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

AndrewJRenko

mike8634 wrote: »

They order food online and get it delivered

Doctor calls around in Hazmat gear if needed

They won't be leaving the house, so chances of getting sick are low

And their families that they live with?

hynesie08

PTH2009 wrote: »

More in a direction of going back to normal

More people admitted for Sporting and other events
Bigger numbers for Transport
Move away from restrictions and get more people back to work
Lets the hospitality and tourism industries open fully including wet pubs with the September restrictions (any messing deal with it quickly in a very stict manner)

but we all know they wont do that and will go with the cautious approach like always. Have to keep Dr Tony happy

That's called level 1.......

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeah when hospital numbers start shooting up, I can’t help but wonder how many caught it in hospital or just happened to test positive while in hospital.

It should be simple to report these numbers. The government and NPHET obviously have the figures.

But perhaps it’s in their best interests not to share the full picture.

They do have the figures, and publish them weekly. In the last report there were 50 cases associated with acute hospital clusters. Going back through the data, about 50% tend to be healthcare workers. Next report is due tomorrow

Galwayguy35

CruelSummer wrote: »

George Lee using the January increase of numbers to ramp up the hysteria nicely on the news. People are ‘so sick’ they have to go to hospital. What about those showing up to hospital for other procedures that test positive. Let’s hear those figures.

They were probably struggling to find something the tosser could actually do so they gave him the job of coming out with his little doom and gloom graphs to keep him busy.

GazzaL

I feel sorry for gym owners. I know a few different gym owners, many of them are young lads who have put everything they have into their businesses. January should be a peak time for selling new memberships yet that could go out the window now thanks to anti-science, anti-health NPHET.

You might not be able to go to a safe, well-run gym, but at least thanks to NPHET you can gorge on essential takeaways washed down with an essential bag of cans from the off licence. #NewYearNewYou #ThanksTony

GazzaL

GazzaL wrote: »

I feel sorry for gym owners. I know a few different gym owners, many of them are young lads who have put everything they have into their businesses. January should be a peak time for selling new memberships yet that could go out the window now thanks to anti-science, anti-health NPHET.

You might not be able to go to a safe, well-run gym, but at least thanks to NPHET you can gorge on essential takeaways washed down with an essential bag of cans from the off licence. #NewYearNewYou #ThanksTony

The talk on this thread is that NPHET are anti science. Where is this science ye speak of?

Duke of Url

Deleted User wrote: »

The talk on this thread is that NPHET are anti science. Where is this science ye speak of?

Never heard of Gym Owner Science?

AndrewJRenko

GazzaL wrote: »

I feel sorry for gym owners. I know a few different gym owners, many of them are young lads who have put everything they have into their businesses. January should be a peak time for selling new memberships yet that could go out the window now thanks to anti-science, anti-health NPHET.

You might not be able to go to a safe, well-run gym, but at least thanks to NPHET you can gorge on essential takeaways washed down with an essential bag of cans from the off licence. #NewYearNewYou #ThanksTony

Where on earth did you get this from?

CruelSummer

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They do have the figures, and publish them weekly. In the last report there were 50 cases associated with acute hospital clusters. Going back through the data, about 50% tend to be healthcare workers. Next report is due tomorrow

But this doesn’t account for cases acquired from people attending hospital for day procedures or other surgical procedures. And who subsequently test positive either as ‘hospitalised cases’ or cases ‘in the community’. When all evidence points to them picking up the infection from the hospital. Where staff are not being routinely tested.

zerosugarbuzz

CruelSummer wrote: »

But this doesn’t account for cases acquired from people attending hospital for day procedures or other surgical procedures. And who subsequently test positive either as ‘hospitalised cases’ or cases ‘in the community’. When all evidence points to them picking up the infection from the hospital. Where staff are not being routinely tested.

I have it on very good authority that many back office admin staff in hospitals are mandated to be in the office full time when they could do their work from home perfectly adequately. This, while they mandate that the private sector works from home or doesn't work at all.

GreeBo

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe do some research on Tony. The man is very much against alcohol. He deemed an anti alcohol conference essential during a pandemic... so I’m sure he enjoys having pubs closed all year.

There are also other things he would like to make amends for, but there are other threads for that.

And?

You think he is basing all his decisions on being anti alcohol?

