China Coronavirus

[Angelo]

I never mentioned herd immunity. I'm for shielding the elderly, implementing the basic measures and trying to get on with things.

At present we have no end game. Lock down for 6 weeks, open up for 2 months and lock down again next March is not a logical, economical or proportionate strategy. The cure will do more damage than the disease.

your first paragraph is not based in reality, it is not possible to protect the vulnerable or shield the elderly and get on with things. We have seen that since the last lockdown as  we now have cases in numerous nursing homes and hospitals filling quickly.

i agree roling lockdowns arent the answer, the only answer to reducing numbers that i can see that worked so far is a lockdown. The question is what should we do differently, what can we do and how good are we are adhering to what we need to do when this lockdown is over to prevent what is happening now happening again.

your last sentence again is a joke and not basd in reality either but id like to know why you think that? Based on what we know so far.

What is based in reality?

The reality at the minute seems to be rolling lockdowns and if the data returns to us in a few months that the fatality rate of this virus is something like 0.4% and most of those who die from it are eldery and/or have underlying health conditions that have limited life expectancy- at what point do we say that  what we are doing is counter-productive?

What does it take for us to look at this differently? We are quite happy to allow seasonal flu overwhelm the health sector every year and take lives.

1. the flu is seasonal.. covid is not
2. the flu has a vaccine. covid does not
3. the flu does not overwhelm the health system.. despite lockdowns and restrictions covid clearly would overwhelm and has in some countries.

please stop comparing them.. they are not the same.

the reality is healthcare systems cannot cope if we went back to pre covid livesyles, it cannot cope with the level of restrictions and wfh that we have now. That is why we need a second lockdown imo.

what we do need to do is something that stops us from getting back to this position again. I dont know what that is.but i am.confident it is not herd immunity. My reason for this, is because despite restrictions etc. it has still got back in nursing homes which means letting it rip who cause way more people to die as we cannot silo vulnerable people.

can you tell me me other than rolling lockdowns what we should do?

1. The flu is seasonal - so why don't we go into seasonal lockdown?
2. The flu has a vaccine, uptake is at about 15-20%, vulnerable people get it, vulnerable people die from it. Healthy people get it, healthy people die from it.
3. The flu does overwhelm the health system

I think we should learn to live with it, particularly with the fatality rate falling in double digit multiples across Europe. Why do we live with the acceptable risk of death with flu every year. Can you tell me at what rate Covid comes with an acceptable risk because we clearly take an acceptable risk with flu every single year.

As near to zero as possible, that is why nurses and doctors throughout the island are putting their lives on the line as we discsuss - while you just don't value life enough to make the effort or sacrifice.  Irish Lives Matter.

Nurses and doctors putting their lives on the line?

Do they not do that day in day out or did they just merely start doing it the past year?

Way to patronise our healthcare workers.

[PadraicHenryPearse]

I never mentioned herd immunity. I'm for shielding the elderly, implementing the basic measures and trying to get on with things.

At present we have no end game. Lock down for 6 weeks, open up for 2 months and lock down again next March is not a logical, economical or proportionate strategy. The cure will do more damage than the disease.

your first paragraph is not based in reality, it is not possible to protect the vulnerable or shield the elderly and get on with things. We have seen that since the last lockdown as  we now have cases in numerous nursing homes and hospitals filling quickly.

i agree roling lockdowns arent the answer, the only answer to reducing numbers that i can see that worked so far is a lockdown. The question is what should we do differently, what can we do and how good are we are adhering to what we need to do when this lockdown is over to prevent what is happening now happening again.

your last sentence again is a joke and not basd in reality either but id like to know why you think that? Based on what we know so far.

What is based in reality?

The reality at the minute seems to be rolling lockdowns and if the data returns to us in a few months that the fatality rate of this virus is something like 0.4% and most of those who die from it are eldery and/or have underlying health conditions that have limited life expectancy- at what point do we say that  what we are doing is counter-productive?

What does it take for us to look at this differently? We are quite happy to allow seasonal flu overwhelm the health sector every year and take lives.

1. the flu is seasonal.. covid is not
2. the flu has a vaccine. covid does not
3. the flu does not overwhelm the health system.. despite lockdowns and restrictions covid clearly would overwhelm and has in some countries.

please stop comparing them.. they are not the same.

the reality is healthcare systems cannot cope if we went back to pre covid livesyles, it cannot cope with the level of restrictions and wfh that we have now. That is why we need a second lockdown imo.

what we do need to do is something that stops us from getting back to this position again. I dont know what that is.but i am.confident it is not herd immunity. My reason for this, is because despite restrictions etc. it has still got back in nursing homes which means letting it rip who cause way more people to die as we cannot silo vulnerable people.

can you tell me me other than rolling lockdowns what we should do?

