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

Boggles

GazzaL wrote: »

I was talking to an elderly lady this morning on the phone, she's terrified to even open her front door. Very sad.

Get off her porch so.

:pac:

JRant

JRant wrote: »

The chances that we had COVID here in early 2019 are very high. Look how quickly the UK and SA strains have travelled around the globe even with restricted numbers flying. I'd say there's close to zero chance it wasn't here at the start of last year.

Surely you mean 2020?

And assuming you did, it is likely it was here in January, in low numbers

JRant

JRant wrote: »

When did we stop that?
Did they not warning a day or so ago that close contacts would no longer get an automatic test?

I have heard of 3 asymptomatic contacts of confirmed cases from work who are not being referred for a test.

risteard7

When we didn't have to wear masks we never reached these numbers.

For Forks Sake

Treseemme. wrote: »

Surely Hancock knows something

Past evidence would tend to disprove that, man's an absolute idiot

AndrewJRenko

risteard7 wrote: »

When we didn't have to wear masks we never reached these numbers.

When we didn't have Christmas trees in every window with flashing lights, we never reached these numbers.

I reckon it's the lights. What's your theory?

sprucemoose

risteard7 wrote: »

When we didn't have to wear masks we never reached these numbers.

id imagine because people were (largely) staying at home and following restrictions. now i think the majority of the population don't give a **** anymore (sadly)

JRant

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Surely you mean 2020?

And assuming you did, it is likely it was here in January, in low numbers

Your right, it should said 2020
I think I've mentally blocked out 2020 already.

It's safe to safe that if was here in that timeframe then the numbers would have been quite large by the time we actually started testing in March.

Ace2007

facehugger99 wrote: »

I suspect at this stage the Government parties are privately resigned to seeing the Shinners win the next election and leaving the mess for them to deal with - God help us all when those former terrorists and economic morons seize the reins of power.

LOL SF don't want to be in power - it's clear as day - they didn't put up enough candidates in the last election - do you not think in Mary Lou's constituency it was a bit odd that she didn't have a running mate? 16 candidates ran but only one was from SF....

They will make sure that come the next election that one of FG or FF will have to go into coalition with them, and then have the PR Spin merchants say that they can't get what they want because they aren't in sole power.

JRant

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I have heard of 3 asymptomatic contacts of confirmed cases from work who are not being referred for a test.

Makes sense to only test symptomatic people right now. Close contacts need to restrict movements for 14 days regardless of testing negative anyway.

risteard7

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

When we didn't have Christmas trees in every window with flashing lights, we never reached these numbers.

I reckon it's the lights. What's your theory?

I don't know what sh*te you are spewing but my point clearly is masks just dont work.

Psychedelic Hedgehog

risteard7 wrote: »

I don't know what sh*te you are spewing but my point clearly is masks just dont work.

Have you any objective evidence to back up that claim?

risteard7

sprucemoose wrote: »

id imagine because people were (largely) staying at home and following restrictions. now i think the majority of the population don't give a **** anymore (sadly)

So staying at home works but masks dont. I never thought of it that way

sprucemoose

risteard7 wrote: »

I don't know what sh*te you are spewing but my point clearly is masks just dont work.

correctly worn masks work, masks worn around your chin or with your nose hanging out don't

risteard7

Psychedelic Hedgehog wrote: »

Have you any objective evidence to back up that claim?

Well numbers have only gone up since they were made mandatory. I dont need a medical "expert " to tell me that.

sprucemoose

risteard7 wrote: »

So staying at home works but masks dont. I never thought of it that way

no, staying at home works best, wearing masks properly works but is less effective, incorrectly worn masks are very ineffective, fairly simple

Psychedelic Hedgehog

risteard7 wrote: »

Well numbers have only gone up since they were made mandatory. I dont need a medical "expert " to tell me that.

That’s the very definition of subjective evidence, which is the opposite of what I asked for.

