FG to just do nothing for the next 5 years.

Shefwedfan

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Somebody was making the inhuman and sickening point that the general population's safety and health was prioritised over the more vulnerable. That Simon Harris's 'inaction' pointed 'to the success of the strategy that was implemented with the rest of the population'.

That doesn't sit well with me anyhow having vulnerable people in my family, who cannot look out for themselves.

Nobody made that point.....


Or points to the success of the strategy that was implemented with the rest of the population?


That is what they posted, so quit with the over dramatics......

FrancieBrady

Augeo wrote: »

It's frankly not true, the vulnerable have been prioritised in all of this.
Those in nursing homes were higher risk due to the number of folk there and staff coming and going. Very unfortunate and more could have been done for them, no doubt.

How the f*** do you know that at this stage?

jesus, the efforts people are going to to make sure the gloss doesn't come off the FG capes.

Fann Linn

Fann Linn wrote: »

In fairness they weren't. Fact is their rep has continually stated that on March 6 they wrote to HSE looking for specific guidelines in relation to nursing homes which were ignored and PPE and other services have been curtailed.

It's a difficult one.
Cocooning and self isolation is a non runner in nursing homes. Front line workers with PPE have contracted Covid19 from patients so PPE isn't the solution lots of folk claim it is either.
Short of advising the staff to live there and no other folk on site whatsoever I'm not sure what could have been done.

FrancieBrady

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Nobody made that point.....





That is what they posted, so quit with the over dramatics......

Which was in reply to the following...'It looks as if Simon Harris' inaction has had a massive impact'.

'Or points to the success of the strategy that was implemented with the rest of the population? '

Or did they just post that sentence apropos of nothing? :rolleyes:

James Brown

Augeo wrote: »

Sure with herd immunity strategy the health service would be over ran in weeks. We'd be in a disaster situation now.

The health service was over run decades ago. But that was a problem for people who couldn't afford private. The scale has certainly changed and like FG get voters off of, 'it could be worse', yes it could have been, but FF/FG do not have a record for giving two f***s about the health system.
FG taking a hands off approach has helped, apart from private bed rentals obviously but FG gonna FG.

Augeo

Augeo wrote: »

It's frankly not true, the vulnerable have been prioritised in all of this.
Those in nursing homes were higher risk due to the number of folk there and staff coming and going. Very unfortunate and more could have been done for them, no doubt.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How the f*** do you know that at this stage?

jesus, the efforts people are going to to make sure the gloss doesn't come off the FG capes.

How do I know what Francie?
Ease off on the expletives now, we aren't at an old firm game.

Bowie

Bowie wrote: »

The health service was over run decades ago. But that was a problem for people who couldn't afford private. The scale has certainly changed and like FG get voters off of, 'it could be worse', yes it could have been, but FF/FG do not have a record for giving two f***s about the health system.
FG taking a hands off approach has helped, apart from private bed rentals obviously but FG gonna FG.

I was referring to overrun in relation to covid19 herd immunity approach.

FrancieBrady

Augeo wrote: »

How do I know what Francie?
Ease off on the expletives now, we aren't at an old firm game.

It's frankly not true,

It's preposterous that you proclaiming that at this point.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Somebody was making the inhuman and sickening point that the general population's safety and health was prioritised over the more vulnerable..................

Augeo wrote: »

It's frankly not true, the vulnerable have been prioritised in all of this.............

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's preposterous that you proclaiming that at this point.

It's obvious Francie, the entire country not involved in essential activity are at home unless they are food shopping or doing brief exercise within 2km of home.
That is to benefit the more vulnerable, the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions.

Jaysus.

If they weren't we'd all be out and about as usual.

Francie is ringing head office / diesel laundering plant for guidance on his next response.

Macy0161

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Nobody made that point.....


Or points to the success of the strategy that was implemented with the rest of the population?


That is what they posted, so quit with the over dramatics......

I wasn't dismissing what has happened in nursing homes. I think the assessment of whatever strategy was, or wasn't, taken is really months if not years away.

My point was that "half" of all deaths can be taken as either a failure of the strategy in nursing homes, or as an indicator of the success of the wider strategy that has avoided the impact on the wider community - therefore making nursing homes a higher percentage of overall deaths.

