Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VII *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

RobitTV

Charles Babbage wrote: »

At least two tests are needed to have any significant level of safety and two tests going back. There is no evidence of any credible plan to achieve this.

This is because there has been no engagement on this issue between the government and the aviation industry. This is a mistake.

They are actually making the situation potentially worse by refusing to engage with the DAA on testing in our airports. I cannot explain as to why they are refusing to engage, it's an utterly bizarre mystery.

RobitTV

Boggles wrote: »

That's what the ECDC document effectively does, which goes against their own recommendations.

But again, lets put aside them and NPHET and face the reality that there is no robust testing regimes at our ports.

Well they seem to have come to the conclusion that air travel is much safer then being out in any other public situations, they wouldn't recommend air travel if it wasn't safe for passengers. I don't personally see any reason for me to disagree with that analysis from the ECDC. People are going to come home to Ireland, and there is nothing that can be done at this stage. I blame the government for not investing in adequate testing facilities.

The ECDC is a well respected organisation and has a panel of international experts in all areas from aviation to pubs and restaurants. Everything is open for questioning, but they should explain this more clearly in future.

Boggles

RobitTV wrote: »

I don't personally see any reason for me to disagree with that analysis from the ECDC.

Basic maths and the fact it goes against their own advice would be 2 glaring reasons for me.

It would be dangerously stupid for Ireland to back the ECDC travel plan after all our hard work to get to the lowest infection rate in the EU.

RobitTV

Boggles wrote: »

Basic maths and the fact it goes against their own advice would be 2 glaring reasons for me.

It would be dangerously stupid for Ireland to back the ECDC travel plan after all our hard work to get to the lowest infection rate in the EU.

If it goes against their own advice as you say, then why are they currently pushing this new advice? Doesn't advice and information change throughout any time period. Maybe they have come to a different conclusion. Who are we to really understand, unless we find somebody who works for them to discover their day-to-day thinking.

Interestingly the rest of Europe has backed the ECDC plan. I can't imagine a continent full of trusted European experts are all wrong on this to be quite honest.

Nobody gets everything right, but it would be pretty extraordinary and damaging if the ECDC expert panel get this totally wrong. It would destroy the organisation.

Boggles

RobitTV wrote: »

This is because there has been no engagement on this issue between the government and the aviation industry. This is a mistake.

They are actually making the situation potentially worse by refusing to engage with the DAA on testing in our airports. I cannot explain as to why they are refusing to engage, it's an utterly bizarre mystery.

The ECDC in their document do not recommend testing at airports.

RobitTV wrote: »

Interestingly the rest of Europe has backed the ECDC plan. .

Have they? The rest of Europe is not a country on an island with the lowest infection rate.

RobitTV

Boggles wrote: »

The ECDC in their document do not recommend testing at airports.



Have they? The rest of Europe is not a country on an island with the lowest infection rate.

You do understand that the infection rate is going to increase since the lockdown measures have ended anyway. Come back by the new year and we will be having a different conversation. Things are changing on a daily basis. Nothing remains the same.

We wont remain this low.

Boggles

RobitTV wrote: »

You do understand that the infection rate is going to increase since the lockdown measures have ended anyway. Come back by the new year and we will be having a different conversation. Things are changing on a daily basis. Nothing remains the same.

We wont remain this low.

Restriction measures haven't ended, but yeah, more interaction = more spread.

But sticking to the topic at hand the ECDC travel advice document is daft in the extreme in relation to Ireland and in reality will increase spread nationwide.

NPHET and our governance need to be more vocal in underlining the dangerous stupidity of it IMO.

RobitTV

Boggles wrote: »

Restriction measures haven't ended, but yeah, more interaction = more spread.

But sticking to the topic at hand the ECDC travel advice document is daft in the extreme in relation to Ireland and in reality will increase spread nationwide.

NPHET and our governance need to be more vocal in underlining the dangerous stupidity of it IMO.

Lockdown measures have ended, not the restrictions in general.

HPSC data has shown that air travel has contributed just 1% of new cases over the last number of weeks while significant travel is still occuring.

Since March travel has been 2% of cases.

RobitTV

Irish Times - Quote: "The Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC) said of 73,045 confirmed Covid-19 cases analysed up to 1 December, 663 were imported from abroad"

That figure of 663 makes up just (0.91%) of the total national infection figure.

Boggles

RobitTV wrote: »

Lockdown measures have ended, not the restrictions in general.

Semantics. We sill have restrictions.

RobitTV wrote: »

HPSC data has shown that air travel has contributed just 1% of new cases over the last number of weeks while significant travel is still occuring.

Since March travel has been 2% of cases.

So have you changed your mind on testing at ports?

