China Coronavirus

[Taylor]

Hope all goes ok Fear

[Ball Hopper]

Hoping for a speedy recovery to Clan na bhFear.

[bennydorano]

Looks like national level 3  no level 5 for now

The old 'c**k / Nose' tactic played to a Tee.

[Angelo]

There's two ways of looking at it. We are 7/8 months into this now, messaging from governments on both sides of the border has been poor, people are getting frustrated and agitated about how slow moving things are. Science looks every bit as clueless as they did at the start, they have yet to establish any real definitive idea on how our immunity is to it, how it is spread, what % of people are asymptomatic.

Governments have reacted poorly, we are now in the second wave and how have we improved in hospital capacity, testing and other resources from the start?

At the end of the day, there is one metric that will judge Covid, deaths. And at the minute the while the cases seem to be on the rise, deaths don't seem to be following that trend. That is probably in large down to the fact it's a younger/healthier demographic picking it up. Can you blame youngsters, we all look back at our youth and the freedom with it, we never had to live those years in a pandemic. After 7 or 8 months they are now saying screw it, it's not good but you can understand it.

The real issue is that science is being shown up here, it is chasing its tail around the place and still unable to give clear answers on basic aspects of the virus - immunity, anitbodies, % of asymptomatic etc.

When it turns out that the smartest kid in the class is a dunce then we are in trouble.

There are decent answers to all these questions if you could be bothered look for them.

You'll be waiting a while for your definitive answers, though. That's not really how it works.

There are conflicting answers to all of these which is the problem.

They don't have the slightest clue.

[sid waddell]

if the government are going to do what the media are saying they're going to do and reject NPHET's advice I think it's a very bad call

Huge long term consequences for compliance to whatever restrictions are in place at any particular time

A seminal moment

The crackpots have seriously influenced public debate for the worse

Sure you might as well put Generic Ultra-Confident But Clueless Blowhard Airline Executive in charge of policy now

That'll keep the contrarians happy

But it won't be good for public health and the health system

[armaghniac]

if the government are going to do what the media are saying they're going to do and reject NPHET's advice I think it's a very bad call

I's say they haven't so much rejected it as postponed it, despite the headlines. More a case of moving up through the gears. The NPHET meeting last Thursday didn't have this so the Sunday recommendation was a bit a step change.

In a few days the government will say "we warned you, but the numbers are still going up" and go for level 4,  in many places at least.

Sure you might as well put Generic Ultra-Confident But Clueless Blowhard Airline Executive in charge of policy now

Actually, that wouldn't be such a bad idea. If aforesaid person was in charge, then people would be wearing masks and if they don't like they could get out.

[sid waddell]

if the government are going to do what the media are saying they're going to do and reject NPHET's advice I think it's a very bad call

I's say they haven't so much rejected it as postponed it, despite the headlines. More a case of moving up through the gears. The NPHET meeting last Thursday didn't have this so the Sunday recommendation was a bit a step change.

In a few days the government will say "we warned you, but the numbers are still going up" and go for level 4,  in many places at least.

Sure you might as well put Generic Ultra-Confident But Clueless Blowhard Airline Executive in charge of policy now

Actually, that wouldn't be such a bad idea. If aforesaid person was in charge, then people would be wearing masks and if they don't like they could get out.

It seems obvious to me it's a postponement

But sure that's what the Brits did in March, you're best off acting sooner rather than later

Maybe there's a psychological aspect to it, ie. deliberately let the numbers go up to scare people, but not so far up that it overwhelms the health service

But I don't actually think they're that machiavelian

And by doing that you dice with things spiralling out of control

Putting the fire out when you have the chance is better than letting it rage a bit more before acting

[thewobbler]

if the government are going to do what the media are saying they're going to do and reject NPHET's advice I think it's a very bad call

I's say they haven't so much rejected it as postponed it, despite the headlines. More a case of moving up through the gears. The NPHET meeting last Thursday didn't have this so the Sunday recommendation was a bit a step change.

