Lockdown and restrictions all for nothing?

circadian

TRANQUILLO wrote: »

https://youtu.be/eKKIr425b40

A rebuttal to the rebuttal. Cummins bites back.

As much as he wants to claim it's not pseudo-science, it just is. Cherry picking data and not using the entire collection of information is what these charlatans do.

Dolores Cahill done this. She used her credentials to push an agenda with partial information and complete fabrications.

Ivor is doing the same.

Also note that Computing Forever is trying to get him on his channel off the back of this tells you everything you need to know.

air

is_that_so wrote: »

He was effectively agitating against his employer. As they said that was untenable and no employer will tolerate that.

That policy excludes virtually every medical professional in the country from the debate then.

irishblessing

air wrote: »

That policy excludes virtually every medical professional in the country from the debate then.

I think I get your point. And it's important to any democracy to have free speech and opposing viewpoints.

I feel that we're in a different spot with this virus though. We're at a very worrying time in which all of us need to pull together in order to bring the cases down so as not to overwhelm our health services, which affects so many others who need it for other reasons also, and to prevent illness and death. To be able to keep our economy going and not have to shut down people's livelihoods.

In order to achieve all that, we need to have people rowing together in the same direction. There is so much confusion and lack of clarity or trust as it is, that we really can't have more confusion thrown into the mix which would cause even more people to ignore the advice that right now needs to be heeded.

air

I think people would be a lot more supportive of the measures if they were allowed to be openly discussed and were clearly linked to solid science.

We introduced face coverings months after other countries for example by which time data from those countries clearly showed they had no impact at all on virus transmission, cases or deaths.

Cummins posted graphs from several different EU countries, Scotland, Germany, Poland & Slovakia included off the top of my head, with the date of introduction of masks marked.
There was zero impact from them, no room for debate whatsoever.
It's pointless discussing various postulated studies when we have real world data on hundreds of millions of people to hand.

That we proceeded to introduce masks despite this lead to an erosion in public confidence iny opinion.

Furthermore, the government have made error after error in the fight against the virus but this is buried & we tell ourselves what a great job we're doing.

Perhaps if these failings were discussed in a more open manner & new restrictions were introduced along with supporting evidence for their efficacy, people would have more faith in the government.

irishblessing

What data is showing that masks have no impact at all on virus transmission?

The Director of the American CDC just stated that face masks may provide more protection than a covid vaccine. The WHO and ECDC (does and doesn't :-s) also recommends face masks. They're worn in other major countries around the world. Are you saying that all the worlds leading science and health experts have the science wrong?

The delay in the wearing of them was down to the fact it would create shortages for the healthcare/front line workers at that time.

The strange thing is the ECDC does not recommend them, yet NPHET apparently takes their lead from them and we're all wearing them. Probably because our class sizes are among the worst in Europe, we haven't invested in school infrastructure or funding, and it's impossible to SD in most of them.

How could you prove no impact on transmission, if the wearing of them are actually preventing worse outbreaks?

This seems to be what the ECDC's position is, but it seems to go against other scientific research.

Then they post other articles saying that facemasks actually do help.

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/COVID-19-use-face-masks-community.pdf

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/using-face-masks-community-reducing-covid-19-transmission

How would anyone know wtf to think.

Sorry, but I think discussion of the government failings are pretty widespread and out in the open. I hear it every time I scan the radio.

I think the science behind some restrictions are there, other times its being driven by economic needs.

air

irishblessing wrote: »

What data is showing that masks have no impact at all on virus transmission?

I've attached screenshots from Cummins video that I mentioned on R value and estimated case numbers for Austria and Scotland respectively. The other countries are all similar, no correlation whatsoever between the introduction of masks and Covid.

irishblessing wrote: »

The Director of the American CDC just stated that face masks may provide more protection than a covid vaccine.

What data does he present to support his argument?
No covid vaccine is likley to be very effective as Beda Stadler outlines in his interview. Young people who will respond to the vaccine are not heavily impacted by Covid so a vaccine is of little use to them.
The old and vulnerable don't have a strong immune response to the disease, the same will be true of the vaccine and it will not greatly improve their lot.

irishblessing wrote: »

The WHO and ECDC (does and doesn't :-s) also recommends face masks.

