# Ireland to move to Level 3 from 1st December



## odyssey06

The Taoiseach said *the country will move to Level 3 from 1 December*, with some modifications.


*From next Tuesday 1 December*, retailers, hairdressers, gyms, libraries, galleries and cinemas will reopen. People will be permitted to use tennis courts and golf courses, and religious services will also be allowed to resume.
*From Friday 4 December*, restaurants and pubs with a kitchen on-site are to reopen, but with additional restrictions than before. Hotels will also be able to open to indoor diners. Pubs that only serve alcohol will not be permitted to reopen before Christmas, but will be allowed to serve takeaway drinks.
*From Friday 18 December*, restrictions on household visits will be lifted from a ban on household visits, to allow two households to visit a third. Inter-county travel will also be permitted from this date, until 6 January.
*From 7 January*, the measures put in place prior to 18 of December will apply, subject to ongoing review of the trajectory of the virus.


People are advised to continue to work from home unless it is absolutely necessary they attend in person. The Taoiseach said it has further been agreed that the use of facemasks is now recommended in crowded workplaces, places of worship and in busy or crowded outdoor spaces where there is significant congregation.









						Confirmed: Shops, restaurants and some pubs reopen next week, green light for household visits at Christmas
					

Taoiseach Micheál Martin made the announcement this evening.




					www.thejournal.ie


----------



## odyssey06

Lower level detail from RTE









						All you need to know about the easing of restrictions
					

The Government has announced an easing of the Covid-19 restrictions ahead of Christmas, after six weeks at Level 5, the highest level in the framework for dealing with the virus.




					www.rte.ie


----------



## Leper

Opportunity lost - Wet pubs allowed to serve take away alcohol and we haven't learned from recent outdoor congregations of groups. Restaurants to be allowed some indoor dining - realistically unpoliced. Gastro pubs to be allowed to open provided the food is prepared within - but in a "controlled environment." I wonder why I don't trust most publicans and most restauranteurs?

Too much trust being placed on the vaccines roll-out but the virus will not disappear overnight. The government has just handed Covid-19 a platform to increase it's dreadful toll of death and infection. And the controlled environments of pubs and restaurants are going to save us? Not a chance! We'll be staying indoors, self distancing and wearing masks for a long time yet to come. 

The hope was when the last restrictions were imposed was to reduce the death rate, the daily infections to under 50 (currently 200+ and lowest for some time, but nowhere near <50). Our R number was to be reduced to less than 0.5 and we're not near that.


----------



## Purple

Leper said:


> Opportunity lost - Wet pubs allowed to serve take away alcohol and we haven't learned from recent outdoor congregations of groups. Restaurants to be allowed some indoor dining - realistically unpoliced. Gastro pubs to be allowed to open provided the food is prepared within - but in a "controlled environment." I wonder why I don't trust most publicans and most restauranteurs?
> 
> Too much trust being placed on the vaccines roll-out but the virus will not disappear overnight. The government has just handed Covid-19 a platform to increase it's dreadful toll of death and infection. And the controlled environments of pubs and restaurants are going to save us? Not a chance! We'll be staying indoors, self distancing and wearing masks for a long time yet to come.
> 
> The hope was when the last restrictions were imposed was to reduce the death rate, the daily infections to under 50 (currently 200+ and lowest for some time, but nowhere near <50). Our R number was to be reduced to less than 0.5 and we're not near that.


The level 5 restrictions weren't working. People were visiting each other in their homes. That is what is causing the infection rate to remain high. Drinking in the street will have limited impact on infection rates as it is, by its nature, a well ventilated area.
If level 5 restrictions were kept we'd just get more household gatherings and more infections anyway.


----------



## odyssey06

Schools are still open, far more retail open than previously - even if it is just click+collect, you have staff close contacting.
I didn't think it was realistic to get the case count and R number down that low given there are still so many people interacting on a daily basis.

I don't think there's any confidence from NPHET or government that the regulations in 'pint' pubs would be policed effectively.
Sure in Temple Bar, but not country wide. And they don't want to give a green light which would have more people out and about.
But yes, that will displace things to people's houses.


----------



## Leper

Purple said:


> The level 5 restrictions weren't working. People were visiting each other in their homes. That is what is causing the infection rate to remain high. Drinking in the street will have limited impact on infection rates as it is, by its nature, a well ventilated area.
> If level 5 restrictions were kept we'd just get more household gatherings and more infections anyway.



I agree, the Level 5 restrictions were short of the mark. Therefore, we should have remained at Level 5 and make them work.  Many people have become too relaxed having battled the situation since March. We're not hearing enough about New Zealand and Australia where the battle has got better results. We've come a long way and at this late stage it appears we're caving in to commercial screaming.


----------



## Leo

Leper said:


> Too much trust being placed on the vaccines roll-out but the virus will not disappear overnight.



I doubt any of the changes were influenced by recent vaccine news. We won't have sufficient quantities to make any sort of difference until some time next year.


----------



## joe sod

Leper said:


> I agree, the Level 5 restrictions were short of the mark. Therefore, we should have remained at Level 5 and make them work.


There is the enormous cost of level 5, the economic cost, Pascal Donohue said it cost at least an extra billion euros on top of the costs of the level 3 restrictions. He also gave a startling statistic that on the night of going back into level 5, the domestic violence helpline reported a doubling in the number of calls they received. When you close everything down like that you also imprison people in intolerable situations where previously they had some escape valves.


----------



## Leper

joe sod said:


> There is the enormous cost of level 5, the economic cost, Pascal Donohue said it cost at least an extra billion euros on top of the costs of the level 3 restrictions.


Yep, Like I said, it was a decision based on commerce.


----------



## odyssey06

joe sod said:


> There is the enormous cost of level 5, the economic cost, Pascal Donohue said it cost at least an extra billion euros on top of the costs of the level 3 restrictions. He also gave a startling statistic that on the night of going back into level 5, the domestic violence helpline reported a doubling in the number of calls they received. When you close everything down like that you also imprison people in intolerable situations where previously they had some escape valves.



Something must have been seriously dysfunctional in the situations to erupt like that, that people needed escape valves?
It sounds more like a bomb waiting to go off than one planted by the lockdown.

And many other crimes dropped during the previous lockdown, including crimes against the person overall. 
We don't have stats for the current one, but we could expect some sort of drop there again.

So the whole area of secondary effects is messy and complicated and has positives and negatives.
Donohue is the Minister for Finance, he should speak from that remit.


----------



## odyssey06

Leper said:


> I agree, the Level 5 restrictions were short of the mark. Therefore, we should have remained at Level 5 and make them work.  Many people have become too relaxed having battled the situation since March. We're not hearing enough about New Zealand and Australia where the battle has got better results. We've come a long way and at this late stage it appears we're caving in to commercial screaming.



