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

end of the road

Whatsisname wrote: »

The Welsh PM has been barred from over 100 pubs for 18 months because of his alcohol ban.

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/mark-drakeford-barred-100-north-19377496

i'm sure he is very, very bothered about it.
(not)
the bann is still apparently happening.

patnor1011 wrote: »

This is basic flaw in thinking of covid-preachers who scream conspiracy theory at everyone who has a question about this "pandemic".
You only need small group of wealthy individuals or corporations who can extend pressure on few politicians which depend on their donations or investments. Add campaign of fear and pointing fingers from media.
This spread in no time and what we see is no real "working together" but copying each other for fear of being singled out. Exactly what happened to everyone who dared to have some questions. On national scale just look at what happened with Sweden - they were basically a pariah state and pretty much browbeaten into compliance.

And most of it based on flawed PCR testing.
Have a blast and read what some scientists have to say about them.
https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/

Op-ed based on this paper:
A global team of experts has found 10 FATAL FLAWS in the main test for Covid and is demanding it’s urgently axed. As they should.
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/508383-fatal-flaws-covid-test/

ah yes, sweden were browbeaten into compliance with whatever.
it wasn't that they followed a strategy that was always doomed to fail and did so, and it wasn't that the regional authorities in sweden decided they had enough and implemented extensive restrictions and lock downs defying central government.
it was some shadowy figures and other states that forced them to change tack dispite the fact they refused and would have continued to refuse to change strategy.

Boggles

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Can't believe they think travel is no risk isn't that what started the mess in the first place and after wave 1.

I didn't think this would happen. But I agree with you. But it's not that they think travel is no risk, it's the same risk.

But how you can travel from a place of severely high infection to a place with very low and be deemed as safe as the local population is quite baffling. I thought it was why the traffic light system was introduced?

Someone will have to explain that one.

copeyhagen

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It seems NPHET are losing their grip on not just the public, but the media as well..



Tony being shown up again.

Lets see what Dr Hush says next. will he double down, trumpesque..

drunkmonkey

Maybe they need a €9 meal when they arrive just to be safe.

martingriff

Boggles wrote: »

I didn't think this would happen. But I agree with you. But it's not that they think travel is no risk, it's the same risk.

But how you can travel from a place of severely high infection to a place with very low and be deemed as safe as the local population is quite baffling. I thought it was why the traffic light system was introduced?

Someone will have to explain that one.

I wondered that in a reply to someone else what implication to this have on the traffic light system. Seems very strange or is it as long as you follow the rules set out then that

martingriff

copeyhagen wrote: »

Lets see what Dr Hush says next. will he double down, trumpesque..

Well that advice does seem to be going against there own systems on travel traffic light system

OwenM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Maybe they need a €9 meal when they arrive just to be safe.

Two of them, sure it's Christmas after all, maybe NPHET will insist the meal is a turkey dinner with all the trimmings.

There's a lot of supposition about the mindset of NPHET members, some of it warranted, but if they don't openly signal majority easing (level 2 or below) of restrictions when a vaccine rollout is well underway they will loose most if not all remaining public and political support.

Boggles

martingriff wrote: »

I wondered that in a reply to someone else what implication to this have on the traffic light system. Seems very strange or is it as long as you follow the rules set out then that

Importation of COVID-19 can occur from any point of origin where there is ongoing transmission, including another
area in the same country.

The majority of EU/EEA countries and the UK are currently experiencing widespread
transmission of COVID-19 [47].

Therefore, the relative significance of the virus being introduced by cross-border
travellers is minimal compared to ongoing community transmission and transmission related to national/non-crossborder travel.

Oh right, they seem to have based it on Europe been riddled, so sure what harm.

Fúck that.

speckle

brisan wrote: »

Tony is quite vocal about his anti alcohol stance so barring him from every pub in the country would not bother him

I would include all dail members who have clinics in pubs and who drank in them over the summer and have not objected to them being excluded from opening this time unless they flouted the rules to keep patrons safe.

One rule for them on their holidays and another for locals who served them who cant have a quiet pint or even cuppa tea over the season.