1. The flu is seasonal - so why don't we go into seasonal lockdown?
2. The flu has a vaccine, uptake is at about 15-20%, vulnerable people get it, vulnerable people die from it. Healthy people get it, healthy people die from it.
3. The flu does overwhelm the health system

I think we should learn to live with it, particularly with the fatality rate falling in double digit multiples across Europe. Why do we live with the acceptable risk of death with flu every year. Can you tell me at what rate Covid comes with an acceptable risk because we clearly take an acceptable risk with flu every single year.

we have to live with it? great answer! how do we live with it...

you are not comparing like for like with covid and the flu, we live with alot of things that cause hospitalisations and dead amd there are alot of knowns about those things but we dont know enough about covid and what we do know shows it to be worst .

forget the falling fatality rate as it not reflective of what you are proposing which is living with the virus, it is as a result if all the measures that have been.taken to date including lockdowns

[Angelo]

I never mentioned herd immunity. I'm for shielding the elderly, implementing the basic measures and trying to get on with things.

At present we have no end game. Lock down for 6 weeks, open up for 2 months and lock down again next March is not a logical, economical or proportionate strategy. The cure will do more damage than the disease.

your first paragraph is not based in reality, it is not possible to protect the vulnerable or shield the elderly and get on with things. We have seen that since the last lockdown as  we now have cases in numerous nursing homes and hospitals filling quickly.

i agree roling lockdowns arent the answer, the only answer to reducing numbers that i can see that worked so far is a lockdown. The question is what should we do differently, what can we do and how good are we are adhering to what we need to do when this lockdown is over to prevent what is happening now happening again.

your last sentence again is a joke and not basd in reality either but id like to know why you think that? Based on what we know so far.

What is based in reality?

The reality at the minute seems to be rolling lockdowns and if the data returns to us in a few months that the fatality rate of this virus is something like 0.4% and most of those who die from it are eldery and/or have underlying health conditions that have limited life expectancy- at what point do we say that  what we are doing is counter-productive?

What does it take for us to look at this differently? We are quite happy to allow seasonal flu overwhelm the health sector every year and take lives.

1. the flu is seasonal.. covid is not
2. the flu has a vaccine. covid does not
3. the flu does not overwhelm the health system.. despite lockdowns and restrictions covid clearly would overwhelm and has in some countries.

please stop comparing them.. they are not the same.

the reality is healthcare systems cannot cope if we went back to pre covid livesyles, it cannot cope with the level of restrictions and wfh that we have now. That is why we need a second lockdown imo.

what we do need to do is something that stops us from getting back to this position again. I dont know what that is.but i am.confident it is not herd immunity. My reason for this, is because despite restrictions etc. it has still got back in nursing homes which means letting it rip who cause way more people to die as we cannot silo vulnerable people.

can you tell me me other than rolling lockdowns what we should do?

1. The flu is seasonal - so why don't we go into seasonal lockdown?
2. The flu has a vaccine, uptake is at about 15-20%, vulnerable people get it, vulnerable people die from it. Healthy people get it, healthy people die from it.
3. The flu does overwhelm the health system

I think we should learn to live with it, particularly with the fatality rate falling in double digit multiples across Europe. Why do we live with the acceptable risk of death with flu every year. Can you tell me at what rate Covid comes with an acceptable risk because we clearly take an acceptable risk with flu every single year.

we have to live with it? great answer! how do we live with it...

you are not comparing like for like with covid and the flu, we live with alot of things that cause hospitalisations and dead amd there are alot of knowns about those things but we dont know enough about covid and what we do know shows it to be worst .

forget the falling fatality rate as it not reflective of what you are proposing which is living with the virus, it is as a result if all the measures that have been.taken to date including lockdowns

So we live with a lot of things that cause death and hospitalisations? We accept those risks? At what point do we accept Covid?

Forget the falling fatality rate?

Why forget the falling fatality, surely this is the one metric that actually matters?

What I am saying is that at what point do we accept that Covid is acceptable to live with?

You are completely ignoring the huge societal and economic problems that lockdowns and restrictions cause. This discussion is completely shelved, at what point do we say that the narrative has to switch from Covid.

[imtommygunn]

That point is not yet and this "second wave" has shown that.

[restorepride]

I never mentioned herd immunity. I'm for shielding the elderly, implementing the basic measures and trying to get on with things.

At present we have no end game. Lock down for 6 weeks, open up for 2 months and lock down again next March is not a logical, economical or proportionate strategy. The cure will do more damage than the disease.

your first paragraph is not based in reality, it is not possible to protect the vulnerable or shield the elderly and get on with things. We have seen that since the last lockdown as  we now have cases in numerous nursing homes and hospitals filling quickly.

i agree roling lockdowns arent the answer, the only answer to reducing numbers that i can see that worked so far is a lockdown. The question is what should we do differently, what can we do and how good are we are adhering to what we need to do when this lockdown is over to prevent what is happening now happening again.

your last sentence again is a joke and not basd in reality either but id like to know why you think that? Based on what we know so far.

