Coronavirus

[Emphyrio]

Letting healthy under 60s sounds great in theory. Except for those healthy folk who are fucked up from it weeks and months after they first got it. And fuck knows the long term health impact.

Nein, danke.

[astfgyl]

Letting people decide their own level of risk and act accordingly sounds even better in theory.

Also, post viral fatigue is not exclusive to Covid-19 it is just being highlighted now as if it is a new thing. You were able to get on with your life this time last year with the exact same level of risk. What happened?

[Emphyrio]

To be fair, I only heard about the healthy under 60s approach mentioned on the radio this morning so I haven't read your link.

The impression I got was that it was desirable to run rampant, burn out and all is rosy. That's all well and good if under 60s had no ill effects. Sadly not the case. I think enough of the population are "in fear" that they'd try protect themselves, and those around them, and not enough of the population would get it for it to burn out.

[astfgyl]

I think a simple tactic of going back to general 'flu season advice with extra emphasis put on infection control in nursing homes would do the trick.

The hard part from a government standpoint would be rowing back on all this shit. Who is going to say take down the perspex and pull up all the floor signs and we will get on with it as it is running its' course no matter what we do? No one, because then there would be hard questions as to why persist with this for so long, destroying the economy in the process. The simple answer is that we didn't know and that is the fair answer for anyone to give but no one will.

All of the effects of this thing are also consistent with a case of flu, including the after effects, but this has been blown up so much in the media that people have the impression that it is much worse than it is. The Swedes took the sensible approach and things aren't gone to ruin there. The results speak for themselves.

[Kurt Cocaine]

Go Sverige.... 

https://youtu.be/eI6M4ExbOgY

[Airneanach]

To be fair, I only heard about the healthy under 60s approach mentioned on the radio this morning so I haven't read your link.

The impression I got was that it was desirable to run rampant, burn out and all is rosy. That's all well and good if under 60s had no ill effects. Sadly not the case. I think enough of the population are "in fear" that they'd try protect themselves, and those around them, and not enough of the population would get it for it to burn out.

What illness has no ill effects, though? The clue's in the nomenclature.

I had a flu last year that knocked me on my arse for about a month. I don't think I appreciated how long the after effects actually were at the time, but for weeks afterwards I was getting absolutely knackered after my walks and a few pints had that empty stomach, drinking on antibiotics whack to them that didn't quite feel right.

I'm not rubbishing the seriousness of these effects - and the Just a Flu! crowd are full of shit - but there's going to be some percentage of under 60s who get the raw end of the stick with virtually anything. That's just...well...scope. Variance. The one in a hundred who takes his pants off and runs into the night on half a yoke while the rest of us are rubbing the back of our heads on the couch.

I'm not denying that long term complications may arise from this illness, but it's being leveraged as a bogeyman based largely on anecdotals what ifs rather than any great wealth of empirical data showing that under 65s have been rendered fucked from this thing in any great numbers.

Those numbers may come out more, by the way. It could be worse than muggins here thinks. But it also mightn't be, and that's where we revert back to what was above described succinctly as "Letting people decide their own level of risk and acting accordingly". All whilst at least trying to propagate a system of gradual immunity that may weaken the virus, in lieu of a vaccine that for now is a golden egg.

I'd strongly disagree about enough of the population being interested in this, either. The pubs would be packed like they used to this weekend if they could be, and live gigs would sell out not a bother. I'm not saying that should happen, but the appetite and Laissez-faire  amongst the young is clearly there and has been demonstrated plenty over the past few weeks.

I heard it being described as ableist the other week to suggest that vulnerable people should opt out of situations that may put them at risk. Why? Surely those that can keep the economy going should, in order to pay for essential health services and the welfare of those who are currently unable to continue in their line of work? I'm only speaking of a small minority of people, of course - and I don't want to sound insensitive - but there's been impetus for a lot of bed wetting with this pandemic. And a lot of good guy badges being brandished by ordinary Joe Soaps who are now enjoying a certain hero citizen status for simply staying in and not licking their fucking snots.