So there you go,the position is not clear.

irishblessing wrote: »

They're worn in other major countries around the world.

Not a compelling argument for them.

irishblessing wrote: »

Are you saying that all the worlds leading science and health experts have the science wrong?

It has been suggested by Cummins and others that masks are merely social engineering. They are being made mandatory to provide an illusion of control and security. In the absence of any other compelling reason for wearing them I'm inclined to agree.

irishblessing wrote: »

The delay in the wearing of them was down to the fact it would create shortages for the healthcare/front line workers at that time.

I agree that was a factor all right. However we were told that they could do more harm than good at one point also.

irishblessing wrote: »

The strange thing is the ECDC does not recommend them, yet NPHET apparently takes their lead from them and we're all wearing them.

Not surprising to me at all that there is no scientific basis behind the advice of NPHET.

irishblessing wrote: »

Probably because our class sizes are among the worst in Europe, we haven't invested in school infrastructure or funding, and it's impossible to SD in most of them.

Class sizes? Children are virtually completely immune to Covid and are not a recognised vector, I don't think there is much debate about that.

irishblessing wrote: »

How could you prove no impact on transmission, if the wearing of them are actually preventing worse outbreaks?

Our case numbers have gone through the roof since we introduced them. Where is the evidence suggesting they prevent worse outbreaks?

irishblessing wrote: »

This seems to be what the ECDC's position is, but it seems to go against other scientific research.

So you agree that the government advice goes against what the ECDC says. Surely this does not reflect well on that advice?

irishblessing wrote: »

Sorry, but I think discussion of the government failings are pretty widespread and out in the open. I hear it every time I scan the radio.

I think the science behind some restrictions are there, other times its being driven by economic needs.

Fair enough. But you have to acknowledge that all these failings were under the advice of our so called experts, which surely means they have been completely discredited by this point?

What exactly have they gotten right to date in terms of public health policy around Covid?

irishblessing

That's a lot to chew on, you were very thorough there, ha ha.

But for now- your statement "Class sizes? Children are virtually completely immune to Covid and are not a recognised vector, I don't think there is much debate about that."

That is not what science shows. Can you please link to any research showing that children are completely immune to Covid? I don't think I need to link any showing that very young children have a high viral load and children 10 years of age and older have been shown to contract and spread at least as well as adults do (as per Mike Ryan of WHO), as that science is (or should be very well known by this stage). But I've never seen any research that says children are completely immune. There have been school outbreaks all over the world and closures, it's just beginning to kick off here. more than 100 school children have already tested positive for Covid. That's not immunity.

Case numbers are rising due to situations in which masks aren't being worn, as the data shows. Surely it would be much worse by now if we weren't wearing masks.

As for what our government got right in terms of public health policy around Covid - well our health system wasn't overrun because of the actions they took. They also provided financial support for people who were out of work due to lockdowns. They have gotten a clear message out early on that we need to social distance, wash hands, and not touch our faces.
They haven't been perfect, and I'm very critical of the way schools were opened and without a hybrid/blended/remote learning support model. There's been more recent mistakes, and I'm not convinced that the pub policy is fair to owners, while letting house parties rage on.

air

irishblessing wrote: »

That's a lot to chew on, you were very thorough there, ha ha.

Only yourself to blame

irishblessing wrote: »

That is not what science shows. Can you please link to any research showing that children are completely immune to Covid? I don't think I need to link any showing that very young children have a high viral load and children 10 years of age and older have been shown to contract and spread at least as well as adults do (as per Mike Ryan of WHO), as that science is (or should be very well known by this stage). But I've never seen any research that says children are completely immune. There have been school outbreaks all over the world and closures, it's just beginning to kick off here. more than 100 school children have already tested positive for Covid. That's not immunity.

I was curt in that regard, what I meant was that kids aren't impacted by Covid, they almost never get sick. I'm not denying that they pick it up from one another.
I'm not sure if there's any evidence to suggest them getting it is a serious issue.
Mortality is effectively zero under 18 across the world as far as I'm aware.
Travel to school is probably 100x + more of a risk to schoolchildren than Covid at a guess.

irishblessing wrote: »

Case numbers are rising due to situations in which masks aren't being worn, as the data shows. Surely it would be much worse by now if we weren't wearing masks.