What is based in reality?

The reality at the minute seems to be rolling lockdowns and if the data returns to us in a few months that the fatality rate of this virus is something like 0.4% and most of those who die from it are eldery and/or have underlying health conditions that have limited life expectancy- at what point do we say that  what we are doing is counter-productive?

What does it take for us to look at this differently? We are quite happy to allow seasonal flu overwhelm the health sector every year and take lives.

1. the flu is seasonal.. covid is not
2. the flu has a vaccine. covid does not
3. the flu does not overwhelm the health system.. despite lockdowns and restrictions covid clearly would overwhelm and has in some countries.

please stop comparing them.. they are not the same.

the reality is healthcare systems cannot cope if we went back to pre covid livesyles, it cannot cope with the level of restrictions and wfh that we have now. That is why we need a second lockdown imo.

what we do need to do is something that stops us from getting back to this position again. I dont know what that is.but i am.confident it is not herd immunity. My reason for this, is because despite restrictions etc. it has still got back in nursing homes which means letting it rip who cause way more people to die as we cannot silo vulnerable people.

can you tell me me other than rolling lockdowns what we should do?

1. The flu is seasonal - so why don't we go into seasonal lockdown?
2. The flu has a vaccine, uptake is at about 15-20%, vulnerable people get it, vulnerable people die from it. Healthy people get it, healthy people die from it.
3. The flu does overwhelm the health system

I think we should learn to live with it, particularly with the fatality rate falling in double digit multiples across Europe. Why do we live with the acceptable risk of death with flu every year. Can you tell me at what rate Covid comes with an acceptable risk because we clearly take an acceptable risk with flu every single year.

As near to zero as possible, that is why nurses and doctors throughout the island are putting their lives on the line as we discsuss - while you just don't value life enough to make the effort or sacrifice.  Irish Lives Matter.

Nurses and doctors putting their lives on the line?

Do they not do that day in day out or did they just merely start doing it the past year?

Way to patronise our healthcare workers.

You see there is this thing called PPE which never ran short until this pandemic - and you think there is no difference in the way our doctors and nurses have been trying to save lives in the past 7 months?   You question if doctors and nurses are putting their lives on the line?  You just don't value life enough, or their lives enough, to make the effort and sacrifice.  Probably too worried about money.  It is your right to think that way but it my right to call you out on a discussion board for your morality and distain for fellow Irish citizens.  Irish Lives Matter.   

[Milltown Row2]

Also there is a flu vaccine hitch helps in avoiding shielding the elderly and most vulnerable.

That has very limited uptake.

We live with flu.

What if we don't have a Covid vaccine for 7/8 years?

Would you be prepared to take a vaccine rushed through without proper testing?

Or would you be prepared to take a chance with a virus that probably has a fatality rate of 0.1% for people in your age bracket if you have no underlying health issues?

So happy for family to pass away or even pass it on to them and allow them to die as it's acceptable and we live with other conditions like flu, aids, malaria?

That is a hysterical and very insulting post.

If I said you were happy for suicide rates to spike would that be true, would you take offence at such an allegation?

There are detrimental impacts of this approach we are taking with Covid and it will effect have drastic and detrimental effects on the economy and society as a result. The fact that you are going down that route to shut this debate down really typifies the type of lowlife you must be.

Not going to answer the question then?

[Angelo]

I never mentioned herd immunity. I'm for shielding the elderly, implementing the basic measures and trying to get on with things.

At present we have no end game. Lock down for 6 weeks, open up for 2 months and lock down again next March is not a logical, economical or proportionate strategy. The cure will do more damage than the disease.

your first paragraph is not based in reality, it is not possible to protect the vulnerable or shield the elderly and get on with things. We have seen that since the last lockdown as  we now have cases in numerous nursing homes and hospitals filling quickly.

i agree roling lockdowns arent the answer, the only answer to reducing numbers that i can see that worked so far is a lockdown. The question is what should we do differently, what can we do and how good are we are adhering to what we need to do when this lockdown is over to prevent what is happening now happening again.

your last sentence again is a joke and not basd in reality either but id like to know why you think that? Based on what we know so far.

What is based in reality?

The reality at the minute seems to be rolling lockdowns and if the data returns to us in a few months that the fatality rate of this virus is something like 0.4% and most of those who die from it are eldery and/or have underlying health conditions that have limited life expectancy- at what point do we say that  what we are doing is counter-productive?

What does it take for us to look at this differently? We are quite happy to allow seasonal flu overwhelm the health sector every year and take lives.