"Half" isn't the appropriate indicator, in my view. And that was really my point.

James Brown

Augeo wrote: »

I was referring to overrun in relation to covid19 herd immunity approach.

I know. You also said, "..the health service would be over ran in weeks. We'd be in a disaster situation now."

I pointed out is was over run long ago. Kenny called it a scandal in 2011. Of course it's continued breaking records year on year since then.

James Brown

Macy0161 wrote: »

I wasn't dismissing what has happened in nursing homes. I think the assessment of whatever strategy was, or wasn't, taken is really months if not years away.

My point was that "half" of all deaths can be taken as either a failure of the strategy in nursing homes, or as an indicator of the success of the wider strategy that has avoided the impact on the wider community - therefore making nursing homes a higher percentage of overall deaths.

"Half" isn't the appropriate indicator, in my view. And that was really my point.

As with any number of people in an enclosed space together it was sadly inevitable. I'm not sure what could have been done. Possible sectioning off areas in homes, which I'm sure they tried.

Loafing Oaf

Bowie wrote: »

As with any number of people in an enclosed space together it was sadly inevitable. I'm not sure what could have been done. Possible sectioning off areas in homes, which I'm sure they tried.

If this business of staff working at multiple homes wasn't stopped at the outset of the epidemic, it certainly should have been...

But yeah, other countries with more advanced health services than Ireland saw this nursing home catastrophe coming and could not prevent it

FrancieBrady

Augeo wrote: »

It's obvious Francie, the entire country not involved in essential activity are at home unless they are food shopping or doing brief exercise within 2km of home.
That is to benefit the more vulnerable, the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions.

Jaysus.

If they weren't we'd all be out and about as usual.

They don't seem to have been properly equipped as a priority. That is what the staff are saying and one of the reasons for the resignation.

As I said, these are allegations...it is far far too early for you to be confidently claiming it that 'it's frankly not true'.

And I didn't have to approach anyone for that nugget of common sense.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?

You have a doctor resigning from the Medical COuncil, citing a complete lack of care and prep for this sector and just today the 11th patient of a home in Dundalk dies with staff citing the lack of PPE and preparedness as a reason?

I have let you go on with this for the last 24 hours without responding to see how big a hole you would dig for yourself.

For a start, you have been running around with the nonsense that this is particularly embarassing for Simon Harris because it was one of his nominees. To be fair to you, the journalists reporting on it have been almost as ignorant of the facts as you. Here is a link to the structure of the Medical Council:

https://www.medicalcouncil.ie/about-us/the-medical-council/

As you can see, it has 25 members, both elected and appointed. Your friend, Dr. de Brun was elected, not appointed.

https://www.medicalcouncil.ie/about-us/elections/election-results/election-results.html

So the first contention you have made about this is factually inaccurate.

I was going to leave it there because the rest of your posting on this, bordering on the hysterical at times, is completely undermined by your misunderstanding of the basic fact that Dr. de Brun, is not, was not and never was an appointee of the Minister. However, it gets better, much better.

Why are doctors elected to the Medical Council? Well, effectively they are the equivalent of the union reps elected to the Teaching Council and other regulatory bodies. You may remember that the medical profession has had several run-ins with the Minister over fees for GPs and rates of pay for consultants etc. and that such types of reps might not have the best regard for Harris as a result. At a minimum that should have made you pause before your knee-jerk support for anyone saying anything bad about the government.

So is Dr. De Brun on the same wavelength as other critics? I have had a look at Dr. De Brun's CV. An interesting and strange character, whose most recent educational qualification is in Philosophy, not Public Health as you might expect from his public pronouncements.

So what does your friend Marcus think of Coronavirus?

https://sway.office.com/PwTN7GCvJWDgn9yd?ref=Link&loc=play


"Herd-Immunity is an inevitable consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic. In the absence of a vaccine and if environmental or climate related factors are not
influential upon reducing spread of the virus, Herd-Immunity is the only viable
means of eradication."

"Unfortunately, an unavoidable consequence of 'lock-down' and social distancing is that Herd-Immunity is effectively delayed, and in this sense an increasing amount of time is afforded to the virus permitting and possibly
encouraging its mutation."

