Lockdown and restrictions all for nothing?

air

irishblessing wrote: »

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

Are these figures in the pdfs or on the website somewhere?

Has there been an increase in overall hospital admissions in these age groups?
Is there any clarity as to whether these patients were admitted due to Covid or with Covid?
An important distinction given the fact all hospital admissions are now tested & the large case numbers in young people now.

air

air wrote: »

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.

We seem to be agreement in some regards. This massive population curve cannot show a direct correlation to masks. There are far, far too many variables at play.

Where did the ECDC advise against masks?

What exactly is "population based data"?

There has been lots of papers written if that's what you mean: https://files.fast.ai/papers/masks_lit_review.pdf

air

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We seem to be agreement in some regards. This massive population curve cannot show a direct correlation to masks. There are far, far too many variables at play.

Of course, but if you decide to look at R, case numbers or any other metric and examine the trends in each and can find zero correlation with mask introduction in any country, I think it's fair to assume they have little or no impact.
There are many variables at play but when there is no evidence of any impact in any country I think it's fair to draw conclusions.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Where did the ECDC advise against masks?

I took that from a poster here on your side of the argument, I didn't try to verify their claim.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What exactly is "population based data"?

Publically available data on R, case & death numbers made available by Euromomo & national health services.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There has been lots of papers written if that's what you mean: https://files.fast.ai/papers/masks_lit_review.pdf

The available evidence suggests that near-universal adoption of non-medical masks when out in public, in combination
with complementary public health measures could successfully
reduce effective-R to below 1.0

I've quoted from the conclusion of that paper.
Our own population based study (actual health outcomes in this country) seem to contradict that finding as R has increased markedly here since masks were introduced.

This is in keeping with all of Cummins graphs which show zero correlation between R & mask wearing in any country.

air

air wrote: »

Of course, but if you decide to look at R, case numbers or any other metric and examine the trends in each and can find zero correlation with mask introduction in any country, I think it's fair to assume they have little or no impact.
There are many variables at play but when there is no evidence of any impact in any country I think it's fair to draw conclusions.

If you think it's fair to draw conclusions from that graph Cummins put up along with the date in which mandatory masks came in, we've got nothing else to talk about. It's reaching to say the least.

I took that from a poster here on your side of the argument, I didn't try to verify their claim.


Publically available data on R, case & death numbers made available by Euromomo & national health services.



I've quoted from the conclusion of that paper.
Our own population based study (actual health outcomes in this country) seem to contradict that finding as R has increased markedly here since masks were introduced.

This is in keeping with all of Cummins graphs which show zero correlation between R & mask wearing in any country.

Our own population based study? Are you talking about our increasing numbers across the country? R number has gone over 1 therefore masks don't work? It that what you are saying? We also almost completely opened up our economy at the same time. That is one of the many, many variables I keep harping on about; which are alluded to in the quote you picked

The available evidence suggests that near-universal adoption of non-medical masks when out in public, in combination
with complementary public health measures could successfully
reduce effective-R to below 1.0

I don't know why I keep dragging myself into these arguments. If you honestly think Cummins conclusion from those graphs is 100% sounds and flawless, we've nothing else to discuss. I'll never convince you.

air

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you think it's fair to draw conclusions from that graph Cummins put up along with the date in which mandatory masks came in, we've got nothing else to talk about. It's reaching to say the least.

I agree it's tenuous, but when it's repeated in every country it becomes a lot more compelling.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Our own population based study? Are you talking about our increasing numbers across the country? R number has gone over 1 therefore masks don't work? It that what you are saying? We also almost completely opened up our economy at the same time. That is one of the many, many variables I keep harping on about; which are alluded to in the quote you picked

I agree it's one of many variables but the fact is there is no evidence to suggest that they had any positive health impact at all, anywhere.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't know why I keep dragging myself into these arguments. If you honestly think Cummins conclusion from those graphs is 100% sounds and flawless, we've nothing else to discuss. I'll never convince you.

I don't believe it's flawless by any means but it's by far the best I've seen.
Impact on the disease (or lack of) in the population is surely the most important result of all.
If mask wearing by the populatiom is so ineffective as to be lost in the noise everywhere, I really don't see the point.
There is every bit as much possibility that they are doing harm as good.

BoatMad

What concerns me greatly is the mis information being spread by so called experts

Listening to the guy on drive time saying Covid is air spread not droplets contradicts directly what the WHO say on current guidance

These people are using their so called status to advocate policies that would destroy this country , he was pushing the zero Covid line , massive travel restrictions etc.

It’s disgraceful these people get unchallenged airtime , why doesn’t RTÉ have a challenger on as well

Mongfinder General

BoatMad wrote: »

What concerns me greatly is the mis information being spread by so called experts

Listening to the guy on drive time saying Covid is air spread not droplets contradicts directly what the WHO say on current guidance

These people are using their so called status to advocate policies that would destroy this country , he was pushing the zero Covid line , massive travel restrictions etc.

It’s disgraceful these people get unchallenged airtime , why doesn’t RTÉ have a challenger on as well

I've been a good boy to date and tried to following the guidance and rules set. I don't use public transport, I keep my distance from others and I try not touch **** or go any place that I don't need to. But it's a ****ing waste of time. There are just too many of us who just don't care. December will be mayhem, silly season will take it to another level.

BoatMad

Mongfinder General wrote: »

I've been a good boy to date and tried to following the guidance and rules set. I don't use public transport, I keep my distance from others and I try not touch **** or go any place that I don't need to. But it's a ****ing waste of time. There are just too many of us who just don't care. December will be mayhem, silly season will take it to another level.

Why do you think what you are doing will actually help. We have mayhem socially and economically already ( or just around the corner )

circadian

BoatMad wrote: »

What concerns me greatly is the mis information being spread by so called experts

Listening to the guy on drive time saying Covid is air spread not droplets contradicts directly what the WHO say on current guidance

These people are using their so called status to advocate policies that would destroy this country , he was pushing the zero Covid line , massive travel restrictions etc.

It’s disgraceful these people get unchallenged airtime , why doesn’t RTÉ have a challenger on as well

I still think Dolores Cahill is the worst of the lot of them. She's using her academic credentials to peddle bull****, mistruths and outright conspiracies to further her political career. She has absolutely abandoned science to attempt to push all sorts of insane right wing policies. Thankfully she's nowhere near getting elected but she is part of a cohort that is actively antagonising those who wish to believe in conspiracies.

BoatMad

circadian wrote: »

I still think Dolores Cahill is the worst of the lot of them. She's using her academic credentials to peddle bull****, mistruths and outright conspiracies to further her political career. She has absolutely abandoned science to attempt to push all sorts of insane right wing policies. Thankfully she's nowhere near getting elected but she is part of a cohort that is actively antagonising those who wish to believe in conspiracies.

Whatever about that I’m sick of sycophantic RTÉ presenters wheeling out unchallenged virologists and assorted gurus

Mongfinder General

BoatMad wrote: »

Why do you think what you are doing will actually help. We have mayhem socially and economically already ( or just around the corner )

I wore a mask because private businesses I need to purchase from requested me to do so. As for mayhem, do you mean like the time the IMF was given carte Blanche in this country but did fcuk all except recommend reducing the minimum wage and provide a few ****ty loans with stupid interest rates.
Well bring it on. Too many governments in the western world spending taxpayer and borrowed money on dead beats and dead beat programs. Time they were fcuked off.

mandrake04

Chivito550 wrote: »

So are we saying these statistics are all lies?

Looks well researched to me.

Chivito550 wrote: »

Cases or deaths? If the testing methods are picking up dead virus as cases then that's hardly a resurgence.

What do you think now?