How is he managing to get the rest of the world to play along? A magic flute perhaps?

AndrewJRenko

zerosugarbuzz wrote: »

I have it on very good authority that many back office admin staff in hospitals are mandated to be in the office full time when they could do their work from home perfectly adequately. This, while they mandate that the private sector works from home or doesn't work at all.

How do you protect the confidentiality and security of personal medical information in a work from home scenario?

awec

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How do you protect the confidentiality and security of personal medical information in a work from home scenario?

The same way confidential and personal data is secured in all the companies all over the world that have people working from home.

normanoffside

SusieBlue wrote: »

There was an article in the local paper today about an elderly gentleman who celebrated a milestone birthday in hospital. He was admitted after falling and breaking his hip last month, and then contracted covid-19 while an in-patient.
I have a close relative working in a hospital and apparently it’s still spreading like wildfire in there.
The majority of current and historical hospitalisations are people who were admitted for other health reasons, who then contracted the virus while there.
Yet they will never admit to that in any of the conferences, but are happy to count such cases as hospitalisations.
It’s so deceiving and not a true reflection of what’s actually happening at all.

https://www.echolive.ie/corknews/arid-40197705.html

But But But, when spread is high in the community they can't stop it spreading in hospitals and care homes because that would involve them actually doing something.

LAZYIRISH

This isnt a big one says the who, qoute “not necessarily the big one”, and that the world will have to learn to live with Covid-19. The “destiny” of the virus is to become endemic, even as vaccines begin to be rolled out in the US and UK, says Professor David Heymann, the chair of the WHO’s strategic and technical advisory group for infectious hazards.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/29/who-warns-covid-19-pandemic-is-not-necessarily-the-big-one

Have our boards experts being saying this from the beginning lol

GreeBo

normanoffside wrote: »

May I remind you that during our last 6 week lockdown we had less than 3% of our beds with Covid patients in them (that was at peak). In the summer we had single digit cases per day, zero deaths for weeks and something like 6 people in hospital 'with covid' but that wasn't enough to let us have most of our normal freedoms. Tony's concern levels were still high and people weren't allowed to live in any way normally.


There's got to be a balance somewhere and it has long been weighted in favour of harsh restrictions for no apparent gain.

Ehh can you not see the link to a six week lockdown and 3% bed occupancy?
Have you any thoughts you can share as to why Ireland had such low levels? Is it the Guinness you reckon?

The balance you talk about doesn't have two equal things on each side though, any sane person will pick excessive lockdown over excessive covid.
Just look around the world at the moment, would you like to be in the UK and waiting 6 hours for an ambulance while you are having a heart attack? What do you think makes them so different than us, next door?

PTH2009

hynesie08 wrote: »

That's called level 1.......

Level 1 is still very restrictive and not near normal times

Cant see us going below level 3 as were too cautious

AndrewJRenko

awec wrote: »

The same way confidential and personal data is secured in all the companies all over the world that have people working from home.

How is it though? You tell me how a staff member sitting in their box room in their shared house with your intimate medical information on the screen in front of them can be prevented from taking photos of what is on screen and sharing that information? How can they ensure their housemates don't overhear important information on phone calls?

awec

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

How is it though? You tell me how a staff member sitting in their box room in their shared house with your intimate medical information on the screen in front of them can be prevented from taking photos of what is on screen and sharing that information? How can they ensure their housemates don't overhear important information on phone calls?

Laptops are managed by the organisation (in this case the HSE) to secure the data on them and ensure proper use. Encryption, rights management, audited access etc etc etc.

There is nothing special here just cause it's some administrator in a hospital. This already happens all over the world with data that is a lot more sensitive than someone's medical record. There has been a huge push to move this way the past number of years.

AndrewJRenko

awec wrote: »

Laptops are managed by the organisation (in this case the HSE) to secure the data on them and ensure proper use. Encryption, rights management, audited access etc etc etc.

There is nothing special here just cause it's some administrator in a hospital. This already happens all over the world with data that is a lot more sensitive than someone's medical record. There has been a huge push to move this way the past number of years.

I'm familiar with encryption, rights management, audited access and more.

The question you're failing to answer is how you stop a staff member from taking a photo using a mobile phone of your medical details that are appearing on the screen in front of them?