Australia and New Zealand and Iceland also have real travel quarantine restrictions. Their approach made sense for them but realistically it's not going to happen here because of our land border with the North and EU membership.

You can have open borders or open businesses \ society but not both, or it is only a matter of time before hospitals are overwhelmed.
Even if you had twice the ICU capacity, you would just be buying more time before the case count gets too high.

I don't think we can sustain Level 5 economically indefinitely or even until vaccines arrive.
More practicable would be a harder version of level 3 with real enforcement of the mandatory measures with 'circuit breaker' Level 5 if needed. 
And by real enforcement I don't mean tailbacks from garda checkpoints looking for motor tax or turning a blind eye on county final day.
And also need to get tougher with businesses bringing in staff who could WFH.


----------



## Purple

odyssey06 said:


> Something must have been seriously dysfunctional in the situations to erupt like that, that people needed escape valves?
> It sounds more like a bomb waiting to go off than one planted by the lockdown.
> 
> And many other crimes dropped during the previous lockdown, including crimes against the person overall.
> We don't have stats for the current one, but we could expect some sort of drop there again.
> 
> So the whole area of secondary effects is messy and complicated and has positives and negatives.
> Donohue is the Minister for Finance, he should speak from that remit.


I've great regard and respect for Dascal Donohue. He is considered and measured in what he says and what he does. He is by far the best minister in this or any recent government. I listen to whatever he says as it's always worth listening to.

Those in or close to high risk groups are understandably prioritising actions that act to reduce the direct impact of Covid19. Those who own or work in retail point out that there have only been 25 cases of community infection from shops. Those who work in cinemas point out that there hasn't been a single case traced to a cinema anywhere in the world. Those who work in addiction services point out the impact that lockdowns have on addicts. Those who work in mental health services point out the impact that lockdowns have on those who suffer from mental health issues. Those who work in domestic abuse services point out the impact that lockdowns have on those who suffer from domestic abuse. Those who work in international development point out the deaths and suffering that the collapse in international trade has had on the most vulnerable in the world. Every rational voice should be heard.

I've long been of the view that as a cohort pensioners are the most selfish and hyopic group in Irish society. This crisis has done nothing to change that opinion.


----------



## Purple

odyssey06 said:


> Even if you had twice the ICU capacity, you would just be buying more time before the case count gets too high.


See that's at the heart of this and, without wishing to sound like a broken record, why has one of the most highly funded and well resourced healthcare systems in the world utterly failed to sufficiently increase its ICU capacity in the last 9 months?


----------



## SGWidow

Purple said:


> The level 5 restrictions weren't working.



Firstly, they were working not just effectively enough

Secondly, why were they not working to the hoped-for extent? My view is that sufficient numbers of people were disrespecting the guidelines. The key here is compliance.

It seems to me that a substantial cohort is not respecting the guidelines. There is a house near me, for example, where students from Trinity are, on a couple of nights a week, congregating in serious numbers.


----------



## Purple

SGWidow said:


> Firstly, they were working not just effectively enough
> 
> Secondly, why were they not working to the hoped-for extent? My view is that sufficient numbers of people were disrespecting the guidelines. The key here is compliance.
> 
> It seems to me that a substantial cohort is not respecting the guidelines. There is a house near me, for example, where students from Trinity are, on a couple of nights a week, congregating in serious numbers.


Exactly. The government governs with the consent of the people. For public health guidelines, or laws, to work they require the buy in of the people. When small business owners see their life's work turn to dust because the it is easier for Gardai to keep them closed than it is to stop house parties, despite house parties being a much bigger cause of infection, that small business owner can legitimately question the validity of, and the justice in, the actions of the State.


----------



## SGWidow

That's fair comment, Purple

Interestingly, what we seem to be getting at in this thread, is debating an earlier thread that I started titled "are we all in this together?"

The truth is that the real life impact on different cohorts is substantially different. These differing impacts mean that their interests are simply not aligned.


----------



## odyssey06

Purple said:


> See that's at the heart of this and, without wishing to sound like a broken record, why has one of the most highly funded and well resourced healthcare systems in the world utterly failed to sufficiently increase its ICU capacity in the last 9 months?



Depends what you mean by heart of the matter...

These restrictions and lockdowns are happening all across Europe, even in countries with significantly higher ICU capacity than we have. 
If you let the virus run unchecked, no amount of ICU capacity will be enough.
More ICU capacity buys you more time at say Level 2 v 3 or Level 3 v 5.
Other countries have stopped many other hospital services in this phase, we did not. That was another reason for the restrictions.


----------



## joe sod

Purple said:


> Exactly. The government governs with the consent of the people. For public health guidelines, or laws, to work they require the buy in of the people. When small business owners see their life's work turn to dust because the it is easier for Gardai to keep them closed than it is to stop house parties, despite house parties being a much bigger cause of infection, that small business owner can legitimately question the validity of, and the justice in, the actions of the State.


It's now a seriously neglected demographic, the small business owner, there is nobody at the cabinet now that voices their concerns anymore especially since this new government, most of the cabinet is under 45, urban, predominantly from the public sector in work experiences. It is noticeable how powerless the publicans are now, yes maybe they had too much say in the past but we are going from one extreme to the other, it is the varadkarisation of Irish politics that is the predominant power now


----------



## Purple

joe sod said:


> It's now a seriously neglected demographic, the small business owner, there is nobody at the cabinet now that voices their concerns anymore especially since this new government, most of the cabinet is under 45, urban, predominantly from the public sector in work experiences. It is noticeable how powerless the publicans are now, yes maybe they had too much say in the past but we are going from one extreme to the other, it is the varadkarisation of Irish politics that is the predominant power now


I find it strange that many of the same people who say that politicians are overpaid also lament the lack of representation from the private sector. Teachers and Lawyers become politician s because they can walk back into their old job if they lose their seat. That's why there are so many of them in the Dail.


----------



## Purple

odyssey06 said:


> Depends what you mean by heart of the matter...
> 
> These restrictions and lockdowns are happening all across Europe, even in countries with significantly higher ICU capacity than we have.
> If you let the virus run unchecked, no amount of ICU capacity will be enough.
> More ICU capacity buys you more time at say Level 2 v 3 or Level 3 v 5.
> Other countries have stopped many other hospital services in this phase, we did not. That was another reason for the restrictions.


True but very few countries spend so much on their healthcare system and when adjusted for demographics only Luxemburg spends more than us. We should be top of the league, not in the middle. We didn't stop as many hospital services as some others because we had  longer and deeper lockdowns.