I don't think there's any data to suggest that the masks were the difference in this regard.
We had nobody working in shops wearing masks from March to at least June and little or no shop workers got Covid to my knowledge despite them not wearing masks and dealing with the public face to face 8 hours a day.

irishblessing wrote: »

As for what our government got right in terms of public health policy around Covid - well our health system wasn't overrun because of the actions they took.

It wasn't overrun no, but it was virtually shut down. What's the difference in terms of access to healthcare? Very little!

No cancer screening, hundreds of thousands of elective procedures cancelled etc.
They guaranteed the result they were trying to avoid as far as I can tell.

irishblessing wrote: »

They also provided financial support for people who were out of work due to lockdowns.

Who will pay for this and what did it achieve?
The taxpayer is on the hook and we are possibly in a much worse position than Sweden at this point with far worse herd immunity going into winter.
I will admit that a lockdown was prudent in the face of the unknown in March but it should have been rolled back months before it was.
It is certain that the lockdown will cause multiples of the deaths that Covid has to date and orders of magnitude greater life years lost.

irishblessing wrote: »

They have gotten a clear message out early on that we need to social distance, wash hands, and not touch our faces.

I'll give them that, a serious result for 30 billion spent.

I had a look at the CDC article you posted and they discuss the potential effectiveness of the vaccine.
It says that 75% effectiveness is the best they can hope for realistically.
You can bet that the 25% of the population that won't be covered are the people that are dying from Covid today, ergo the vaccines are likely to be quite ineffective at best.

irishblessing

Here's blowing your "children are immune" hogwash out the water-

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/summary/

PS: It's impossible to respond to all of those questions in any one discussion without spending too much of my time to give it the thoughtful response it deserves. How about pick one or two issues first to focus on.

snowcat

irishblessing wrote: »

Here's blowing your "children are immune" hogwash out the water-

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/summary/

PS: It's impossible to respond to all of those questions in any one discussion without spending too much of my time to give it the thoughtful response it deserves. How about pick one or two issues first to focus on.

On those figures one thing stands out to me. The ICU number and deaths. 454 patients went to ICU. I believe circa 80% of ICU cases survived so 90 people died in ICU. So 1300 or so of the deaths did not even make it to ICU or hospital.

air

irishblessing wrote: »

Here's blowing your "children are immune" hogwash out the water-

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/summary/

PS: It's impossible to respond to all of those questions in any one discussion without spending too much of my time to give it the thoughtful response it deserves. How about pick one or two issues first to focus on.

I clarified that I meant in terms of illness related to it, not actually picking up the virus.
How many children have been admitted to hospital for Covid? Very close to zero I'm sure as they are almost 100% asymptomatic when they have it.

The large number of topics was primarily from me responding to others, if you're not interested enough to engage why bother posting.

air

snowcat wrote: »

So 1300 or so of the deaths did not even make it to ICU.

Exactly, and this is a relatively slow moving disease so it's not like there wouldn't have been opportunity to, furthermore our ICUs have never reached capacity.

So why weren't they admitted to ICU?

The reality is that those 1300 were almost exclusively elderly people at end of life & for at least half of them (per the RTE article posted earlier) Covid was not even a significant factor in their deaths.

nthclare

The thing I hear often enough is people have died "WITH" Covid 19, not of or covid 19.

If you break down the reports and read it or listen to it slowly you'll see how the sensationalism gets into people's Psyche.

A lot of sociopaths, narcissts and psychopath's are really getting off on this situation it's not hard to figure that out.

A lot of NPC's and loons are working for the tabloid's and media outlets.

Fear sells that's for sure and there's something really messed up and sinister about how this is being handled and people's anxiety and fear levels are amplified.

Any idiot who stocked up on toilet roll are metaphorically similar to the chicken licken and the sky falling down story.

Warbeastrior

Can someone paraphrase?
I'm too busy to watch it all (Really just couldn't be bothered)

4068ac1elhodqr

Was at first very sceptical of Sweden's approach, but as time goes on, it's looking now like a good call, with every passing day
i.e. the keep calm and carry on approach.