1. the flu is seasonal.. covid is not
2. the flu has a vaccine. covid does not
3. the flu does not overwhelm the health system.. despite lockdowns and restrictions covid clearly would overwhelm and has in some countries.

please stop comparing them.. they are not the same.

the reality is healthcare systems cannot cope if we went back to pre covid livesyles, it cannot cope with the level of restrictions and wfh that we have now. That is why we need a second lockdown imo.

what we do need to do is something that stops us from getting back to this position again. I dont know what that is.but i am.confident it is not herd immunity. My reason for this, is because despite restrictions etc. it has still got back in nursing homes which means letting it rip who cause way more people to die as we cannot silo vulnerable people.

can you tell me me other than rolling lockdowns what we should do?

1. The flu is seasonal - so why don't we go into seasonal lockdown?
2. The flu has a vaccine, uptake is at about 15-20%, vulnerable people get it, vulnerable people die from it. Healthy people get it, healthy people die from it.
3. The flu does overwhelm the health system

I think we should learn to live with it, particularly with the fatality rate falling in double digit multiples across Europe. Why do we live with the acceptable risk of death with flu every year. Can you tell me at what rate Covid comes with an acceptable risk because we clearly take an acceptable risk with flu every single year.

As near to zero as possible, that is why nurses and doctors throughout the island are putting their lives on the line as we discsuss - while you just don't value life enough to make the effort or sacrifice.  Irish Lives Matter.

Nurses and doctors putting their lives on the line?

Do they not do that day in day out or did they just merely start doing it the past year?

Way to patronise our healthcare workers.

You see there is this thing called PPE which never ran short until this pandemic - and you think there is no difference in the way our doctors and nurses have been trying to save lives in the past 7 months?   You question if doctors and nurses are putting their lives on the line?  You just don't value life enough, or their lives enough, to make the effort and sacrifice.  Probably too worried about money.  It is your right to think that way but it my right to call you out on a discussion board for your morality and distain for fellow Irish citizens.  Irish Lives Matter.

Listen mate, I'm not the one belittling and patronising healthcare workers - that's you. They do it every day they go to work, they didn't just start a few months back like you alluded to. So maybe you should take your condescending and belittling remarks back about them?

[restorepride]

I never mentioned herd immunity. I'm for shielding the elderly, implementing the basic measures and trying to get on with things.

At present we have no end game. Lock down for 6 weeks, open up for 2 months and lock down again next March is not a logical, economical or proportionate strategy. The cure will do more damage than the disease.

your first paragraph is not based in reality, it is not possible to protect the vulnerable or shield the elderly and get on with things. We have seen that since the last lockdown as  we now have cases in numerous nursing homes and hospitals filling quickly.

i agree roling lockdowns arent the answer, the only answer to reducing numbers that i can see that worked so far is a lockdown. The question is what should we do differently, what can we do and how good are we are adhering to what we need to do when this lockdown is over to prevent what is happening now happening again.

your last sentence again is a joke and not basd in reality either but id like to know why you think that? Based on what we know so far.

What is based in reality?

The reality at the minute seems to be rolling lockdowns and if the data returns to us in a few months that the fatality rate of this virus is something like 0.4% and most of those who die from it are eldery and/or have underlying health conditions that have limited life expectancy- at what point do we say that  what we are doing is counter-productive?

What does it take for us to look at this differently? We are quite happy to allow seasonal flu overwhelm the health sector every year and take lives.

1. the flu is seasonal.. covid is not
2. the flu has a vaccine. covid does not
3. the flu does not overwhelm the health system.. despite lockdowns and restrictions covid clearly would overwhelm and has in some countries.

please stop comparing them.. they are not the same.

the reality is healthcare systems cannot cope if we went back to pre covid livesyles, it cannot cope with the level of restrictions and wfh that we have now. That is why we need a second lockdown imo.

what we do need to do is something that stops us from getting back to this position again. I dont know what that is.but i am.confident it is not herd immunity. My reason for this, is because despite restrictions etc. it has still got back in nursing homes which means letting it rip who cause way more people to die as we cannot silo vulnerable people.

can you tell me me other than rolling lockdowns what we should do?

1. The flu is seasonal - so why don't we go into seasonal lockdown?
2. The flu has a vaccine, uptake is at about 15-20%, vulnerable people get it, vulnerable people die from it. Healthy people get it, healthy people die from it.
3. The flu does overwhelm the health system

I think we should learn to live with it, particularly with the fatality rate falling in double digit multiples across Europe. Why do we live with the acceptable risk of death with flu every year. Can you tell me at what rate Covid comes with an acceptable risk because we clearly take an acceptable risk with flu every single year.

As near to zero as possible, that is why nurses and doctors throughout the island are putting their lives on the line as we discsuss - while you just don't value life enough to make the effort or sacrifice.  Irish Lives Matter.