In a few days the government will say "we warned you, but the numbers are still going up" and go for level 4,  in many places at least.

Sure you might as well put Generic Ultra-Confident But Clueless Blowhard Airline Executive in charge of policy now

Actually, that wouldn't be such a bad idea. If aforesaid person was in charge, then people would be wearing masks and if they don't like they could get out.

It seems obvious to me it's a postponement

But sure that's what the Brits did in March, you're best off acting sooner rather than later

Maybe there's a psychological aspect to it, ie. deliberately let the numbers go up to scare people, but not so far up that it overwhelms the health service

But I don't actually think they're that machiavelian

And by doing that you dice with things spiralling out of control

Putting the fire out when you have the chance is better than letting it rage a bit more before acting

Would you maybe agree though that there's a better chance of the fire being allowed to be put out, when people are scared of getting burnt?

Level 5 is only a theoretical level 5  until the majority of the population get onboard with it. Sadly, until there's a massive spike in deaths somewhere (it doesn't have to be Ireland, but close enough to home to make it seem very real), a chunky percentage of the population will ignore it. Not fight it per se, but definitely pay lip service to it.

I'd also think that much as everyone wants to keep schools open, the right time to level 5 it is with an extended school break. It will just be easier to comprehend and get on board with.

[Angelo]

Inadequate health services and capacity seems to be the biggest crisis rather than the virus itself.

[trileacman]

Varadker confirming on Claire Byrne that no-one in government or Npet is proposing a Zero COVID policy. "Have to learn t live with the virus".

[sid waddell]

if the government are going to do what the media are saying they're going to do and reject NPHET's advice I think it's a very bad call

I's say they haven't so much rejected it as postponed it, despite the headlines. More a case of moving up through the gears. The NPHET meeting last Thursday didn't have this so the Sunday recommendation was a bit a step change.

In a few days the government will say "we warned you, but the numbers are still going up" and go for level 4,  in many places at least.

Sure you might as well put Generic Ultra-Confident But Clueless Blowhard Airline Executive in charge of policy now

Actually, that wouldn't be such a bad idea. If aforesaid person was in charge, then people would be wearing masks and if they don't like they could get out.

It seems obvious to me it's a postponement

But sure that's what the Brits did in March, you're best off acting sooner rather than later

Maybe there's a psychological aspect to it, ie. deliberately let the numbers go up to scare people, but not so far up that it overwhelms the health service

But I don't actually think they're that machiavelian

And by doing that you dice with things spiralling out of control

Putting the fire out when you have the chance is better than letting it rage a bit more before acting

Would you maybe agree though that there's a better chance of the fire being allowed to be put out, when people are scared of getting burnt?

Level 5 is only a theoretical level 5  until the majority of the population get onboard with it. Sadly, until there's a massive spike in deaths somewhere (it doesn't have to be Ireland, but close enough to home to make it seem very real), a chunky percentage of the population will ignore it. Not fight it per se, but definitely pay lip service to it.

I'd also think that much as everyone wants to keep schools open, the right time to level 5 it is with an extended school break. It will just be easier to comprehend and get on board with.

This is possible, but it's also possible the fire will continue to burn underneath the floorboards and by the time people decide they want out, the fire could be out of control

In my view the lockdown is likely to be longer and harder the longer you put it off, we have the lesson of last March for this

Public debate has turned into an almost impenetrable barrage of conflicting messages the last few months and especially the last few weeks as RTE and the Irish Times have platformed a series of contrarians who in truth have had very weak arguments, people like Ciara Kelly and Niall Boylan are driving a large section of visible public opinion (as opposed to what I believe is still a large, largely silent majority) in what in my view is a very worrying direction

The government so publicly going against Neffit now only contributes even more to that

But I don't think the data presents us with a hugely conflicting picture, it's going in one direction

I think if this doesn't work, and I expect it probably won't, I think in a best case scenario it will keep things ticking along at a certain level which is already too high and which means restrictions cannot be relaxed, it will lead to a very deep seated distrust and cynicism towards any government messaging, which would be very unfortunate