Then take a look over at the uk's approach, panic and mismanagement from the getgo, not to mention other worring stats {since lockdown} starting to appear:

'Dangerous' drinking levels up approx 1/3rd (with 1/2m extra at increased levels, classed:dangerous) from 1.6m to 2.2m
Domestic violence levels up approx 200%
Calls to adult helplines with mental issues up around 200%
Zero deaths(covid) of any healthy children*, and no recommendations (<11) to wear facecoverings, yet many primary schools proudly enforcing manditory usage of.
Calls to childline also up approx 200%, largest risk to youngsters is now self-termination incidents.
Long-term damage due to isolation/distancing policies (some even regard this as a torture technique)
Long-term increase in other health issues, e.g. cancers due to reduced access to services
Collapse of enterprise activities and they have 186,000 redundancies since March 23.
and so on...

irishblessing

air wrote: »

I clarified that I meant in terms of illness related to it, not actually picking up the virus.
How many children have been admitted to hospital for Covid? Very close to zero I'm sure as they are almost 100% asymptomatic when they have it.

The large number of topics was primarily from me responding to others, if you're not interested enough to engage why bother posting.

I am interested in engaging, but it currently feels like a bombardment. Happy to chip away and chat about things I just think it would be more useful and manageable to narrow it a bit.

Here's an article discussing the recent "Confirmed Covid-19 hospital patients rise to 51 as 11 children admitted."

Check this out, page 8, which summarises hospitalisations by age group of covid.
In the age group of newborn-14yrs of age, the number is 37 for hospitalisations. Up to 7 in ICU. Then you'll have a portion of the 69 hospitalisations as well but the age range is 15-24 so there will be some in the 15-18yrs of age category as well.

Keep in mind much of these stats were from during a time in which schools and clubs were closed. Now that they are mixing once again, the numbers will rise.

Edited to add, those figures were from mid-June. I went to the HPSC website and remembered they publish figures weekly.
Hospitalisations of yesterday by age:
0-4: 29
5-14:19
15-24: 88

Here's the link:The daily epidemiology of COVID-19 in Ireland report and the 14 day COVID-19 epidemiology reports are available at HPSC.ie/COVID-19epidemiology
https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/casesinireland/epidemiologyofcovid-19inireland/COVID-19_Daily_epidemiology_report_(NPHET)_20200918%20-%20Website.pdf

road_high

weldoninhio wrote: »

Exponential growth. Thrown around a lot. No one seems to actually know what it means. Fair play lads.

No but it sounds scary. Like some kind of George lee vernacular

donaghs

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hardly picking up dead virus months later.

Why wouldn’t it? Because it “doesn’t fit the narrative?” There’s been lots of concerns about test reliability.

In particular, concerns that tests are picking up dead virus in recovered people:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/health-54000629

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-30/dead-coronavirus-particles-muddy-the-outcome-of-test-results

MerlinSouthDub

irishblessing wrote: »

I am interested in engaging, but it currently feels like a bombardment. Happy to chip away and chat about things I just think it would be more useful and manageable to narrow it a bit.

Here's an article discussing the recent "Confirmed Covid-19 hospital patients rise to 51 as 11 children admitted."

Check this out, page 8, which summarises hospitalisations by age group of covid.
In the age group of newborn-14yrs of age, the number is 37 for hospitalisations. Up to 7 in ICU. Then you'll have a portion of the 69 hospitalisations as well but the age range is 15-24 so there will be some in the 15-18yrs of age category as well.

Keep in mind much of these stats were from during a time in which schools and clubs were closed. Now that they are mixing once again, the numbers will rise.

Edited to add, those figures were from mid-June. I went to the HPSC website and remembered they publish figures weekly.
Hospitalisations of yesterday by age:
0-4: 29
5-14:19
15-24: 88

Here's the link:The daily epidemiology of COVID-19 in Ireland report and the 14 day COVID-19 epidemiology reports are available at HPSC.ie/COVID-19epidemiology
https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/casesinireland/epidemiologyofcovid-19inireland/COVID-19_Daily_epidemiology_report_(NPHET)_20200918%20-%20Website.pdf

The evidence from every country in the world is that the flu is more dangerous to children than covid-19. It is a proven fact.

The_Brood

It is an outrage how much we are allowing to be taken away from us. An outrage. The only people defending this at this stage are those with happy, sorted lives that are not in danger of losing anything. Lockdowns do nothing but criple the entire population.

Masks and 2 meter distance is enough.

irishblessing

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

The evidence from every country in the world is that the flu is more dangerous to children than covid-19. It is a proven fact.