The audited access will indeed show that they looked at that particular record, but will tell you nothing about what was done in front of the laptop.

awec

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm familiar with encryption, rights management, audited access and more.

The question you're failing to answer is how you stop a staff member from taking a photo using a mobile phone of your medical details that are appearing on the screen in front of them?

The audited access will indeed show that they looked at that particular record, but will tell you nothing about what was done in front of the laptop.

The same way you stop them taking a photo using their mobile phone if they're sitting at their desk in the hospital.

The same way you stop them writing down the info on a bit of paper when they're sitting at their desk in the hospital.

AndrewJRenko

awec wrote: »

The same way you stop them taking a photo using their mobile phone if they're sitting at their desk in the hospital.

The same way you stop them writing down the info on a bit of paper when they're sitting at their desk in the hospital.

So you're going have their supervisor walking into their bedroom every 20 minutes to keep an eye on them? Or their peers looking across the room at them every 10 minutes?

Because that's how you stop them breaching confidentiality when they are in te workplace.

Try to apply that approach to work from home and see how you get on.

awec

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So you're going have their supervisor walking into their bedroom every 20 minutes to keep an eye on them? Or their peers looking across the room at them every 10 minutes?

Because that's how you stop them breaching confidentiality when they are in te workplace.

Try to apply that approach to work from home and see how you get on.

Every 20 minutes? You mean they have 19 minutes to do whatever they want?

It is no discernible greater risk someone being in their bedroom vs in their office, unless the office is organised in a way that nobody is ever left on their own for any period of time and supervision is constant.

This would not be considered more secure.

Lundstram

Jaysus, they're really losing the plot on the main Covid19 thread, makes for amusing reading. 8pm curfews, close schools, 5km limit and wait for it - ban alcohol.

You'd laugh at them if they weren't being serious.

CruelSummer

CruelSummer wrote: »

But this doesn’t account for cases acquired from people attending hospital for day procedures or other surgical procedures. And who subsequently test positive either as ‘hospitalised cases’ or cases ‘in the community’. When all evidence points to them picking up the infection from the hospital. Where staff are not being routinely tested.

If there is a cluster in the hospital area they were in they will be traced to the hospital cluster. If there isn’t, they could just as easily have picked it up elsewhere and it cannot be traced to the hospital

pjohnson

Lundstram wrote: »

Jaysus, they're really losing the plot on the main Covid19 thread, makes for amusing reading. 8pm curfews, close schools, 5km limit and wait for it - ban alcohol.

You'd laugh at them if they weren't being serious.

Off course you lot would. The higher numbers always get ye in the mood.

Necro

Lundstram wrote: »

Jaysus, they're really losing the plot on the main Covid19 thread, makes for amusing reading. 8pm curfews, close schools, 5km limit and wait for it - ban alcohol.

You'd laugh at them if they weren't being serious.

pjohnson wrote: »

Off course you lot would. The higher numbers always get ye in the mood.

Mod:

Can we not please folks, no need for the 'us vs them' type posts. People are allowed to have differing opinions.

Ironhead93

GazzaL wrote: »

I feel sorry for gym owners. I know a few different gym owners, many of them are young lads who have put everything they have into their businesses. January should be a peak time for selling new memberships yet that could go out the window now thanks to anti-science, anti-health NPHET.

You might not be able to go to a safe, well-run gym, but at least thanks to NPHET you can gorge on essential takeaways washed down with an essential bag of cans from the off licence. #NewYearNewYou #ThanksTony

All this after a week ago Leo came out and (rightfully) said that gyms are not a main source of infection according to the data and are vital to many peoples mental and physical health. Utterly senseless if they close again.

Lundstram

pjohnson wrote: »

Off course you lot would. The higher numbers always get ye in the mood.

It's peak winter, it's Christmas, it's bitterly cold, people are moving around a lot more.

Were you expecting 5 cases a day?

Lundstram

Lundstram wrote: »

Jaysus, they're really losing the plot on the main Covid19 thread, makes for amusing reading. 8pm curfews, close schools, 5km limit and wait for it - ban alcohol.

You'd laugh at them if they weren't being serious.

Could pick a post or 200 from this thread and get a right laugh. 90% plus of posts are reasoned with difference of opinions. A few on both ends of the argument are hysterical