Nurses and doctors putting their lives on the line?

Do they not do that day in day out or did they just merely start doing it the past year?

Way to patronise our healthcare workers.

You see there is this thing called PPE which never ran short until this pandemic - and you think there is no difference in the way our doctors and nurses have been trying to save lives in the past 7 months?   You question if doctors and nurses are putting their lives on the line?  You just don't value life enough, or their lives enough, to make the effort and sacrifice.  Probably too worried about money.  It is your right to think that way but it my right to call you out on a discussion board for your morality and distain for fellow Irish citizens.  Irish Lives Matter.

Listen mate, I'm not the one belittling and patronising healthcare workers - that's you. They do it every day they go to work, they didn't just start a few months back like you alluded to. So maybe you should take your condescending and belittling remarks back about them?
[/qu
I am not your mate - you will have a few less of them if they read your disgraceful posts.  You just don't value life enough, or the lives of our selfless, dedicated healthcare workers enough, to make the effort and sacrifice.  Probably too worried about money.  It is your right to think that way but it my right to call you out on a discussion board for your morality and distain for fellow Irish citizens.  Irish Lives Matter.

[restorepride]

Angelo - I am not your mate - you will have a few less of them if they read your disgraceful posts.  You just don't value life enough, or the lives of our selfless, dedicated healthcare workers enough, to make the effort and sacrifice.  Probably too worried about money.  It is your right to think that way but it my right to call you out on a discussion board for your morality and distain for fellow Irish citizens.  Irish Lives Matter.

[Angelo]

I am not your mate - you will have a few less of them if they read your disgraceful posts.  You just don't value life enough, or the lives of our selfless, dedicated healthcare workers enough, to make the effort and sacrifice.  Probably too worried about money.  It is your right to think that way but it my right to call you out on a discussion board for your morality and distain for fellow Irish citizens.  Irish Lives Matter.

My main worry is for people's health and wellbeing and I think lockdowns will have a much worse effect on society as whole than learning to live with Covid as an acceptable risk.

I don't have disdain for Irish people.

You seem to be just shouting illogical rambling now because you are unable to argue your points like an adult.

The more data that we are seeing being released about the virus should have people questioning our approach but when we have people with below average intelligence like yourself then that it's difficult for people to think about things sensibly and what the best balanced approach is.

Do you not accept that lockdown has huge societal and economic consequences? I keep asking this but a lot of you cowards are too afraid to actually address it? At what point does Covid have an acceptable risk?

[PadraicHenryPearse]

I never mentioned herd immunity. I'm for shielding the elderly, implementing the basic measures and trying to get on with things.

At present we have no end game. Lock down for 6 weeks, open up for 2 months and lock down again next March is not a logical, economical or proportionate strategy. The cure will do more damage than the disease.

your first paragraph is not based in reality, it is not possible to protect the vulnerable or shield the elderly and get on with things. We have seen that since the last lockdown as  we now have cases in numerous nursing homes and hospitals filling quickly.

i agree roling lockdowns arent the answer, the only answer to reducing numbers that i can see that worked so far is a lockdown. The question is what should we do differently, what can we do and how good are we are adhering to what we need to do when this lockdown is over to prevent what is happening now happening again.

your last sentence again is a joke and not basd in reality either but id like to know why you think that? Based on what we know so far.

What is based in reality?

The reality at the minute seems to be rolling lockdowns and if the data returns to us in a few months that the fatality rate of this virus is something like 0.4% and most of those who die from it are eldery and/or have underlying health conditions that have limited life expectancy- at what point do we say that  what we are doing is counter-productive?

What does it take for us to look at this differently? We are quite happy to allow seasonal flu overwhelm the health sector every year and take lives.

1. the flu is seasonal.. covid is not
2. the flu has a vaccine. covid does not
3. the flu does not overwhelm the health system.. despite lockdowns and restrictions covid clearly would overwhelm and has in some countries.

please stop comparing them.. they are not the same.

the reality is healthcare systems cannot cope if we went back to pre covid livesyles, it cannot cope with the level of restrictions and wfh that we have now. That is why we need a second lockdown imo.

what we do need to do is something that stops us from getting back to this position again. I dont know what that is.but i am.confident it is not herd immunity. My reason for this, is because despite restrictions etc. it has still got back in nursing homes which means letting it rip who cause way more people to die as we cannot silo vulnerable people.

can you tell me me other than rolling lockdowns what we should do?