She's a tricky one. You may be dead right and I may be dead wrong. I just feel that other avenues are worth exploring, and that this whole situation has grounds for a bit more flex and nuance than the churlish "Yeah but what if it was YOUR mam's funeral, eh, Mr. Western Decadence?" discourse some people have been pulling.

Apologies this spiel's in response to you, by the way. It was more a starting point for a sort of anthology of my most recent layman's thoughts on all of this 

[Emphyrio]

To be fair, I only heard about the healthy under 60s approach mentioned on the radio this morning so I haven't read your link.

The impression I got was that it was desirable to run rampant, burn out and all is rosy. That's all well and good if under 60s had no ill effects. Sadly not the case. I think enough of the population are "in fear" that they'd try protect themselves, and those around them, and not enough of the population would get it for it to burn out.

What illness has no ill effects, though? The clue's in the nomenclature.

I had a flu last year that knocked me on my arse for about a month. I don't think I appreciated how long the after effects actually were at the time, but for weeks afterwards I was getting absolutely knackered after my walks and a few pints had that empty stomach, drinking on antibiotics whack to them that didn't quite feel right.

I'm not rubbishing the seriousness of these effects - and the Just a Flu! crowd are full of shit - but there's going to be some percentage of under 60s who get the raw end of the stick with virtually anything. That's just...well...scope. Variance. The one in a hundred who takes his pants off and runs into the night on half a yoke while the rest of us are rubbing the back of our heads on the couch.

I'm not denying that long term complications may arise from this illness, but it's being leveraged as a bogeyman based largely on anecdotals what ifs rather than any great wealth of empirical data showing that under 65s have been rendered fucked from this thing in any great numbers.

Those numbers may come out more, by the way. It could be worse than muggins here thinks. But it also mightn't be, and that's where we revert back to what was above described succinctly as "Letting people decide their own level of risk and acting accordingly". All whilst at least trying to propagate a system of gradual immunity that may weaken the virus, in lieu of a vaccine that for now is a golden egg.

I'd strongly disagree about enough of the population being interested in this, either. The pubs would be packed like they used to this weekend if they could be, and live gigs would sell out not a bother. I'm not saying that should happen, but the appetite and Laissez-faire  amongst the young is clearly there and has been demonstrated plenty over the past few weeks.

I heard it being described as ableist the other week to suggest that vulnerable people should opt out of situations that may put them at risk. Why? Surely those that can keep the economy going should, in order to pay for essential health services and the welfare of those who are currently unable to continue in their line of work? I'm only speaking of a small minority of people, of course - and I don't want to sound insensitive - but there's been impetus for a lot of bed wetting with this pandemic. And a lot of good guy badges being brandished by ordinary Joe Soaps who are now enjoying a certain hero citizen status for simply staying in and not licking their fucking snots.

She's a tricky one. You may be dead right and I may be dead wrong. I just feel that other avenues are worth exploring, and that this whole situation has grounds for a bit more flex and nuance than the churlish "Yeah but what if it was YOUR mam's funeral, eh, Mr. Western Decadence?" discourse some people have been pulling.

Apologies this spiel's in response to you, by the way. It was more a starting point for a sort of anthology of my most recent layman's thoughts on all of this 

All very well put, and I'd agree with the majority of it, really. For me, there's still too many unknowns that I'd personally be willing to take a chance on getting it. That's me speaking as a self-confessed hypochondriac and yes, a huge raft of folk are dying to get out to the pubs etc.

On the pubs side of things, I suppose I've just changed my outlook and I'm happy enough drinking at home with a few friends out the garden. I was in the pub early on Sunday, grand distancing and felt very safe. But, would I go to a pub at 8pm til closing? Nope, cos I know that I'd be one of the eejits lepping around like a spa, hugging all and sundry. I don't think I'd be the only one who kinda thinks like that.

