neil Ferguson etc. - Ferguson was broadly correct

What is this "middle ground" narrative you claim isn't being heard?

We are already in a middle ground - we have been experimenting with finding the maximum possible liberalisation of the restrictions without letting the virus spread significantly

That is a middle ground

But these experimentations have to be conducted slowly and very cautiously, and the message has to be rammed home that any liberalisation measures are reversible at immediate notice

What are these treatments you claim have become available?

One of the most damaging false narratives that has been allowed to spread is that there is a binary choice between public health and the economy

There isn't - public health and the economy are inherently linked - to lessen economic damage in any sort of meaningful way, you have to protect public health

To lessen the social impacts of the pandemic, you have to protect public health

The narrative about "people being unhappy at restrictions, so let's get rid of them" is magical thinking - it posits that there is a magic solution - it's essentially trying to wish the pandemic away

You mention that there was complacency at the start of this - that is true - but the "let's get rid of restrictions" narrative is the ultimate complacency

Everybody is unhappy at there being a pandemic

But you can't wish it away

[sid waddell]

To be fair I don't think that was all "right wing".  There were a good few who weren't. There was a gp speaking and other doctors there.

I am not defending it in any way shape or form but it isn't just "right wingers" protesting.

It's just another thing which looks it will really polarise society.

Climate change deniers and the tobacco industry have always had credentialed people, doctors, scientists to shill for them

There are some really awful credentialed people out there, and because they are credentialed, that makes them more dangerous than your standard crazy fascist hatemonger like O'Doherty

Some credentialed people have totally crazy religious or political beliefs and will use those credentials to give false credibility to those crazy beliefs

The far right is inherently tied up with conspiracy theory nonsense

Yesterday's event was a far right event, anybody who is not far right who attended is being played for a fool

[Rossfan]

This one is a leading extreme right wing nasty of a "Party" founded by Farage

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/ucd-school-of-medicine-disassociates-itself-from-professor-s-views-1.4283774?mode=amp

[ONeill]

From all of this we have multiple layers of Fear.

I don't have any fear of this damn thing. I respect the notion of keeping it under control. But it's not going to determine how I live or take control of my life.

You either get busy living or you get busy dying!

Youth and the healthy should be encouraged to live, while there should be supports in place to protect the old and those with health conditions.

Take my word for it, if you ever are unlucky enough to contract the little bastard, you'll have plenty of fear of it for the rest of your life. What sort of "supports" do you have in mind? How would you put them in place. The problem with youth and the healthy being encouraged to live is that we now have a resurgence of the virus and all the grunt work that was done to flatten the curve has been largely undone. From bitter personal experience, you cannot take control of your life as you cannot eliminate the risk of picking up the virus from someone who may already be infected but showing no outward signs.
I was infected for well over a fortnight but my blood pressure, body temperature and general health was well within normal range.  I had them checked three times a week - each time I turned up for a dialysis session. I wasn't sleeping normally and I had lost my appetite but no cough etc. and otherwise okay.
Indeed, the day before a routine swab confirmed that I had Covid-19, a renal consultant talked to me about possible reasons for my loss of appetite and sleep but he told me he had no idea what was causing my problems.
You can make all the positive resolutions you can think of but the fact is that unless you lock yourself away from the world, you run the risk of contacting an asymptomatic individual and you will wind up jettisoning from both ends and that's only if you contract a mild instance.
Never underestimate the danger.

Had you no flu-like symptoms at all?

[Blowitupref]

To be fair I don't think that was all "right wing".  There were a good few who weren't. There was a gp speaking and other doctors there.

I am not defending it in any way shape or form but it isn't just "right wingers" protesting.

It's just another thing which looks it will really polarise society.

Let me guess the nutjob that is Dr. Marcus de Brún was in attendance?

[imtommygunn]

He was but the gp wasn't him. Can't remember the name.

[6th sam]

To be fair I don't think that was all "right wing".  There were a good few who weren't. There was a gp speaking and other doctors there.