----------



## Leper

Purple said:


> I find it strange that many of the same people who say that politicians are overpaid also lament the lack of representation from the private sector. Teachers and Lawyers become politician s because they can walk back into their old job if they lose their seat. That's why there are so many of them in the Dail.


. . . . wrong again Purple! - It's their pensions entitlements (note pensions not pension).


----------



## Purple

Leper said:


> . . . . wrong again Purple! - It's their pensions entitlements (note pensions not pension).


If their pension(s) entitlement was that good then more people from the real economy would be politicians.
The pensions are in line with senior civil servants so yes, they are excellent but they can't claim them until they are in their 50's so if someone loses their seat in their 30's they could have no income for 20 years. That's why so many people from the State sector and to a lesser extent the self employed become TD's


----------



## SGWidow

Purple said:


> The pensions are in line with senior civil servants....



Is this actually true, Purple?

I'd be amazed if the accrual basis and other conditions weren't more attractive for TDs/Ministers versus civil servants?


----------



## Purple

SGWidow said:


> Is this actually true, Purple?
> 
> I'd be amazed if the accrual basis and other conditions weren't more attractive for TDs/Ministers versus civil servants?


Good explainer here
Those elected after 2004 are on far less attractive pensions and can't draw them until they are 65. Those elected before 2004 can draw their pension at 50.


----------



## SGWidow

Exactly - the pensions for TDs/Ministers are way better


----------



## Purple

SGWidow said:


> Exactly - the pensions for TDs/Ministers are way better


The pensions for ministers are way better. The pensions for TD's are about the same as the rt of the public sector and nowhere near as the pensions Gardai get. They also have a maximum of 5 years job security. 
Anyway, this is way off topic.


----------



## SGWidow

Off topic yes but current TDs at N/40ths accrual and N/16ths accrual for ministers is nowhere near comparable to the current career average civil service scheme. Your the one that brought it up! 

As a matter of interest, comparing like for like, what is the accrual rate as a % of salary for new guards - i.e. those post 2012 who are subject to the career average plan?


----------



## Purple

SGWidow said:


> Off topic yes but current TDs at N/40ths accrual and N/16ths accrual for ministers is nowhere near comparable to the current career average civil service scheme. Your the one that brought it up!
> 
> As a matter of interest, comparing like for like, what is the accrual rate as a % of salary for new guards - i.e. those post 2012 who are subject to the career average plan?


New entrants? Absolutely; they were shafted by their Unions to protect the T's & C's of the existing members. Now they are pretending that they care. That's a recent thing though. 
The average income of a Guard is €67,000 plus allowances so well over €70k a year. With their very generous pension their package is worth over €100,000 a year. New entrants will be worse off but they are still well paid.
The average salary of a nurse is €56,000 plus their pension brings their package to well over €70,000.
Teachers are the best paid graduates in the country after 5 years working (better than engineers or doctors or scientists). 
I'm not saying any off them don't deserve it but they aren't badly paid.
TD's and Ministers work long hours and work hard. Ministers are in very stressful jobs. You mightn't like them all, I certainly don't, but they work harder and longer than just about any Garda or Nurse or Teacher (or engineer or whatever).

I warmed to Simon Harris in his last year or so as Minister for Health. I'm not impressed with the new boy. I wouldn't for a moment say that he isn't doing his very best and working extremely hard. I can't stand most of the Shinners but I'd say they are also very hard working and sacrificing time with their families at all hours of the night and day. It's a very hard, very high risk job. They should be very well paid.


----------



## SGWidow

Purple,

I was only questioning your comment about the pensions of politicians being in line with senior civil servants. It is not true.

The only reason I mentioned new entrants in my last post is because there are so many different pension schemes. For new entrants, politicians win.

If you want to go back in time - say 20 years ago, the TDs pension was 50% of salary after 20 years payable from age 50 (plus gratuity)
The guards pension is 50% of salary after 30 years payable from age 55 (plus gratuity)

By your own admission, the cops used to get the pension cream.

Demonstrably, run of the mill TD, did miles better than the cop so we can figure that he is doing miles and miles better than the civil servant which was the point that I was querying.


----------



## Purple

SGWidow said:


> Purple,
> 
> I was only questioning your comment about the pensions of politicians being in line with senior civil servants. It is not true.
> 
> The only reason I mentioned new entrants in my last post is because there are so many different pension schemes. For new entrants, politicians win.
> 
> If you want to go back in time - say 20 years ago, the TDs pension was 50% of salary after 20 years payable from age 50 (plus gratuity)
> The guards pension is 50% of salary after 30 years payable from age 55 (plus gratuity)
> 
> By your own admission, the cops used to get the pension cream.
> 
> Demonstrably, run of the mill TD, did miles better than the cop so we can figure that he is doing miles and miles better than the civil servant which was the point that I was querying.


Fair enough. My point is that when you take the hours, responsibility and lack of job security into account politicians pensions are a necessity unless we want to be ruled by people who have never worked in the real economy and the idle rich.


----------



## Leper

Day One of Return to Level 3:-  Mrs Lep had her usual first communication of the day with her mobile phone before first light at 6.00am. "Penneys are opening"  were her first words Tuesday  followed by "We're going there immediately after breakfast, there'll be a queue." "What's this 'We' business" says I and I found myself dutifully driving towards the Wilton Shopping Centre in the pitch darkness of the 7.30 Tuesday morning. Approaching the Kinsale Road Roundabout we encountered one of our cherished youth riding a battery powered scooter with no light on the back and not even wearing a high-viz jacket. I don't know how that battery-scooter invisible jockey ever arrived at the intended destination. Perhaps it was Penneys too?

Having alighted at the Wilton Hilton (Cork University Maternity Hospital) my passenger  armed with her mini flask of tea (Barrys natch!) and pop-of-colour scarf with matching tasseled hat marched stoically towards Penneys to form the Queue-of-One.  After returning home I decided to take the bus to Cork's city centre during the quieter mid morning.  Nearly every shop had a non self distancing queue outside. Chin masks were worn by most to ensure if they received infection it wouldn't be through the chin. They seemed unaware that most infections occur through the mouth and nose. which I reckon they thought improved their looks if nothing else. Barbers, hairdressers, department stores, nail sculpting outlets, beauty salons, boutiques had the larger queues. I could get in nowhere without queueing so I headed for Dealz and MrPrice both of which had queues of non self distancing Corporal Clotts. A new low for me, I never thought I'd find myself queueing outside Dealz and MrPrice so I headed home, but now the buses were occupied by people who  thought the "Don't Sit Here" sign was an invitation for sitting and piled in again wearing chin masks. 