I think part of the problem also is that the public messaging since last March suggested or at least hinted that restrictions could be a reasonably short term thing

It was a sort of "the war will be over by Christmas" idea

But that wasn't the case and even last March it always seemed very unlikely that it would be

This is likely a multi-year job

People are going to have to reconcile themselves to this likelihood or at least the strong possibility of such

The zero Covid strategy still seems worthy of a serious discussion

At least government need to come out and state very clearly why it is not possible if they believe it's not possible

[armaghniac]

It was a sort of "the war will be over by Christmas" idea

No, but there can be an objective not to have overflowing hospitals and old people unable to visit the relatives at Christmas, and to achieve that we have to put the squeeze on now.

[Milltown Row2]

If we are in a second wave, will there be a third and fourth wave?

[armaghniac]

If we are in a second wave, will there be a third and fourth wave?

Probably not a fourth one.

[trileacman]

if the government are going to do what the media are saying they're going to do and reject NPHET's advice I think it's a very bad call

I's say they haven't so much rejected it as postponed it, despite the headlines. More a case of moving up through the gears. The NPHET meeting last Thursday didn't have this so the Sunday recommendation was a bit a step change.

In a few days the government will say "we warned you, but the numbers are still going up" and go for level 4,  in many places at least.

Sure you might as well put Generic Ultra-Confident But Clueless Blowhard Airline Executive in charge of policy now

Actually, that wouldn't be such a bad idea. If aforesaid person was in charge, then people would be wearing masks and if they don't like they could get out.

It seems obvious to me it's a postponement

But sure that's what the Brits did in March, you're best off acting sooner rather than later

Maybe there's a psychological aspect to it, ie. deliberately let the numbers go up to scare people, but not so far up that it overwhelms the health service

But I don't actually think they're that machiavelian

And by doing that you dice with things spiralling out of control

Putting the fire out when you have the chance is better than letting it rage a bit more before acting

Would you maybe agree though that there's a better chance of the fire being allowed to be put out, when people are scared of getting burnt?

Level 5 is only a theoretical level 5  until the majority of the population get onboard with it. Sadly, until there's a massive spike in deaths somewhere (it doesn't have to be Ireland, but close enough to home to make it seem very real), a chunky percentage of the population will ignore it. Not fight it per se, but definitely pay lip service to it.

I'd also think that much as everyone wants to keep schools open, the right time to level 5 it is with an extended school break. It will just be easier to comprehend and get on board with.

This is possible, but it's also possible the fire will continue to burn underneath the floorboards and by the time people decide they want out, the fire could be out of control

In my view the lockdown is likely to be longer and harder the longer you put it off, we have the lesson of last March for this

Public debate has turned into an almost impenetrable barrage of conflicting messages the last few months and especially the last few weeks as RTE and the Irish Times have platformed a series of contrarians who in truth have had very weak arguments, people like Ciara Kelly and Niall Boylan are driving a large section of visible public opinion (as opposed to what I believe is still a large, largely silent majority) in what in my view is a very worrying direction

The government so publicly going against Neffit now only contributes even more to that

But I don't think the data presents us with a hugely conflicting picture, it's going in one direction

I think if this doesn't work, and I expect it probably won't, I think in a best case scenario it will keep things ticking along at a certain level which is already too high and which means restrictions cannot be relaxed, it will lead to a very deep seated distrust and cynicism towards any government messaging, which would be very unfortunate

I think part of the problem also is that the public messaging since last March suggested or at least hinted that restrictions could be a reasonably short term thing

It was a sort of "the war will be over by Christmas" idea

But that wasn't the case and even last March it always seemed very unlikely that it would be

This is likely a multi-year job

People are going to have to reconcile themselves to this likelihood or at least the strong possibility of such

The zero Covid strategy still seems worthy of a serious discussion

At least government need to come out and state very clearly why it is not possible if they believe it's not possible

It seems the Zero COVID debate is dead. You can't keep flogging a dead horse.