Essentially he argues against the lockdown. Up until now, you have been consistently arguing that not enough was done to lockdown the country, from banning flights from Italy for the rugby game to Cheltenham to stopping flights into Dublin to fruit-pickers, your constant position has been that the government has not done enough.

Yet here you are doing a complete u-turn and supporting a man who suggests that the government has done too much and imposed too much of a lockdown. It just beggars belief that you of all posters have done that.

The credibility of every other single post you have made on coronavirus is fatally undermined by your support of Dr. de Brun. You are holding two completely contradictory views at the exact same time.

A very amusing spectacle it has been.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I have let you go on with this for the last 24 hours without responding to see how big a hole you would dig for yourself.

For a start, you have been running around with the nonsense that this is particularly embarassing for Simon Harris because it was one of his nominees. To be fair to you, the journalists reporting on it have been almost as ignorant of the facts as you. Here is a link to the structure of the Medical Council:

https://www.medicalcouncil.ie/about-us/the-medical-council/

As you can see, it has 25 members, both elected and appointed. Your friend, Dr. de Brun was elected, not appointed.

https://www.medicalcouncil.ie/about-us/elections/election-results/election-results.html

So the first contention you have made about this is factually inaccurate.

I was going to leave it there because the rest of your posting on this, bordering on the hysterical at times, is completely undermined by your misunderstanding of the basic fact that Dr. de Brun, is not, was not and never was an appointee of the Minister. However, it gets better, much better.

Why are doctors elected to the Medical Council? Well, effectively they are the equivalent of the union reps elected to the Teaching Council and other regulatory bodies. You may remember that the medical profession has had several run-ins with the Minister over fees for GPs and rates of pay for consultants etc. and that such types of reps might not have the best regard for Harris as a result. At a minimum that should have made you pause before your knee-jerk support for anyone saying anything bad about the government.

So is Dr. De Brun on the same wavelength as other critics? I have had a look at Dr. De Brun's CV. An interesting and strange character, whose most recent educational qualification is in Philosophy, not Public Health as you might expect from his public pronouncements.

So what does your friend Marcus think of Coronavirus?

https://sway.office.com/PwTN7GCvJWDgn9yd?ref=Link&loc=play


"Herd-Immunity is an inevitable consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic. In the absence of a vaccine and if environmental or climate related factors are not
influential upon reducing spread of the virus, Herd-Immunity is the only viable
means of eradication."

"Unfortunately, an unavoidable consequence of 'lock-down' and social distancing is that Herd-Immunity is effectively delayed, and in this sense an increasing amount of time is afforded to the virus permitting and possibly
encouraging its mutation."

Essentially he argues against the lockdown. Up until now, you have been consistently arguing that not enough was done to lockdown the country, from banning flights from Italy for the rugby game to Cheltenham to stopping flights into Dublin to fruit-pickers, your constant position has been that the government has not done enough.

Yet here you are doing a complete u-turn and supporting a man who suggests that the government has done too much and imposed too much of a lockdown. It just beggars belief that you of all posters have done that.

The credibility of every other single post you have made on coronavirus is fatally undermined by your support of Dr. de Brun. You are holding two completely contradictory views at the exact same time.

A very amusing spectacle it has been.

So effectively all you have done is what was done to other whistleblowers/messengers, which is to disparage and dilute what they are saying.

Fair enough, not going there. The allegations are there and I would imagine thet will keep coming.

Shefwedfan

Macy0161 wrote: »

I wasn't dismissing what has happened in nursing homes. I think the assessment of whatever strategy was, or wasn't, taken is really months if not years away.

My point was that "half" of all deaths can be taken as either a failure of the strategy in nursing homes, or as an indicator of the success of the wider strategy that has avoided the impact on the wider community - therefore making nursing homes a higher percentage of overall deaths.

"Half" isn't the appropriate indicator, in my view. And that was really my point.