The nightly RTE television news had cameras and microphones in various locations in Cork and were not short of interviewees dying for their moment of fame. One advised "we have half normality" and others were glad this  pandemic is nearly over and one thought the nation demanded full view of her nose. Most interviewees were of the older generation and it suddenly it dawned on me these are the parents of Cork people who refuse to use indicators when driving on roundabouts and those who ride invisibly on battery powered scooters in total darkness. 

I regret we'll pay the Covid price of this stupidity during January 2021 and perhaps the battery scooter rider well before then!


----------



## Deiseblue

Like yourself Leper , returning to Level 3 with a renewed sense of optimism and hope.
A vaccine to be rolled out soon hopefully, Waterford in an All Ireland and Christmas nearly upon us.
After 14 years on a Bank of Ireland defined pension supplementary income is on the way next week in the form of the contributory OAP , the first payment of which coincides with the bonus Christmas payment - double joy !
I intend to , if spared and things return to some normality , share this largess with the community as a whole - particularly publicans , bookies , restaurants, hotels , shops and travel agents and charities.
I must mentally draft my letter to my local TD in time for the next budget bemoaning the meagre increase ( or no increase ) in the OAP - that’s apparently what’s expected of us .
The downside is a friend pointed out that I will start shouting at the TV and mistaking the doorbell and phone ringing on the TV for my own doorbell and.  phone !
Thanks for the tip about teenagers on scooters , I’ll add that to my Pensioner’s list of things to be enraged about.


----------



## demoivre

Leper said:


> The government has just handed Covid-19 a platform to increase it's dreadful toll of death and infection.



The risk of dying from Covid in Ireland is 0.0004 and symptoms are mild for 80% of people. Imagine a disease so catastrophic that you need a test to tell you you have it. Pretty sure I know when I have the flu !

Meanwhile 2000 people are walking around with undiagnosed cancers because of cancelled screenings.


----------



## odyssey06

demoivre said:


> The risk of dying from Covid in Ireland is 0.0004 and symptoms are mild for 80% of people. Imagine a disease so catastrophic that you need a test to tell you you have it. Pretty sure I know when I have the flu !



Nope, you don't know when you have the flu necessarily. Asymptomatic & mild flu is an established concept also.
What you thought was a cold may have been a mild flu, a strain similar to one you previously encountered.



> Meanwhile 2000 people are walking around with undiagnosed cancers because of cancelled screenings.



Imagine a disease so catastrophic that you need a test to tell you you have it?

And cancer screenings have resumed though there is a backlog from spring. One of the reasons for the restrictions over past few months has been to ensure hospitals can continue with routine operations. In some other countries at the moment, to free up capacity as we did in spring, routine procedures have been cancelled.








						More than 300,000 cancer screenings delayed due to Covid crisis
					

The pandemic forced the suspension of services and reduced screening capacity




					www.irishexaminer.com
				




In this scenario, think of the covid test as screening to try to detect it before you spread it to someone for which it could be 'catastrophic'.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

demoivre said:


> The risk of dying from Covid in Ireland is 0.0004 and symptoms are mild for 80% of people. Imagine a disease so catastrophic that you need a test to tell you you have it. Pretty sure I know when I have the flu !
> 
> Meanwhile 2000 people are walking around with undiagnosed cancers because of cancelled screenings.


I love when people simply use an overall average to justify a false narrative,  it would be better if the data for each subset of our population was used,  but I doubt that's going to happen. 

Then let's use cancer to further the narrative,  well undiagnosed cancer is the same every year as  the majority people don't go for or do anything about getting tested. We lose more people to cancer due to indifference than we do if we weren't screening. 

A few years ago , about 4/5 the HSE along with the ICS sent out "poo sample" kits to test for bowel cancer,  less than 35% returned them and the majority of those who did were survivors. Bowel cancer has a 90% plus survival rate.

As a survivor it  really annoys me that people who haven't the first clue about the statistics or what the disease is, simply trot it out to justify an irrelevant and often dangerous view, and pretend to actually care about cancer patients.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

Deiseblue said:


> Like yourself Leper , returning to Level 3 with a renewed sense of optimism and hope.
> A vaccine to be rolled out soon hopefully, Waterford in an All Ireland and Christmas nearly upon us.
> After 14 years on a Bank of Ireland defined pension supplementary income is on the way next week in the form of the contributory OAP , the first payment of which coincides with the bonus Christmas payment - double joy !
> I intend to , if spared and things return to some normality , share this largess with the community as a whole - particularly publicans , bookies , restaurants, hotels , shops and travel agents and charities.
> I must mentally draft my letter to my local TD in time for the next budget bemoaning the meagre increase ( or no increase ) in the OAP - that’s apparently what’s expected of us .
> The downside is a friend pointed out that I will start shouting at the TV and mistaking the doorbell and phone ringing on the TV for my own doorbell and.  phone !
> Thanks for the tip about teenagers on scooters , I’ll add that to my Pensioner’s list of things to be enraged about.


I hope Waterford do it , as a Corkman I'll be behind ye......


----------



## demoivre

odyssey06 said:


> Nope, you don't know when you have the flu necessarily. Asymptomatic & mild flu is an established concept also.
> What you thought was a cold may have been a mild flu, a strain similar to one you previously encountered.
> 
> 
> 
> Imagine a disease so catastrophic that you need a test to tell you you have it?
> 
> And cancer screenings have resumed though there is a backlog from spring. One of the reasons for the restrictions over past few months has been to ensure hospitals can continue with routine operations. In some other countries at the moment, to free up capacity as we did in spring, routine procedures have been cancelled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More than 300,000 cancer screenings delayed due to Covid crisis
> 
> 
> The pandemic forced the suspension of services and reduced screening capacity
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.irishexaminer.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this scenario, think of the covid test as screening to try to detect it before you spread it to someone for which it could be 'catastrophic'.



The pertinent point is that the vast majority of people will walk away unscathed from Covid. Untreated they won't from cancer.


----------



## demoivre

Paul O Mahoney said:


> I love when people simply use an overall average to justify a false narrative,  it would be better if the data for each subset of our population was used,  but I doubt that's going to happen.
> 
> Then let's use cancer to further the narrative,  well undiagnosed cancer is the same every year as  the majority people don't go for or do anything about getting tested. We lose more people to cancer due to indifference than we do if we weren't screening.
> 
> A few years ago , about 4/5 the HSE along with the ICS sent out "poo sample" kits to test for bowel cancer,  less than 35% returned them and the majority of those who did were survivors. Bowel cancer has a 90% plus survival rate.
> 
> As a survivor it  really annoys me that people who haven't the first clue about the statistics or what the disease is, simply trot it out to justify an irrelevant and often dangerous view, and pretend to actually care about cancer patients.