I am not defending it in any way shape or form but it isn't just "right wingers" protesting.

It's just another thing which looks it will really polarise society.

The narrative about the dangers of the virus has been mostly  effective, perhaps over effective at times , in terms of over exaggerated anxieties.
The poor science narrative peddled by Trump types , incredibly also gets dangerous traction ,
However , like most things in a modern day society of unsolicited social media, there is a middle ground narrative which isn't being heard over the dominating, high expressed emotion of the extremes.

With absolute respect and empathy to those affected or bereaved by the virus, the first wave didn't see as many deaths as feared. Initially , especially in England etc , early complacency proved catastrophic and we really "dropped the ball" throughout these islands in terms of protecting nursing homes etc.
Now we have more testing, more knowledge and more treatments. Importantly we are now more infection aware and know the importance of protecting the vulnerable, which will hopefully reduce sickness and death overall, going forward. Hopefully we are now better placed to prevent spread and deal with the direct effects of the virus.
The effects of restrictions however have massive long term implications for the economy, society and thereby health which though not accurately quantifiable , are inevitable .
Here's a quick list: economical effects on health and society, diseases of poverty, isolation, inactivity, delayed diagnoses and treatment. Increased alcohol consumption and its effects, increased mental health issues, less enjoyable activities, less community involvement, lack of respect for elderly/vulnerable  and their wishes.

To minimise deaths and sickness going forward, there is a responsibility of health leaders right up to WHO level to seek quality evidence comparing the direct effect of the virus against the effect of restrictions . Can we manage the risks of the disease whilst ensuring we minimise the significant damage of restrictions.
The simple messages of hygiene , distancing , social responsibility, protecting the vulnerable are a given but we must protect the economy and society going forward

We didn't see as many deaths as feared because we locked down

That hasn't stopped the crazy narratives like the vilification of Neil Ferguson etc. - Ferguson was broadly correct

What is this "middle ground" narrative you claim isn't being heard?

We are already in a middle ground - we have been experimenting with finding the maximum possible liberalisation of the restrictions without letting the virus spread significantly

That is a middle ground

But these experimentations have to be conducted slowly and very cautiously, and the message has to be rammed home that any liberalisation measures are reversible at immediate notice

What are these treatments you claim have become available?

One of the most damaging false narratives that has been allowed to spread is that there is a binary choice between public health and the economy

There isn't - public health and the economy are inherently linked - to lessen economic damage in any sort of meaningful way, you have to protect public health

To lessen the social impacts of the pandemic, you have to protect public health

The narrative about "people being unhappy at restrictions, so let's get rid of them" is magical thinking - it posits that there is a magic solution - it's essentially trying to wish the pandemic away

You mention that there was complacency at the start of this - that is true - but the "let's get rid of restrictions" narrative is the ultimate complacency

Everybody is unhappy at there being a pandemic

But you can't wish it away

We know much more about the virus than we did originally, management at home, in hospitals and in ICU has improved as evidence base improves eg specifics re oxygenation, treating the complications, use of dexamethasone. I could go on .
Compared to the war-zone of Hospitals in Italy in March, we have not seen the same effects because we are now better prepared.
At the same time, we can't ignore that alcohol consumption has increased, mental health problems have increased and diagnosis and treatment of other illnesses has been delayed. The implications of increased poverty on public health are massive.
I am not advocating removal of all restrictions but compliance with the most stringent restrictions is unworkable long term .
We should strongly promote easily workable measures , but keep society as "normal" as possible to avoid the collateral damage eg re-opening schools.
I'm not advising complacency or irresponsible behaviour, quite the opposite, but we must minimise the potentially catastrophic collateral damage .

[Tony Baloney]

What is the craic in the North with drinking in a hotel as a resident? If you pay 200 quid to stay in a hotel do you still have to order food to have a drink? It seems like madness if that is the case as it was my belief that the eating and drinking were tied together to stimulate people to go eat out

[sid waddell]

To be fair I don't think that was all "right wing".  There were a good few who weren't. There was a gp speaking and other doctors there.