1. The flu is seasonal - so why don't we go into seasonal lockdown?
2. The flu has a vaccine, uptake is at about 15-20%, vulnerable people get it, vulnerable people die from it. Healthy people get it, healthy people die from it.
3. The flu does overwhelm the health system

I think we should learn to live with it, particularly with the fatality rate falling in double digit multiples across Europe. Why do we live with the acceptable risk of death with flu every year. Can you tell me at what rate Covid comes with an acceptable risk because we clearly take an acceptable risk with flu every single year.

we have to live with it? great answer! how do we live with it...

you are not comparing like for like with covid and the flu, we live with alot of things that cause hospitalisations and dead amd there are alot of knowns about those things but we dont know enough about covid and what we do know shows it to be worst .

forget the falling fatality rate as it not reflective of what you are proposing which is living with the virus, it is as a result if all the measures that have been.taken to date including lockdowns

So we live with a lot of things that cause death and hospitalisations? We accept those risks? At what point do we accept Covid?

Forget the falling fatality rate?

Why forget the falling fatality, surely this is the one metric that actually matters?

What I am saying is that at what point do we accept that Covid is acceptable to live with?

You are completely ignoring the huge societal and economic problems that lockdowns and restrictions cause. This discussion is completely shelved, at what point do we say that the narrative has to switch from Covid.

loads of questions no answers!!

i dont know when we accept the risk of covid. At some point i hope we will and the risk will be minimal


yes, forget fatiltiy rate you are predicting as it is as a result of all the actions we have taken. you are suggestting we live our pre covid lifes so then we would have a fatal rate higher than now as a result. Your predicted rate or current rate would not be same if we take what i think you are proposing.

we dont know what the fatality rate would be but it was higher in march april may.

what you are saying... is asking another question, how about deal with what you are suggesting and the implications of it.. however i am still unclear of what you are actually suggesting as all you have done is say live with it (how do we do that) and ask questions.

i am aware of the socio economic factors which is why i  said we need to do something different after this lockdown to ensure we are not back in the same position again. i dont have the answer to what that is but imo it is not herd immunity which is what i think you are sugesting..you might confirm that is your approach?

[Angelo]

I never mentioned herd immunity. I'm for shielding the elderly, implementing the basic measures and trying to get on with things.

At present we have no end game. Lock down for 6 weeks, open up for 2 months and lock down again next March is not a logical, economical or proportionate strategy. The cure will do more damage than the disease.

your first paragraph is not based in reality, it is not possible to protect the vulnerable or shield the elderly and get on with things. We have seen that since the last lockdown as  we now have cases in numerous nursing homes and hospitals filling quickly.

i agree roling lockdowns arent the answer, the only answer to reducing numbers that i can see that worked so far is a lockdown. The question is what should we do differently, what can we do and how good are we are adhering to what we need to do when this lockdown is over to prevent what is happening now happening again.

your last sentence again is a joke and not basd in reality either but id like to know why you think that? Based on what we know so far.

What is based in reality?

The reality at the minute seems to be rolling lockdowns and if the data returns to us in a few months that the fatality rate of this virus is something like 0.4% and most of those who die from it are eldery and/or have underlying health conditions that have limited life expectancy- at what point do we say that  what we are doing is counter-productive?

What does it take for us to look at this differently? We are quite happy to allow seasonal flu overwhelm the health sector every year and take lives.

1. the flu is seasonal.. covid is not
2. the flu has a vaccine. covid does not
3. the flu does not overwhelm the health system.. despite lockdowns and restrictions covid clearly would overwhelm and has in some countries.

please stop comparing them.. they are not the same.

the reality is healthcare systems cannot cope if we went back to pre covid livesyles, it cannot cope with the level of restrictions and wfh that we have now. That is why we need a second lockdown imo.

what we do need to do is something that stops us from getting back to this position again. I dont know what that is.but i am.confident it is not herd immunity. My reason for this, is because despite restrictions etc. it has still got back in nursing homes which means letting it rip who cause way more people to die as we cannot silo vulnerable people.

can you tell me me other than rolling lockdowns what we should do?

1. The flu is seasonal - so why don't we go into seasonal lockdown?
2. The flu has a vaccine, uptake is at about 15-20%, vulnerable people get it, vulnerable people die from it. Healthy people get it, healthy people die from it.
3. The flu does overwhelm the health system

I think we should learn to live with it, particularly with the fatality rate falling in double digit multiples across Europe. Why do we live with the acceptable risk of death with flu every year. Can you tell me at what rate Covid comes with an acceptable risk because we clearly take an acceptable risk with flu every single year.

we have to live with it? great answer! how do we live with it...

you are not comparing like for like with covid and the flu, we live with alot of things that cause hospitalisations and dead amd there are alot of knowns about those things but we dont know enough about covid and what we do know shows it to be worst .

forget the falling fatality rate as it not reflective of what you are proposing which is living with the virus, it is as a result if all the measures that have been.taken to date including lockdowns

So we live with a lot of things that cause death and hospitalisations? We accept those risks? At what point do we accept Covid?

Forget the falling fatality rate?

Why forget the falling fatality, surely this is the one metric that actually matters?