Can you spare me the patronising drivel? You knock my secondary statistic and then quote secondary data yourself. The likes of you should stop assuming that the rest of us cant do basic research or read what the likes of Professor Donal Brennan, Dr Risterard O Laoide or Professor Jack Lambert, to mention just three, have to say.

I'm well capable of reading and interpreting secondary statistics, and conducting primary research if needs be but thanks for your concern.

The notion that there are no consequences to covid being the only show in town is farcical.

Fwiw my father died of pancreatic cancer and my mother survive bowel cancer after extensive treatment. The notion that that makes me more qualified to comment on secondary statistics is embarrassing.


----------



## Deiseblue

Paul O Mahoney said:


> I hope Waterford do it , as a Corkman I'll be behind ye......


Thank you Paul , much appreciated.
I still remember getting a half day when the Waterford All Ireland winning team of 1959 visited St Declan’s national school hopefully another good day is in the offing


----------



## odyssey06

demoivre said:


> The pertinent point is that the vast majority of people will walk away unscathed from Covid. Untreated they won't from cancer.



Cancer isn't an infectious disease.
Ebola has a case fatality rate of 90%.
There's a reason why covid has had a huge impact globally and ebola did not - how infectious it is.
So to merely look at what % of people will survive something untreated entirely misses the threat that covid represents to public health systems.

The low covid fatality rate here is a function of the restrictions deployed to keep the case count down, and in spring, the increase in hospital capacity brought about by the cancellation of other routine operations, including unfortunately screenings.
Those screenings have now been reinstated.

And surely  the last thing someone undergoing treatment for cancer needs is to contract covid, the chances of which would be greatly increased if covid is allowed to become prevalent in the community.

So I don't see how your current comments are in any way pertinent to the conversation in December 2020.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

demoivre said:


> Can you spare me the patronising drivel? You knock my secondary statistic and then quote secondary data yourself. The likes of you should stop assuming that the rest of us cant do basic research or read what the likes of Professor Donal Brennan, Dr Risterard O Laoide or Professor Jack Lambert, to mention just three, have to say.
> 
> I'm well capable of reading and interpreting secondary statistics, and conducting primary research if needs be but thanks for your concern.
> 
> The notion that there are no consequences to covid being the only show in town is farcical.
> 
> Fwiw my father died of pancreatic cancer and my mother survive bowel cancer after extensive treatment. The notion that that makes me more qualified to comment on secondary statistics is embarrassing.


Patronising? You were the one who decided to mitigate the effect of covid 19 with your initial statistic.
If you want to at least try an make a case why not show the statistics in age groups, or those with underlying health issues or any statistics that actually reflect the impact that this disease has had on the lives of the 2099 who have died? 
Reading what you wrote it would easily to assume that those lives aren't important. 

Your post is biased in the extreme and lacks basic empathy towards those have died.

Your experience of cancer, if true , doesn't give you a right to use it to make another deadly disease less important.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

Deiseblue said:


> Thank you Paul , much appreciated.
> I still remember getting a half day when the Waterford All Ireland winning team of 1959 visited St Declan’s national school hopefully another good day is in the offing


Look it would great for ye, and even better for the game, Limerick won't lay down but anyone who has the scalps of the cats will be a bit more up for it.


----------



## Leo

demoivre said:


> The risk of dying from Covid in Ireland is 0.0004



That's not true for a start...

We have never put in place anything approaching the restrictions or levels of investment to address any single health issue in the history of the state, yet we are still at a point where 1 in 35 people with confirmed cases of this highly-contagious virus have died.



demoivre said:


> The pertinent point is that the vast majority of people will walk away unscathed from Covid. Untreated they won't from cancer.



I'm sure you understand that for anyone diagnosed with cancer, there is no walking away unscathed. The Lancet published a study on the impacts of the pandemic on cancer mortality in England.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

odyssey06 said:


> Cancer isn't an infectious disease.
> Ebola has a case fatality rate of 90%.
> There's a reason why covid has had a huge impact globally and ebola did not - how infectious it is.
> So to merely look at what % of people will survive something untreated entirely misses the threat that covid represents to public health systems.
> 
> The low covid fatality rate here is a function of the restrictions deployed to keep the case count down, and in spring, the increase in hospital capacity brought about by the cancellation of other routine operations, including unfortunately screenings.
> Those screenings have now been reinstated.
> 
> And surely  the last thing someone undergoing treatment for cancer needs is to contract covid, the chances of which would be greatly increased if covid is allowed to become prevalent in the community.
> 
> So I don't see how your current comments are in any way pertinent to the conversation in December 2020.


I know of 3 people who are still getting treatment and they are more fearful of covid than their cancer, as if they get covid or anything that reduces their ability to fight their cancer and it would probably reduce massively any chances of surviving .

We still don't know what the long term effects of covid will be, we know from small studies that there has been evidence of scaring of lungs, untreatable fatigue, sleep deprivation and some getting the virus twice.

Cancer is a deadly disease but so is covid and neither needs to be pitted against each other.


----------



## Leper

Leper said:


> Opportunity lost - Wet pubs allowed to serve take away alcohol and we haven't learned from recent outdoor congregations of groups. Restaurants to be allowed some indoor dining - realistically unpoliced. Gastro pubs to be allowed to open provided the food is prepared within - but in a "controlled environment." I wonder why I don't trust most publicans and most restauranteurs?
> 
> Too much trust being placed on the vaccines roll-out but the virus will not disappear overnight. The government has just handed Covid-19 a platform to increase it's dreadful toll of death and infection. And the controlled environments of pubs and restaurants are going to save us? Not a chance! We'll be staying indoors, self distancing and wearing masks for a long time yet to come.
> 
> The hope was when the last restrictions were imposed was to reduce the death rate, the daily infections to under 50 (currently 200+ and lowest for some time, but nowhere near <50). Our R number was to be reduced to less than 0.5 and we're not near that.



Two weeks since I reported the above we have had 310 infections today and our R figure is in excess of 1.20. It is my opinion that somebody should shout "Halt" immediately and return to Level 5 asap. Covidwise our situation is getting worse.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

Leper said:


> Two weeks since I reported the above we have had 310 infections today and our R figure is in excess of 1.20. It is my opinion that somebody should shout "Halt" immediately and return to Level 5 asap. Covidwise our situation is getting worse.


Our R figure is really in excess of 1.2 its about 1 per yesterday's briefing....








						Coronavirus live updates
					

Ireland and Northern Ireland's coronavirus updates from March 2020 - February 2021.




					www.irishcentral.com


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

*isn't


----------



## Leo

Paul O Mahoney said:


> *isn't



You can edit the original....