I am not defending it in any way shape or form but it isn't just "right wingers" protesting.

It's just another thing which looks it will really polarise society.

The narrative about the dangers of the virus has been mostly  effective, perhaps over effective at times , in terms of over exaggerated anxieties.
The poor science narrative peddled by Trump types , incredibly also gets dangerous traction ,
However , like most things in a modern day society of unsolicited social media, there is a middle ground narrative which isn't being heard over the dominating, high expressed emotion of the extremes.

With absolute respect and empathy to those affected or bereaved by the virus, the first wave didn't see as many deaths as feared. Initially , especially in England etc , early complacency proved catastrophic and we really "dropped the ball" throughout these islands in terms of protecting nursing homes etc.
Now we have more testing, more knowledge and more treatments. Importantly we are now more infection aware and know the importance of protecting the vulnerable, which will hopefully reduce sickness and death overall, going forward. Hopefully we are now better placed to prevent spread and deal with the direct effects of the virus.
The effects of restrictions however have massive long term implications for the economy, society and thereby health which though not accurately quantifiable , are inevitable .
Here's a quick list: economical effects on health and society, diseases of poverty, isolation, inactivity, delayed diagnoses and treatment. Increased alcohol consumption and its effects, increased mental health issues, less enjoyable activities, less community involvement, lack of respect for elderly/vulnerable  and their wishes.

To minimise deaths and sickness going forward, there is a responsibility of health leaders right up to WHO level to seek quality evidence comparing the direct effect of the virus against the effect of restrictions . Can we manage the risks of the disease whilst ensuring we minimise the significant damage of restrictions.
The simple messages of hygiene , distancing , social responsibility, protecting the vulnerable are a given but we must protect the economy and society going forward

We didn't see as many deaths as feared because we locked down

That hasn't stopped the crazy narratives like the vilification of Neil Ferguson etc. - Ferguson was broadly correct

What is this "middle ground" narrative you claim isn't being heard?

We are already in a middle ground - we have been experimenting with finding the maximum possible liberalisation of the restrictions without letting the virus spread significantly

That is a middle ground

But these experimentations have to be conducted slowly and very cautiously, and the message has to be rammed home that any liberalisation measures are reversible at immediate notice

What are these treatments you claim have become available?

One of the most damaging false narratives that has been allowed to spread is that there is a binary choice between public health and the economy

There isn't - public health and the economy are inherently linked - to lessen economic damage in any sort of meaningful way, you have to protect public health

To lessen the social impacts of the pandemic, you have to protect public health

The narrative about "people being unhappy at restrictions, so let's get rid of them" is magical thinking - it posits that there is a magic solution - it's essentially trying to wish the pandemic away

You mention that there was complacency at the start of this - that is true - but the "let's get rid of restrictions" narrative is the ultimate complacency

Everybody is unhappy at there being a pandemic

But you can't wish it away

We know much more about the virus than we did originally, management at home, in hospitals and in ICU has improved as evidence base improves eg specifics re oxygenation, treating the complications, use of dexamethasone. I could go on .
Compared to the war-zone of Hospitals in Italy in March, we have not seen the same effects because we are now better prepared.
At the same time, we can't ignore that alcohol consumption has increased, mental health problems have increased and diagnosis and treatment of other illnesses has been delayed. The implications of increased poverty on public health are massive.
I am not advocating removal of all restrictions but compliance with the most stringent restrictions is unworkable long term .
We should strongly promote easily workable measures , but keep society as "normal" as possible to avoid the collateral damage eg re-opening schools.
I'm not advising complacency or irresponsible behaviour, quite the opposite, but we must minimise the potentially catastrophic collateral damage .