[astfgyl]

I think the "it's just a 'flu" argument is being blown out of proportion and used against the common sense of the debate. The little old flu kills millions worldwide every year, so it is no laughing matter either. The effect it had on you that you describe there is consistent to what influenza does to people. The idea of saying it is like the 'flu is that we don't shut down the world for it and it is always there and the golden egg of the vaccine is laid every year with wildly varying results. And we get on with life, not terrorized every day by our news reports with a running tally.

It just needs to stop, the whole publicity of it, and things could simply return to normal again with regular sick season advice and then anyone who wants to hide in their houses or mask up for the shopping is more than welcome to do so. We can even leave up the yellow signs reminding us to wash our hands if we like. But that should be it.

Speaking of the pubs, I would be willing this minute to go to a packed gig and jump all over the place full of drink no bother without being afraid in the slightest.

[Airneanach]

I have fuck all interest in the pubs. Easy to say now, but I don't think it'll ever come back. I hope they come back for the sake of the tourism buck - in good time - but the waxing lyrical "Sure tis part of our heritage, t'wouldn't be the same Ireland without 6.50 pints of craft IPA!" B.S. some publicans have come out with can do one. Traditions change, and one has to change their traditions and adapt with the current going ons. I'm fully in the flow of embracing what I can do now, so pre ordering the new Xbox and getting a few cans for the Saturday night is fine for me.

I've worked at being quite cheery and nonplussed about living in a (still comparatively comfortable) dystopia of sorts. You have to do something for yourself like that. At the start of lockdown I was still plastered in front of YouTube looking up videos of gigs I was at. It'll kill you. You have to let go. I couldn't give a shit now. Not in a nihilistic way, but because it's just best for my own head at the moment.

If they came back tomorrow? I'd be in the pit personally, yeah 

[Emphyrio]

Speaking of the pubs, I would be willing this minute to go to a packed gig and jump all over the place full of drink no bother without being afraid in the slightest.

And that's why the government is stuck. We have 2 very distinct camps, who can claim that their own perspective is the correct one.

[astfgyl]

I do all of my drinking in houses as it is. I should have clarified that there. I wouldn't be afraid of everyone else going into the pub as they did in 2019 though, not in the slightest. The easy way to deal with the 2 camps of people is to let them decide for themselves. If you feel it's risky don't do it. Be informed, not terrorized by the invisible enemy.

[Paul keohane]

Bottom line,you walk into a pub,you sus out the surroundings.Your either happy or not with the clientele and the covid standards in that pub.If youre not happy,turn around and go to another pub,that how this works from now on.

I was out in cork city centre on sunday evening ,4 lads ,absolutely no hassle with social distancing.I went into my local on its reopening on Monday.All tables full,all covid practices in place,tbh it was shite,but very safe.

Pubs are a changed animal now from what i can see,but its up to every individual to choose  which pub they feel safe in.

[mickO)))]

Yes the pubs are a bit shit now. I have been back in Ireland 7 weeks and I have been to the pub 6 or 7 times since then. The pubs are now basically what they were in Canada before all this shit started. You walk in are brought to a table then you are stuck at the table for the night the only reason for getting up is to use the toilet or if someone wants to smoke. All drinks are brought to the table (I wonder how long it's going to be before they start trying to introduce tipping) It's not bad for a quite drink but when it's like this each and every time you go out it gets boring very fast.

One of the local nightclubs has filled the premises up with tables and they basically blast music in exactly the same way as if you were in the pre virus nightclub but everyone has to stay seated so it's pretty shitty and I won't be going back there again.

Will be in Galway this weekend so it will be interesting to see what it's like down there. I am happy they got rid of those ridiculous meals and no matter what happens in the coming weeks I can't see that ever being brought back in.

[astfgyl]

Dr Ronan Glynn said this evening "it's certainly not a strategy that will be adopted in this country".

Who the fuck put him in charge? So NPHET are running the country?

Didn't think so, the thick cunts.

[Bigmac]

Is there actually evidence that an "awful lot of young people MIGHT have to die"?

https://www.thejournal.ie/herd-immunity-nphet-5213262-Sep2020/

Ah, just realised that's the article your quote is from, astfgyl.