What I am saying is that at what point do we accept that Covid is acceptable to live with?

You are completely ignoring the huge societal and economic problems that lockdowns and restrictions cause. This discussion is completely shelved, at what point do we say that the narrative has to switch from Covid.

loads of questions no answers!!

i dont know when we accept the risk of covid. At some point i hope we will and the risk will be minimal


yes, forget fatiltiy rate you are predicting as it is as a result of all the actions we have taken. you are suggestting we live our pre covid lifes so then we would have a fatal rate higher than now as a result. Your predicted rate or current rate would not be same if we take what i think you are proposing.

we dont know what the fatality rate would be but it was higher in march april may.

what you are saying... is asking another question, how about deal with what you are suggesting and the implications of it.. however i am still unclear of what you are actually suggesting as all you have done is say live with it (how do we do that) and ask questions.

i am aware of the socio economic factors which is why i  said we need to do something different after this lockdown to ensure we are not back in the same position again. i dont have the answer to what that is but imo it is not herd immunity which is what i think you are sugesting..you might confirm that is your approach?

Excatly, I've asked a lot of questions and you've been too much of a chicken to address them. Why is that?

We are in a second lockdown now, what difference is going to stop a third or fourth?

Do something different. I agree - we need to do something different to lockdowns.

You look across Europe now, you delve deeper into the figures - there are some interesting results.

In the UK the average age of Covid deaths was 82.4. The median age was higher than non-covid deaths.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/average-age-of-coronavirus-fatalities-is-82-pcwqrzdzz

At what point do we say that all the consequences of the way we are dealing with this issue far outweigh alternative options.

Is this not a complete consequence of complete lack of investment in providing proper healthcare from successive governments for decades. For fit and healthy people, Covid has such a remote chance of killing you, it probably equates to getting in to your and going on a 50 mile round trip and dying.

[PadraicHenryPearse]

I never mentioned herd immunity. I'm for shielding the elderly, implementing the basic measures and trying to get on with things.

At present we have no end game. Lock down for 6 weeks, open up for 2 months and lock down again next March is not a logical, economical or proportionate strategy. The cure will do more damage than the disease.

your first paragraph is not based in reality, it is not possible to protect the vulnerable or shield the elderly and get on with things. We have seen that since the last lockdown as  we now have cases in numerous nursing homes and hospitals filling quickly.

i agree roling lockdowns arent the answer, the only answer to reducing numbers that i can see that worked so far is a lockdown. The question is what should we do differently, what can we do and how good are we are adhering to what we need to do when this lockdown is over to prevent what is happening now happening again.

your last sentence again is a joke and not basd in reality either but id like to know why you think that? Based on what we know so far.

What is based in reality?

The reality at the minute seems to be rolling lockdowns and if the data returns to us in a few months that the fatality rate of this virus is something like 0.4% and most of those who die from it are eldery and/or have underlying health conditions that have limited life expectancy- at what point do we say that  what we are doing is counter-productive?

What does it take for us to look at this differently? We are quite happy to allow seasonal flu overwhelm the health sector every year and take lives.

1. the flu is seasonal.. covid is not
2. the flu has a vaccine. covid does not
3. the flu does not overwhelm the health system.. despite lockdowns and restrictions covid clearly would overwhelm and has in some countries.

please stop comparing them.. they are not the same.

the reality is healthcare systems cannot cope if we went back to pre covid livesyles, it cannot cope with the level of restrictions and wfh that we have now. That is why we need a second lockdown imo.

what we do need to do is something that stops us from getting back to this position again. I dont know what that is.but i am.confident it is not herd immunity. My reason for this, is because despite restrictions etc. it has still got back in nursing homes which means letting it rip who cause way more people to die as we cannot silo vulnerable people.

can you tell me me other than rolling lockdowns what we should do?

1. The flu is seasonal - so why don't we go into seasonal lockdown?
2. The flu has a vaccine, uptake is at about 15-20%, vulnerable people get it, vulnerable people die from it. Healthy people get it, healthy people die from it.
3. The flu does overwhelm the health system

I think we should learn to live with it, particularly with the fatality rate falling in double digit multiples across Europe. Why do we live with the acceptable risk of death with flu every year. Can you tell me at what rate Covid comes with an acceptable risk because we clearly take an acceptable risk with flu every single year.

we have to live with it? great answer! how do we live with it...

you are not comparing like for like with covid and the flu, we live with alot of things that cause hospitalisations and dead amd there are alot of knowns about those things but we dont know enough about covid and what we do know shows it to be worst .

forget the falling fatality rate as it not reflective of what you are proposing which is living with the virus, it is as a result if all the measures that have been.taken to date including lockdowns

So we live with a lot of things that cause death and hospitalisations? We accept those risks? At what point do we accept Covid?

Forget the falling fatality rate?