I wasn't been critical. I got your point. Some people have nothing better to do than try and twist what people say. Its a sad little competition on this thread with a couple of posters. It won't take you long to pick them out

FrancieBrady

Shefwedfan wrote: »

I wasn't been critical. I got your point. Some people have nothing better to do than try and twist what people say. Its a sad little competition on this thread with a couple of posters. It won't take you long to pick them out

Says the poster who has neither backed up what he said about me nor apologised for his lie

smurgen

Augeo wrote: »

So you wanted a disaster outside of nursing homes?
More could have been done in nursing homes............ I'd not advocate for less being done outside of them though.
And if the lad who resigned wanted that he's a loon IMO.

That's some comprehension of what I said.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So effectively all you have done is what was done to other whistleblowers/messengers, which is to disparage and dilute what they are saying.

Fair enough, not going there. The allegations are there and I would imagine thet will keep coming.

Not at all, Dr. de Brun may well be correct, if he is, it will be some vindication for Gemma O'Doherty as well, but the point I was making is that he is saying the complete opposite of everything you have posted on this subject in hundreds of posts over the last month, yet you are doubling down on supporting him.

Even the road to Damascus never saw a conversion like this.

landofthetree

Pretty funny to see a Green party TD on rte news saying we can't have austerity like we did under FG.

Tbf they have been brilliant at getting the public to forget 2007-2011.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Not at all, Dr. de Brun may well be correct, if he is, it will be some vindication for Gemma O'Doherty as well, but the point I was making is that he is saying the complete opposite of everything you have posted on this subject in hundreds of posts over the last month, yet you are doubling down on supporting him.

Even the road to Damascus never saw a conversion like this.

Not in his criticism of the preparedness in nursing homes. Coupled with what staff have been saying, it remains to be seen if he is right and the staff are right.
What his other views are are immaterial to me.
One of the staff could believe the moon is made of cheese...doesn't alter the allegation.

So sling your hook with yet another attempt by you to shoot the messenger

James Brown

landofthetree wrote: »

Pretty funny to see a Green party TD on rte news saying we can't have austerity like we did under FG.

Tbf they have been brilliant at getting the public to forget 2007-2011.

I think the fiscally conservative FG with their record breaking year on year crises blaming everyone but themselves while trumpeting how great their economy is has that beat hands down. They're still selling the steady hand baloney too.

James Brown

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not in his criticism of the preparedness in nursing homes. Coupled with what staff have been saying, it remains to be seen if he is right and the staff are right.
What his other views are are immaterial to me.
One of the staff could believe the moon is made of cheese...doesn't alter the allegation.

So sling your hook with yet another attempt by you to shoot the messenger

It's thinly veiled character assassination. We saw it from the same quarter with Garda McCabe too.

FrancieBrady

Bowie wrote: »

It's thinly veiled character assassination. We saw it from the same quarter with Garda McCabe too.

Yeh and it was as distasteful then as it is now. Not going there.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not in his criticism of the preparedness in nursing homes. Coupled with what staff have been saying, it remains to be seen if he is right and the staff are right.
What his other views are are immaterial to me.
One of the staff could believe the moon is made of cheese...doesn't alter the allegation.

So sling your hook with yet another attempt by you to shoot the messenger

No, not at all, I have no issue with Dr. de Brun, he might be right, but your 100s of posts over the last month can't be right as well.

You are adopting the old tactic that the enemy (De Brun) of my enemy (FG) is my friend.

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

It's thinly veiled character assassination. We saw it from the same quarter with Garda McCabe too.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yeh and it was as distasteful then as it is now. Not going there.

Complete fabrication of what I said.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

No, not at all, I have no issue with Dr. de Brun, he might be right, but your 100s of posts over the last month can't be right as well.

You are adopting the old tactic that the enemy (De Brun) of my enemy (FG) is my friend.

I haven'tt made 100's of posts on the lack or not of preparedness in Nursing homes.

Please stop telling lies. What other stuff De Brun believes is of no relevance here as is other stuff the staff believe.

Stop shooting messengers blanch...it failed before.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Complete fabrication of what I said.

You belittle the qualifications and standing of any professional that may disagree with how Harris, the journalism drop out ironically, runs his ship, (is this were we are told the health minister does nothing?).
The chap had issues. We should be looking at the suggested issues not pissing on his standing. Harris has zero health background but you seem to take him seriously based on him being in his post.