----------



## Leper

Paul O Mahoney said:


> *isn't


I didn't make up the R figure, I got it from "Breaking News" about 6.00pm yesterday where it was stated the R number was in excess of 1.20. The other figures I got were from RTE News at 6.00pm. But, I'm not getting uptight about "about 1" and in "excess of 1.2."

Let's hope the figures drop, but I don't think they will. When we moved to Level 3 it had been mooted that the infection rate should have been between 50 and 100. We're still a long way from that number and yesterday we were greater than 3 times the higher number. Something's not adding up correctly.


----------



## Leo

Leper said:


> I didn't make up the R figure, I got it from "Breaking News" about 6.00pm yesterday where it was stated the R number was in excess of 1.20. The other figures I got were from RTE News at 6.00pm. But, I'm not getting uptight about "about 1" and in "excess of 1.2."



Looking at yesterday's report on the briefing on BreakingNews, they did report it as close to 1.0, but quoted Stephen Donnelly on the consequences *if* the rate rose above 1.2.

Yesterday's NPHET briefing stated "The reproduction number is now estimated to be close to 1.0." They did not report the number in the pervious briefings this week.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

Leper said:


> I didn't make up the R figure, I got it from "Breaking News" about 6.00pm yesterday where it was stated the R number was in excess of 1.20. The other figures I got were from RTE News at 6.00pm. But, I'm not getting uptight about "about 1" and in "excess of 1.2."
> 
> Let's hope the figures drop, but I don't think they will. When we moved to Level 3 it had been mooted that the infection rate should have been between 50 and 100. We're still a long way from that number and yesterday we were greater than 3 times the higher number. Something's not adding up correctly.


I wasn't implying you did make it up, just there is an awful lot of figures floating about and its easy to hear something from days ago or its muddled in someone's speech.

But a R of 1.2 would add significant figures to the daily cases, and those numbers have been fairly stable,  that's the only reason I thought to check it.


----------



## demoivre

odyssey06 said:


> Cancer isn't an infectious disease.
> Ebola has a case fatality rate of 90%.
> There's a reason why covid has had a huge impact globally and ebola did not - how infectious it is.
> So to merely look at what % of people will survive something untreated entirely misses the threat that covid represents to public health systems.
> 
> The low covid fatality rate here is a function of the restrictions deployed to keep the case count down, and in spring, the increase in hospital capacity brought about by the cancellation of other routine operations, including unfortunately screenings.
> Those screenings have now been reinstated.
> 
> And surely  the last thing someone undergoing treatment for cancer needs is to contract covid, the chances of which would be greatly increased if covid is allowed to become prevalent in the community.
> 
> So I don't see how your current comments are in any way pertinent to the conversation in December 2020.



They're very relevant. How do asymptomatic people pose a threat to the public health system? Asymptomatic transmission of covid has never been empirically established and there are no documented cases of asymptomatic transmission of covid.
People with symptoms absolutely need to quarantine and the vulnerable need to be protected but the rest of us should be getting on with it.  
I'd like to see a flattening of the unemployment curve, the depression curve, the bankruptcy curve, the domestic violence curve etc.


----------



## demoivre

Paul O Mahoney said:


> Patronising? You were the one who decided to mitigate the effect of covid 19 with your initial statistic.
> If you want to at least try an make a case why not show the statistics in age groups, or those with underlying health issues or any statistics that actually reflect the impact that this disease has had on the lives of the 2099 who have died?
> Reading what you wrote it would easily to assume that those lives aren't important.
> 
> Your post is biased in the extreme and lacks basic empathy towards those have died.
> 
> Your experience of cancer, if true , doesn't give you a right to use it to make another deadly disease less important.



Resources are finite so it's entirely appropriate that we should question the extraordinary lengths and costs involved in fighting a virus that is deadly for so few people. The opportunity cost of dealing with this virus is very important.
It is appalling that up to 2019 public patients with cervical cancer were denied pembrolizumab because of the cost of it yet we can whip up €16m in overtime payments for the gardai in the recent lockdown to cause nothing but havoc on the likes of the M11 and delay people going to work.

Can you not look up the facts yourself?
Median age of covid death is 83 according to CSO. Dr Ronan Glynn thinks it;s closer to 90.
93% of those who died have underlying conditions.

I'd have concerns about the PCR test too, especially when ct>35 and the amount of false positives it throws up. Have a look at what happened with the Cambridge students recently. Every single positive test was found to be a false positive after a second test.


----------



## demoivre

Leo said:


> That's not true for a start...
> 
> We have never put in place anything approaching the restrictions or levels of investment to address any single health issue in the history of the state, yet we are still at a point where 1 in 35 people with confirmed cases of this highly-contagious virus have died.



If my number is incorrect show the correct calculation. Of course I was generous in including people with pre existing conditions in my calculation.  I suspect that to calculate the probability of a healthy person in Ireland dying of Covid would require use of the exponential function on the calculator, because of the amount of zeros !

Covid is deadly for very few people ie the very old and having comorbidities.


----------



## Purple

demoivre said:


> If my number is incorrect show the correct calculation. Of course I was generous in including people with pre existing conditions in my calculation.  I suspect that to calculate the probability of a healthy person in Ireland dying of Covid would require use of the exponential function on the calculator, because of the amount of zeros !
> 
> Covid is deadly for very few people ie the very old and having comorbidities.


It's very hard to put accurate numbers on the number of people who are dying from Covid or dying with Covid. At what point does having it not matter as the person will die anyway and at what point does having Covid combine with an underlying condition to cause their death? 

It is true to say that only 9 people under the age of 65 with no underlying condition have died from Covid19 but how many with an underlying condition would still be alive today if they hadn't contracted the disease?

That said it is undeniable that if you are healthy and under 65 the chances of dying from it are extremely remote.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

demoivre said:


> Resources are finite so it's entirely appropriate that we should question the extraordinary lengths and costs involved in fighting a virus that is deadly for so few people. The opportunity cost of dealing with this virus is very important.
> It is appalling that up to 2019 public patients with cervical cancer were denied pembrolizumab because of the cost of it yet we can whip up €16 in overtime payments for the gardai in the recent lockdown to cause nothing but havoc on the likes of the M11 and delay people going to work.
> 
> Can you not look up the facts yourself?
> Median age of covid death is 83 according to CSO. Dr Ronan Glynn thinks it;s closer to 90.
> 93% of those who died have underlying conditions.
> 
> I'd have concerns about the PCR test too, especially when ct>35 and the amount of false positives it throws up. Have a look at what happened with the Cambridge students recently. Every single positive test was found to be a false positive after a second test.