RobitTV

Boggles wrote: »

Semantics. We sill have restrictions.



So have you changed your mind on testing at ports?

I never questioned the fact that we still have restrictions. I said that the lockdown measures have ended

"The Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC) said of 73,045 confirmed Covid-19 cases analysed up to 1 December, 663 were imported from abroad"

That figure of 663 makes up just (0.91%) of the total national infection figure.

This is being blown way out of proportion by Holohan and NPHET. Here is the evidence. Since when is (0.91%) significant?

It only means 99.09% of the cases are NOT being imported from abroad.

MOH

RobitTV wrote: »

I never questioned the fact that we still have restrictions. I said that the lockdown measures have ended

"The Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC) said of 73,045 confirmed Covid-19 cases analysed up to 1 December, 663 were imported from abroad"

That figure of 663 makes up just (0.91%) of the total national infection figure.

This is being blown way out of proportion by Holohan and NPHET. Here is the evidence. Since when is (0.91%) significant?

It only means 99.09% of the cases are NOT being imported from abroad.

Yes, but somewhere over 80% have spontaneously arisen in people's homes.
Since NPHET decided that working out where clusters are actually coming from is "an academic exercise". So not sure that 0.91% is reliable.

Being somewhat facetious, 100% of cases in Ireland are ultimately the result of travel.

Boggles

RobitTV wrote: »

I never questioned the fact that we still have restrictions. I said that the lockdown measures have ended

"Lockdown" if you want to call it that, ended in the summer.

RobitTV wrote: »

"The Health Protection Surveillance Centre (HPSC) said of 73,045 confirmed Covid-19 cases analysed up to 1 December, 663 were imported from abroad"

That figure of 663 makes up just (0.91%) of the total national infection figure.

This is being blown way out of proportion by Holohan and NPHET. Here is the evidence. Since when is (0.91%) significant?

That figure is complete nonsense, you could argue every infection stemmed from travel. But even at that, what is travel related?

A MAN WHO failed to restrict his movements after returning to Ireland from a trip abroad led to at least 56 people being infected with coronavirus, including up to ten households, and a sports team.

But going on the official figures of confirmed cases and the ones they obviously missed 1-3% of 50,000 would be significant.

Particularly when that amount will be spread across the 26 counties and a fair bulk of them will be staying with elder family members.

It well could be a significant reseeding event nationwide.

So myopic in the extreme to dismiss it IMHO.

RobitTV

Boggles wrote: »

"Lockdown" if you want to call it that, ended in the summer.



That figure is complete nonsense, you could argue every infection stemmed from travel. But even at that, what is travel related?



But going on the official figures of confirmed cases and the ones they obviously missed 1-3% of 50,000 would be significant.

Particularly when that amount will be spread across the 26 counties and a fair bulk of them will be staying with elder family members.

It well could be a significant reseeding event nationwide.

So myopic in the extreme to dismiss it IMHO.

"That figure is complete nonsense" - so The Health Protection Surveillance Centre is now inaccurate? this is an organisation that works with Holohan and NPHET. So who do we now trust? - since we can't trust this one.

I just find this increasingly funny, the same people on here who have been criticizing others for not believing in the experts, now do not believe in the experts themselves. I'm sorry, but this is not a pick and mix of data and evidence for you to choose from.

First you go against the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and now The Health Protection Surveillance Centre (who works with Tony Holohan himself) is now inaccurate. I just don't understand this.

You have been shown evidence to suggest that 663 cases are from travel, from an organisation that works with NPHET. And now you are critical of an organisation that works directly with Tony Holohan. Despite you coming to his defence can you not see the slight irony in this argument.

OwenM

The ECDC have an evidence based approach, NPHET don't present evidence.

Easy to see why people don't get a warm fuzzy feeling from recommendations without evidential backing.

Boggles

RobitTV wrote: »

"That figure is complete nonsense" - so The Health Protection Surveillance Centre is now inaccurate?

True Accuracy is dependent on far more variables than any agencies ability at a given time.

But if you believe only 600 odd infections are related to travel I have a bridge going cheap if your interested.

RobitTV wrote: »

First you go against the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and now The Health Protection Surveillance Centre (who works with Tony Holohan himself) is now inaccurate. I just don't understand this.

I'm not going against anyone, I am merely giving my opinion as I see it without an axe to grind against either body.

MOH

MOH wrote: »

Yes, but somewhere over 80% have spontaneously arisen in people's homes.
Since NPHET decided that working out where clusters are actually coming from is "an academic exercise". So not sure that 0.91% is reliable.

Being somewhat facetious, 100% of cases in Ireland are ultimately the result of travel.

100% of cases in Ireland are caused by bats ultimately.