JRant

JRant wrote: »

Your right, it should said 2020
I think I've mentally blocked out 2020 already.

It's safe to safe that if was here in that timeframe then the numbers would have been quite large by the time we actually started testing in March.

The Influenza Like Illness tracking that we do suggests otherwise when the January and February data aligned with measured outbreaks of influenza, and only diverged in March

sprucemoose

risteard7 wrote: »

Well numbers have only gone up since they were made mandatory. I dont need a medical "expert " to tell me that.

yes they went up, because of increased testing, increased foreign travel, schools opening, retail opening and a general apathy towards guidelines to name just a few examples

Captain_Crash

Deleted User wrote: »

Surely you mean 2020?

And assuming you did, it is likely it was here in January, in low numbers

Likely? I was certainly here in Jan 2020, and highly probable to certain that it was here in Nov/Dec 2019. Considering its transmissiblity, if it was here it had to have been in fairly high numbers.

Its confirmed to have been in France as early as 3 December 2020*, that was the day first known patient in Europe was admitted to hospital (not known to be Covid at the time). Its safe to say that person wasn't the first person in Europe to have it!

Added to that, the 2019 World Military Games were held in Wuhan in October, and multiple competitors had to pull out with flu like symptoms, including several French servicemen. Ireland had a few competitors at the games also.

*Double check that date, it was Early Dec tho.

Tork

risteard7 wrote: »

I don't know what sh*te you are spewing but my point clearly is masks just dont work.

Masks are only one tool to stop the spread of this airborne virus. You know and I know that nobody is wearing masks when they're socialising.

AndrewJRenko

risteard7 wrote: »

Well numbers have only gone up since they were made mandatory. I dont need a medical "expert " to tell me that.

Have you stopped to think that possibly, case numbers would be an awful lot worse without mask wearing?

Or does that kind of logical thinking not go down well in your circles?

Penfailed

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Erm

Shops closing at 8pm is not a curfew...and that was only for one week.

_Kaiser_

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you stopped to think that possibly, case numbers would be an awful lot worse without mask wearing?

Or does that kind of logical thinking not go down well in your circles?

There's no evidence of that.

Mandatory mask wearing came in around August. The country was essentially reopened (pubs aside) from late May,

Cases continued to fall.

risteard7

sprucemoose wrote: »

yes they went up, because of increased testing, increased foreign travel, schools opening, retail opening and a general apathy towards guidelines to name just a few examples

If we all have our masks on we shouldn't have to worry about any of the above

risteard7

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Have you stopped to think that possibly, case numbers would be an awful lot worse without mask wearing?

Or does that kind of logical thinking not go down well in your circles?

We got down to 6 cases without masks. Now go and put your logical thinking cap on

storker

risteard7 wrote: »

Well numbers have only gone up since they were made mandatory. I dont need a medical "expert " to tell me that.

To know that this was proof of mask inefficacy you would need to know the role that masks did or didn't play in each instance of infection. You don't need to be a medical expert to know this, but a bit of common sense does help.

AndrewJRenko

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

There's no evidence of that.

Mandatory mask wearing came in around August. The country was essentially reopened (pubs aside) from late May,

Cases continued to fall.

risteard7 wrote: »

We got down to 6 cases without masks. Now go and put your logical thinking cap on

You might want to read up on the difference between coincidence and causation.

sprucemoose

risteard7 wrote: »

If we all have our masks on we shouldn't have to worry about any of the above

i get your point but technically incorrect since masks aren't 100% effective, but they are a massive help. unfortunately massive numbers of people seem to be incapable of wearing them correctly

Ace2007

risteard7 wrote: »

If we all have our masks on we shouldn't have to worry about any of the above

But we don't ALL have our masks on, not everyone is obeying to that law. That's the problem, and there are a large % of people that think wearing a mask around your mouth is the problem solved.

How many places still have staff washing hands every 20 mins?