Still didn't show any further statistics to back up your initial assertion or even a link .

You also seem to think that people with underlying conditions are expendables as " they were going to die anyway " 

Ill not be wasting my time trying to verify the unsubstantiated claims you make, if you want those claims to be considered links would be the minimum requirement afterall they are your assertions.


----------



## odyssey06

demoivre said:


> They're very relevant. How do asymptomatic people pose a threat to the public health system? Asymptomatic transmission of covid has never been empirically established and there are no documented cases of asymptomatic transmission of covid.
> People with symptoms absolutely need to quarantine and the vulnerable need to be protected but the rest of us should be getting on with it.
> I'd like to see a flattening of the unemployment curve, the depression curve, the bankruptcy curve, the domestic violence curve etc.



The vulnerable can't be protected if everyone 'gets on with it', if by that you mean, ignoring and lifting all restrictions.
It's fantasy stuff, it is not a slogan of practicable policy.

If you can point me to a study that shows people* without symptoms* are not infectious, please cite.
People without symptoms can transmit covid, the split between pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic is unclear.
Pre-symptomatic & asymptomatic people shed viral load.









						COVID-19
					

See all information on COVID-19, situation updates, risk assessments, questions and answers, latest evidence, surveillance and laboratory guidance and how to protect yourself and others.




					www.ecdc.europa.eu


----------



## Purple

Paul O Mahoney said:


> You also seem to think that people with underlying conditions are expendables as " they were going to die anyway "


We target resources at younger people in preference to older people all the time. Men are as likely to die of Prostate Cancer as women are to die of Breast Cancer but we spend vastly more on Breast cancer screening. That's nothing to do with gender (despite what some men think). It is to do with the fact that the men who die of Prostate Cancer usually do so in their 80's and 90's whereas women start dying of breast cancer in their 30'd and 40's. If you need a transplant age is one of the selecting factors. In a world of finite resources things have to be prioritised. I'm not suggesting that we callously cast aside old people who are sick but lets not pretend that the life of a chronically ill 85 year old is the same as a healthy 10 year old.


----------



## Purple

demoivre said:


> Resources are finite so it's entirely appropriate that we should question the extraordinary lengths and costs involved in fighting a virus that is deadly for so few people. The opportunity cost of dealing with this virus is very important.


But they are questioned and a balance is struck. You may think it's the wrong balance but it is undeniable that the Government is taking everything into account when making decisions.


----------



## odyssey06

demoivre said:


> I'd have concerns about the PCR test too, especially when ct>35 and the amount of false positives it throws up. Have a look at what happened with the Cambridge students recently. Every single positive test was found to be a false positive after a second test.



There is no evidence that PCR testing in Ireland is creating some sort of false 'casedemic'.
The level of variability in in our daily positive rate demonstrates this.

The Cambridge student situation is explained here and no it doesn't mean what you suggest it does:
Cambridge Covid-19 test results don’t mean PCR tests are inaccurate - Full Fact


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

Purple said:


> We target resources at younger people in preference to older people all the time. Men are as likely to die of Prostate Cancer as women are to die of Breast Cancer but we spend vastly more on Breast cancer screening. That's nothing to do with gender (despite what some men think). It is to do with the fact that the men who die of Prostate Cancer usually do so in their 80's and 90's whereas women start dying of breast cancer in their 30'd and 40's. If you need a transplant age is one of the selecting factors. In a world of finite resources things have to be prioritised. I'm not suggesting that we callously cast aside old people who are sick but lets not pretend that the life of a chronically ill 85 year old is the same as a healthy 10 year old.


Prostate deaths are in the 50 to 80 bracket Purple,  its becoming more prevalent now in men in their 40s too.

But I take your point


----------



## Purple

Paul O Mahoney said:


> Prostate deaths are in the 50 to 80 bracket Purple,  its becoming more prevalent now in men in their 40s too.
> 
> But I take your point


Sure, and some women die of breast cancer much younger too.


----------



## Leo

demoivre said:


> If my number is incorrect show the correct calculation. Of course I was generous in including people with pre existing conditions in my calculation.  I suspect that to calculate the probability of a healthy person in Ireland dying of Covid would require use of the exponential function on the calculator, because of the amount of zeros !



It appears you calculated the risk of dying from COVID-19 based on the number of deaths to that point over the entire population. That's not how you calculate risk! Use that method back in March and you'd get 0.0000002039.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

After hearing today's figures I have a feeling that after Christmas day and subsequent weekend we might be revisting level 5 for the remainder of 2020 and probably all of January 2021.
I'm again not wishing for this but looking at Europe now it just feels inevitable.  
The joy of having vaccines has really disappeared quickly.


----------



## demoivre

odyssey06 said:


> The vulnerable can't be protected if everyone 'gets on with it', if by that you mean, ignoring and lifting all restrictions.
> It's fantasy stuff, it is not a slogan of practicable policy.
> 
> If you can point me to a study that shows people* without symptoms* are not infectious, please cite.
> People without symptoms can transmit covid, the split between pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic is unclear.
> Pre-symptomatic & asymptomatic people shed viral load.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> COVID-19
> 
> 
> See all information on COVID-19, situation updates, risk assessments, questions and answers, latest evidence, surveillance and laboratory guidance and how to protect yourself and others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ecdc.europa.eu



Of course the vulnerable can be protected. I see it every day of the week  with very elderly neighbours and  relatives. It's not rocket science and it can be done with respect and dignity. I visit a 90 year old neighbour a few days a week and we have no problem keeping our distance and doing the basics right. My parents in law are in their eighties and have managed fine since March, again by doing the basics right.









						Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China - Nature Communications
					

Large-scale population screening can provide insights to levels of ongoing SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Here, the authors report a citywide screening of ~10,000,000 residents of Wuhan and show that SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence was very low five to eight weeks after the end of lockdown.




					www.nature.com
				




I've already read that ECDC article.  I think you should reread it if you believe that it proves asymptomatic transmission. 

"Similar viral loads in asymptomatic versus symptomatic cases have been reported, indicating the* potential *of virus transmission from asymptomatic patients "

"Asymptomatic transmission (i.e. when the infector has no symptoms throughout the course of the disease), is difficult to quantify. Available data, mainly derived from observational studies, *vary in quality and seem to be prone to publication bias *[34,43]. Mathematical modelling studies (not peer-reviewed) have suggested *that asymptomatic individuals might be major drivers for the growth of the COVID-19 pandemic *[44,45]. "

There are no documented cases of asymptomatic transmission of Covid and that's from WHO.