Why forget the falling fatality, surely this is the one metric that actually matters?

What I am saying is that at what point do we accept that Covid is acceptable to live with?

You are completely ignoring the huge societal and economic problems that lockdowns and restrictions cause. This discussion is completely shelved, at what point do we say that the narrative has to switch from Covid.

loads of questions no answers!!

i dont know when we accept the risk of covid. At some point i hope we will and the risk will be minimal


yes, forget fatiltiy rate you are predicting as it is as a result of all the actions we have taken. you are suggestting we live our pre covid lifes so then we would have a fatal rate higher than now as a result. Your predicted rate or current rate would not be same if we take what i think you are proposing.

we dont know what the fatality rate would be but it was higher in march april may.

what you are saying... is asking another question, how about deal with what you are suggesting and the implications of it.. however i am still unclear of what you are actually suggesting as all you have done is say live with it (how do we do that) and ask questions.

i am aware of the socio economic factors which is why i  said we need to do something different after this lockdown to ensure we are not back in the same position again. i dont have the answer to what that is but imo it is not herd immunity which is what i think you are sugesting..you might confirm that is your approach?

Excatly, I've asked a lot of questions and you've been too much of a chicken to address them. Why is that?

We are in a second lockdown now, what difference is going to stop a third or fourth?

Do something different. I agree - we need to do something different to lockdowns.

You look across Europe now, you delve deeper into the figures - there are some interesting results.

In the UK the average age of Covid deaths was 82.4. The median age was higher than non-covid deaths.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/average-age-of-coronavirus-fatalities-is-82-pcwqrzdzz

At what point do we say that all the consequences of the way we are dealing with this issue far outweigh alternative options.

Is this not a complete consequence of complete lack of investment in providing proper healthcare from successive governments for decades. For fit and healthy people, Covid has such a remote chance of killing you, it probably equates to getting in to your and going on a 50 mile round trip and dying.

ill answer any question you ask just tell me what you are suggesting instead of a lockdown. i cannot answer your questions without knowing what your approach is.. if i know your approach i believe i can tell you why rolling lockdowns is better than it even though i dont believe rolling lockdowns is an answer.

which one? you.mention an alternative can you outline the alternative or confirm its herd imunity. its a bit rich calling me a chicken when you avoid.my questions.

1. rolling lockdowns
2. herd immunity
3. option 3?? please explain.

the lack of investment in healthcare is an issue but a moot point as we have to live with the reality of what we have.

[restorepride]

I am not your mate - you will have a few less of them if they read your disgraceful posts.  You just don't value life enough, or the lives of our selfless, dedicated healthcare workers enough, to make the effort and sacrifice.  Probably too worried about money.  It is your right to think that way but it my right to call you out on a discussion board for your morality and distain for fellow Irish citizens.  Irish Lives Matter.

My main worry is for people's health and wellbeing and I think lockdowns will have a much worse effect on society as whole than learning to live with Covid as an acceptable risk.

I don't have disdain for Irish people.

You seem to be just shouting illogical rambling now because you are unable to argue your points like an adult.

The more data that we are seeing being released about the virus should have people questioning our approach but when we have people with below average intelligence like yourself then that it's difficult for people to think about things sensibly and what the best balanced approach is.

Do you not accept that lockdown has huge societal and economic consequences? I keep asking this but a lot of you cowards are too afraid to actually address it? At what point does Covid have an acceptable risk?

Angelo starts to crack.  The scientific and economic answer is when the R number is under 1 but since you don't value the current scientific contribution, that is wasted on you.  Cowards - really?   A coward could be someone, as you have admitted to in an earlier post, who would visit an ill loved one even though that loved one could die as a result of your visit.  That is a coward, Angelo - look in the mirror. It will probably crack as well.  Below average intelligence?!   Told you he was cracking!!!  What a sad, lonely man you must be, Angelo.  Anyhow, you have been given enough oxygen at this point - hope no-one on here will need oxygen when Angelo is in charge of health because if you are over 80 ......?!!  Irish Lives Matter.  Stay safe folks and thanks to those who continue to make the hard sacrifices.

[restorepride]

Angelo starts to crack.  The scientific and economic answer is when the R number is under 1 but since you don't value the current scientific contribution, that is wasted on you.  Cowards - really?   A coward could be someone, as you have admitted to in an earlier post, who would visit an ill loved one even though that loved one could die as a result of your visit.  That is a coward, Angelo - look in the mirror. It will probably crack as well.  Below average intelligence?!   Told you he was cracking!!!  What a sad, lonely man you must be, Angelo.  Anyhow, you have been given enough oxygen at this point - hope no-one on here will need oxygen when Angelo is in charge of health because if you are over 80 ......?!!  Irish Lives Matter.  Stay safe folks and thanks to those who continue to make the hard sacrifices.