If you caught it abroad, or caught off someone who has been abroad, its travel related, otherwise its local transmission. Now, have we identified every case where someone picked it up of someone who was abroad, no, but neither have we picked up every case of local transmission

Don't Chute!

Dr Ciara Kelly on Newstalk this morning saying once the vulnerable people are vaccinated there should be no need for any more lockdowns. Fair play to her one of the only ones talking any sense.

PTH2009

Don't Chute! wrote: »

Dr Ciara Kelly on Newstalk this morning saying once the vulnerable people are vaccinated there should be no need for any more lockdowns. Fair play to her one of the only ones talking any sense.

Yeah very true and if some vulnerable don't want to take it then leave them off and they will hide away forever for all I care

Expect Dr Tony to come and debate Dr Kelly's mindset. 'We can't leave our guard down even with a vaccine'

Captain_Crash

The cynic in me thinks that once the bulk of people over 65 are vaccinated the outrage will be over and the younger in society will be forgotten! In a sense, the people driving this are mostly but not exclusively it must be said, people who would be closer to an age considered high risk (many members of gov, NPHET, RTE big wigs) once they’re looked after they won’t give a fiddlers about anyone else!

_Kaiser_

Captain_Crash wrote: »

The cynic in me thinks that once the bulk of people over 65 are vaccinated the outrage will be over and the younger in society will be forgotten! In a sense, the people driving this are mostly but not exclusively it must be said, people who would be closer to an age considered high risk (many members of gov, NPHET, RTE big wigs) once they’re looked after they won’t give a fiddlers about anyone else!

That's a valid point and carries over across multiple areas to be honest.

In the same way that they don't care about young(er) people struggling to pay rent or save for a mortgage. Most of the senior decision makers are owners and landlords already and have pulled the ladder up behind them so as to ensure they don't lose out by having too much supply come onto the market.

is_that_so

Captain_Crash wrote: »

The cynic in me thinks that once the bulk of people over 65 are vaccinated the outrage will be over and the younger in society will be forgotten! In a sense, the people driving this are mostly but not exclusively it must be said, people who would be closer to an age considered high risk (many members of gov, NPHET, RTE big wigs) once they’re looked after they won’t give a fiddlers about anyone else!

Well the full list of categories covers absolutely everyone, but the bulk of the "younger in society" will be waiting until the summer, unless we get lots of vaccines approved in the next 3 months and they can roll out the pre-manufactured doses.

Captain_Crash

is_that_so wrote: »

Well the full list of categories covers absolutely everyone, but the bulk of the "younger in society" will be waiting until the summer, unless we get lots of vaccines approved in the next 3 months and they can roll out the pre-manufactured doses.

Oh it does and I'm not saying it wont be made available to everyone. I just think that by the time the younger get it the news will have moved on because the bulk of the covid consuming audience are those who will be first on the list.

is_that_so

Captain_Crash wrote: »

Oh it does and I'm not saying it wont be made available to everyone. I just think that by the time the younger get it the news will have moved on because the bulk of the covid consuming audience are those who will be first on the list.

I, for one, sincerely hope so. It's an obsession we should forget.

statesaver

I find myself in agreement with Ciara Kelly, God 2020 is a weird year alright

Penfailed

250 people vaccinated in the north today. The first care home residents and their carers were amongst those. 25 residents with dementia got the jab...the eldest of which was 100 years old!

acequion

Penfailed wrote: »

250 people vaccinated in the north today. The first care home residents and their carers were amongst those. 25 residents with dementia got the jab...the eldest of which was 100 years old!

Great to have a bit of good news. I have all fingers and toes crossed that the vaccines roll out will be the beginning of the end of this miserable time for everyone.

normanoffside

Looks like the over 85s have been partying and flying in from abroad again

Cases over 2.5 times the national average in that demographic

https://twitter.com/RiochtConor2/status/1336380221172428802

brisan

normanoffside wrote: »

Looks like the over 85s have been partying and flying in from abroad again

Cases over 2.5 times the national average in that demographic

https://twitter.com/RiochtConor2/status/1336380221172428802

Its the grannies sneaking out to swingers parties and bringing back bags of cans that are to blame

Rrrrrr2

Don't Chute! wrote: »

Dr Ciara Kelly on Newstalk this morning saying once the vulnerable people are vaccinated there should be no need for any more lockdowns. Fair play to her one of the only ones talking any sense.

Yep- and brave of her too to step away from the Nphet lockdown lunacy cabal that’s been the excepted dogma amongst the virtue signalling media and cushioned woke middle classes since March.
Utter sense too once you bring some rational thought into the whole thing. Once the most vulnerable are vaccinated you absolutely must drop lockdowns and extreme restrictions and you get on with life (seems to be hard for Tony and his disciples to let go, I know that)