----------



## demoivre

odyssey06 said:


> There is no evidence that PCR testing in Ireland is creating some sort of false 'casedemic'.
> The level of variability in in our daily positive rate demonstrates this.
> 
> The Cambridge student situation is explained here and no it doesn't mean what you suggest it does:
> Cambridge Covid-19 test results don’t mean PCR tests are inaccurate - Full Fact








						Review report Corman-Drosten et al. Eurosurveillance 2020
					

This extensive review report has been officially submitted to Eurosurveillance editorial board on 27th November 2020 via their submission-portal, enclosed to this review report is a retraction request letter, signed by all the main & co-authors. First and last listed names are the first and...




					cormandrostenreview.com


----------



## demoivre

Leo said:


> It appears you calculated the risk of dying from COVID-19 based on the number of deaths to that point over the entire population. That's not how you calculate risk! Use that method back in March and you'd get 0.0000002039.



You are absolutely correct and I was wrong in my conclusion. I calculated the proportion of people in the population that have died from Covid at a point in time. Happy to correct that.

Of course it doesn't detract from the main point which is that Covid, in the main , kills old, frail people with comorbidities.


----------



## demoivre

Paul O Mahoney said:


> After hearing today's figures I have a feeling that after Christmas day and subsequent weekend we might be revisting level 5 for the remainder of 2020 and probably all of January 2021.
> I'm again not wishing for this but looking at Europe now it just feels inevitable.
> The joy of having vaccines has really disappeared quickly.



Sweet music to Bezo's ears as we continue to destroy small businesses. I personally know of 6 that will never reopen. Sad times.


----------



## odyssey06

demoivre said:


> Of course the vulnerable can be protected. I see it every day of the week  with very elderly neighbours and  relatives. It's not rocket science and it can be done with respect and dignity. I visit a 90 year old neighbour a few days a week and we have no problem keeping our distance and doing the basics right. My parents in law are in their eighties and have managed fine since March, again by doing the basics right.
> 
> I've already read that ECDC article.  I think you should reread it if you believe that it proves asymptomatic transmission. There are no documented cases of asymptomatic transmission  and that's from WHO.



You reference people living in their own homes and seem to extrapolate that by doing the basics right, the same could work in care settings?
How do you keep your distance from someone who needs personal care?
What about when the vulnerable need to venture out of their homes for essential services, medical appointments, or require treatment.
To call that out as "of course the vulnerable can be protected" just demonstrates how little you have considered what it actually means.
It is just an empty slogan, it is not a practicable policy

The ECDC article says:
_Similar viral loads in asymptomatic versus symptomatic cases have been reported, indicating the potential of virus transmission from asymptomatic patients... Pre-symptomatic transmission (i.e. when the infector develops symptoms after transmitting the virus to another person) has been reported._

It may turn out that asymptomatic are not drivers of transmission, but we don't have enough certainty to make policy decisions on that basis.
But really asymptomatic is a red herring. Because you have obviously ignored my phrasing of "people without symptoms" which is really what is relevant.
People without symptoms can transmit the virus - whether that is asymptomatic and\or presymptomatic changes nothing from a public policy perspective.

"People with symptoms absolutely need to quarantine"
From a public policy perspective, without legally enforced quarantine measures, this is not a practicable measure.
It's just an excuse for wanting to "get on with life", trying to pin the responsibility on other people. Another empty slogan.

You want no effective restrictions on anyone, anyone carrying the disease could be out and about "getting on with life", infecting those around them...
And you think the vulnerable could be protected in such a society?
Absurd.


----------



## Leo

demoivre said:


> Of course it doesn't detract from the main point which is that Covid, in the main , kills old, frail people with comorbidities.



Yes, in the main, but how many of those elderly have been robbed of 10 or 20 years life with their loved ones? Also, death isn't the only outcome here:



> Figures on how many people are afflicted by so-called Long Covid are still emerging, but the number was estimated in a recent study at about one in 10 survivors aged under 50, and effects range from organ damage to neurological damage, profound exhaustion and shortness of breath.


----------



## Paul O Mahoney

demoivre said:


> Sweet music to Bezo's ears as we continue to destroy small businesses. I personally know of 6 that will never reopen. Sad times.


Depends on your point of view,  personally I think a persons life is far more important than profits. 
Additionally we live in a global free market where competitors compete and the better one survives. 
The pandemic has been hard on small businesses but its been hard on everyone.


----------



## odyssey06

The National Public Health Emergency Team has recommended to Government that the period of relaxed Covid-19 restrictions be shortened to the end of the year as virus cases rise, the Taoiseach has said.
Speaking on RTÉ's Six One, Micheál Martin said: "The anticipated period of going from tomorrow to the 6th of January would be shortened."
He said the measures being recommended would involve the hospitality sector as well as visits between households being reduced from three to one.








						Govt considering new restrictions from 28 December
					

Government ministers are likely to look at bringing forward the tightening of Covid-19 restrictions to 28, 29 or 30 December.




					www.rte.ie


----------



## Leper

odyssey06 said:


> The National Public Health Emergency Team has recommended to Government that the period of relaxed Covid-19 restrictions be shortened to the end of the year as virus cases rise, the Taoiseach has said.
> Speaking on RTÉ's Six One, Micheál Martin said: "The anticipated period of going from tomorrow to the 6th of January would be shortened."
> He said the measures being recommended would involve the hospitality sector as well as visits between households being reduced from three to one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Govt considering new restrictions from 28 December
> 
> 
> Government ministers are likely to look at bringing forward the tightening of Covid-19 restrictions to 28, 29 or 30 December.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rte.ie


I've been saying this for weeks and on this thread. The only surprise for me is that we are still on Level 3.  484 Covid infections in the past 24 hours and an R rate of between 1.20 and 1.30. The situation is not improving.

Yet we are the best performing country of the EU regarding Covid.


----------



## Clamball

Situation is deteriorating on all fronts aside from numbers in ICU which seem to be holding steady.   Many people have already changed or cancelled their Christmas Day plans to spend with elderly parents or grannies.  But there are plenty others criss crossing the country to carry on their traditional Christmas visits after putting them off for months.  

I do hope the cabinet takes decisive action today. This third wave is right here, right now, it won’t pause just because it is Christmas.

I know what I would do but I am not in a bad financial position.  All adults in my house are still working for employers who have behaved perfectly throughout the pandemic.  Our income is steady.   We have no relatives that we need to be with right now, we can all wait for another few months until the vaccine rolls out.  So of course I am in favour of a hard lockdown today.

If I were relying on hospitality remaining open for my income or to keep my business afloat then I might have a different view.  I would not want to be around the cabinet table today.  Especially when they can predict the future deaths and case numbers based on people’s contact numbers.


----------