Where is your evidence to prove that fact.

tobefrank321

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

The evidence from every country in the world is that the flu is more dangerous to children than covid-19. It is a proven fact.

The impact seems to be similar alright. I think one child died from the flu in Ireland last winter and in the US about 150 died from it.

air

air wrote: »

I think people would be a lot more supportive of the measures if they were allowed to be openly discussed and were clearly linked to solid science.

We introduced face coverings months after other countries for example by which time data from those countries clearly showed they had no impact at all on virus transmission, cases or deaths.

Cummins posted graphs from several different EU countries, Scotland, Germany, Poland & Slovakia included off the top of my head, with the date of introduction of masks marked.
There was zero impact from them, no room for debate whatsoever.
It's pointless discussing various postulated studies when we have real world data on hundreds of millions of people to hand.

That we proceeded to introduce masks despite this lead to an erosion in public confidence iny opinion.

Furthermore, the government have made error after error in the fight against the virus but this is buried & we tell ourselves what a great job we're doing.

Perhaps if these failings were discussed in a more open manner & new restrictions were introduced along with supporting evidence for their efficacy, people would have more faith in the government.

One of the many pseudo scientific moments in his video. There are hundreds of variables involved in the R value. His "proof" is meaningless.

circadian

[Deleted User] wrote: »

One of the many pseudo scientific moments in his video. There are hundreds of variables involved in the R value. His "proof" is meaningless.

I've noticed these charlatans are very good at cherry picking data and taking it out of context to suit their agenda.

A nice rule of thumb is if someone is posting on YouTube and in the comments that eejit Computing Forever is hitting them up to be on his channel then your bull**** detector should be bouncing off the wall.

4068ac1elhodqr

More statistical evidence of a severe shock on the way over in the uk, some figures released this week (to add to the others, mentioned a few posts back):

• 322,000 are now behind in their rents on accomodation.
• 174,000 have 'eviction action' started against them, and an eviction ban was also lifted this week.
• 3,600 deaths from preventable heart conditions and strokes, a top expert warned (Dr S. Babu-Narayan, associate medical director at the BHF)
• Full lockdowns will cost £250m per day
• FTSE down 3% today (Monday), as the likelyhood of a lockdown looms.

All big numbers to consider, not to mention the 'growing' amount of obese (not just plain overweight) people (1/4, well 27% actually of their entire population) whom are 200% (twice) more likely to succumb to covid, yet lockdowns only increase this trend further, due to panic/comfort eating and outdoor activity or sport restrictions.

In light of news from Sweden, and the weaker mutated strain now becoming more prevelant, any sudden lockdown needs greater consideration than ever before.
Certainly Christmas, maybe Haloween are the best natural times for some short 2wk periods of reduced activity and travel.

breezy1985

Loving all these threads with loaded statements followed by a ? to give a pretence of the OP not being sure

Duke of Url

begbysback wrote: »

I find it insanely surreal that people are dismissing some glaringly obvious facts pointed out in the video. The scaremongering and the brainwashing has fully taken hold, and unless somebody actually volunteers to inject Covid into their veins and survives then nothing, and I mean nothing, will get these people out from behind their sofa an grow a pair.

Im amazed that there are so many Experts in Disease Control and Prevention posting on boards.

If people want to take preventive measures good for you.

If people want to play roulette with COVID19 go for it.

air

[Deleted User] wrote: »

One of the many pseudo scientific moments in his video. There are hundreds of variables involved in the R value. His "proof" is meaningless.

Yes hundreds of variables & mask wearing is clearly not a significant one.

air

air wrote: »

Yes hundreds of variables & mask wearing is clearly not a significant one.

You could well be correct but the graph he provides doesn't say either way

air

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You could well be correct but the graph he provides doesn't say either way

Precisely, it shows there is no correlation at all which begs the question as to why we introduced masks (against ECDC guidance apparently) in light of a complete lack of any appreciable impact on the countries which had introduced them.

The most obvious reason I can see is that it's a very visible sign of government action, done in order to create an illusion of control over the situation.

He provides 5 different graphs from various countries btw & even the two I posted are plotted against different metrics.

Do you have any population based data to show masks are effective?
Surely widely available now as hundreds of millions have been wearing them for months.