OK, but even if you work on the basis that work around treatments may have slightly improved, this is still is a very dangerous, killer disease with no real reliable treatment

Public health experts are still of the opinion that another wave of the disease will be catastrophic

Perhaps the greatest advantage in terms of treating it and treating anything else too is the comparative lack of cases now compared to before, that comparative lack of cases happened because of lockdown restrictions

If the cases explode again, we get snowed under again and an increase in Covid cases will make people less likely to seek treatment for other conditions


It wasn't the lockdown that made people less likely to seek treatment for other conditions, it was the fear of the virus

Most restrictions that make a real material difference to people's lives have already been lifted - all shops are open, some pubs are open, people can play sport, people can travel where they like in Ireland

We already have a quasi-normality

Apart from opening all pubs, and attending sporting events, I'm not sure exactly what restrictions people are looking for to be lifted

Are people seriously talking about an unnecessary abolition of working from home, or abolishing physical distancing and masks?

What's "long term"?

Opening schools is a massive step - that carries the potential for significant spread - we have to see how that works out before doing anything else

Cases are rising again across Europe, and they're rising here too - and that's before the opening of the schools

In my view we need to see a minimum of six weeks' evidence of how opening schools works out before making any further changes

This is a very delicate point we're at right now

If the virus spreads widely again, or more widely than before, it is likely to give us much increased economic damage and much increased mental problems in society

A public health crisis increases poverty and thus increases joblessness and mental health problems

Forsaking the pub or going to matches, as we're currently asked to do, seems a small price to pay

[smelmoth]

We are also a distance away from understanding the non fatal consequences of getting COVID and particularly the impact of asymptomatic people. Do we really know how many asymtomatic cases there are or how much internal damage can be incurred by someone classified as asymtomatc or a "mild case".

And of course in terms of schools reopening this type of research on kids really should have been done

[Eamonnca1]

That gathering at the Custom House today was scary

The lowlifes who organised it say the virus is "a scam"

At the same time they're trying to exploit anger at the eejits in Clifden - who broke the restrictions - which is exactly what the organisers of the fascist rally today are telling people to do

Scary that a senior counsel could be spouting 5G conspiracy nonsense at a white supremacist rally, just goes to show there's a big difference between passing exams and being intelligent

And Matt Le Tissier promoting the equivalent crackpots in England

Never meet your heroes, or even tweet your heroes

Internet brain rot is a real thing and it's gaining serious ground, it's already in control of several large and very influential countries

Was Gemtrails there too? Wouldn't surprise me. I'm seriously disappointed in Ireland. I thought the country was better informed and better educated than this.

It's still a small minority in this country but they are more likely influenced by the amount of loons they see doing simliar in the USA. Stupidly like a virus spreads worldwide.

You got that right. I couldn't believe it when I listened to a show on RTE radio a few years ago and one of the guests started ranting and raving about how "that's typical of the kind of liberal ideas that are ruining the country." The host had to threaten to turn his mic off. God forbid if that's the level of discourse that becomes normal in Ireland.

[sid waddell]

That gathering at the Custom House today was scary

The lowlifes who organised it say the virus is "a scam"

At the same time they're trying to exploit anger at the eejits in Clifden - who broke the restrictions - which is exactly what the organisers of the fascist rally today are telling people to do

Scary that a senior counsel could be spouting 5G conspiracy nonsense at a white supremacist rally, just goes to show there's a big difference between passing exams and being intelligent

And Matt Le Tissier promoting the equivalent crackpots in England

Never meet your heroes, or even tweet your heroes

Internet brain rot is a real thing and it's gaining serious ground, it's already in control of several large and very influential countries

Was Gemtrails there too? Wouldn't surprise me. I'm seriously disappointed in Ireland. I thought the country was better informed and better educated than this.

It's still a small minority in this country but they are more likely influenced by the amount of loons they see doing simliar in the USA. Stupidly like a virus spreads worldwide.

You got that right. I couldn't believe it when I listened to a show on RTE radio a few years ago and one of the guests started ranting and raving about how "that's typical of the kind of liberal ideas that are ruining the country." The host had to threaten to turn his mic off. God forbid if that's the level of discourse that becomes normal in Ireland.

Irish media has been encouraging that sort of clichéd, imported far right gobshitery for years

It generates reaction and clicks

Media has a lot to answer for in platforming this nonsense