Captain_Crash

martingriff wrote: »

And Government as they are the ones who act on the advice and all of the Dail as they support the advice

Currently NPHET go to Government and say we need to do X or else Y will happen! This as we know has its flaws but its the way its been since the start of this. The most notable flaw is that if government follow advice (which for the most part they have) then we have no way of actually knowing if Y would have happened and by extension, if the advice was actually correct. We all have our opinions on this but none of us actually know for sure.

Would you (and anyone else) be in support of a slight change in approach in how advice is given, to something like every 2 weeks NPHET provide government with data saying... "In Level 5 we predict x cases in 4 weeks, In Level 4 we predict y cases in 4 weeks..." and so on, leaving it up to government to decide which approach is better suited for any current conditions... basically, NPHET don't advice on what level to move to, they only provide advice for what they think would happen in each given scenario?? Or is this putting too much onus on NPHET to actually do some verifiable and accurate work??

Gael23

Matt Hancock in the U.K. suggesting restrictions stay until we know if vaccines make you unable to transmit the virus to others

Sheep2020

Gael23 wrote: »

Matt Hancock in the U.K. suggesting restrictions stay until we know if vaccines make you unable to transmit the virus to others

UK are doing challenge trials now on there own people lol

Wouldn't the extensive trials tell him that anyway or should? :pac:

Surely Pfizer, Moderna, Oxford etc know if the vaccine is sterilising or not?

Mr. Karate

MadYaker wrote: »

Why the constant need to get personal with the insults and belittling of public figures in this thread? Getting happiness or satisfaction from the abuse of others is not a healthy way to be. It’s not personal for him and it shouldn’t be for you.

These power hungry assholes have made our lives hell all year and are determined to do it again next year and for as long as possible. They have ruined many people's lives by putting their businesses under or putting people out of work because their business or job was deemed "non-essential".

These clowns deserve ALOT worse than us insulting them. A hundred years ago their heads would have been chopped off by now.

drunkmonkey

Reminds me of that time the WHO said it was ok to allow flights from China.

Gael23

Sheep2020 wrote: »

UK are doing challenge trials now on there own people lol

Wouldn't the extensive trials tell him that anyway or should? :pac:

Surely Pfizer, Moderna, Oxford etc know if the vaccine is sterilising or not?

I’ve asked in the vaccine there’d. There’s some very knowledgeable contributors there

_Kaiser_

copeyhagen wrote: »

Lets see what Dr Hush says next. will he double down, trumpesque..

Don't know, but I can see him refusing to walk away when the time comes like Trump alright.

As for why the advice has now changed, I'd say two reasons:

1. The virus is simply not as dangerous as was feared in March

2. Pressure from the airlines (several of which are State owned)

Boggles

Mr. Karate wrote: »

These power hungry assholes have made our lives all year and are determined to do it again next year and for as long as possible. They have ruined many people's lives by putting their businesses under or putting people out of work because their business or job was deemed "non-essential".

These clowns deserve ALOT worse than us insulting them. A hundred years ago their heads would have been chopped off by now.

Don't remember reading about any public health officials been beheaded a 100 years ago?

in the Journal of the American Medial Association analyzed health data from the U.S. census that experienced the 1918 pandemic, and charted the death rates of 43 U.S. cities.

That same year, two studies published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences sought to understand how responses influenced the disease’s spread in different cities.

By comparing fatality rates, timing, and public health interventions, they found death rates were around 50 percent lower in cities that implemented preventative measures early on, versus those that did so late or not at all. The most effective efforts had simultaneously closed schools, churches, and theaters, and banned public gatherings

BeefeaterHat

Gael23 wrote: »

Matt Hancock in the U.K. suggesting restrictions stay until we know if vaccines make you unable to transmit the virus to others

And here we have the excuse for restrictions for the next year. 'Lads we need to stay in lockdown to make sure the vaccines sterilizing/enough people are vaccinated/that there's no mutations.' We've opened Pandora's box and given governments complete overreach into our lives and it'll be very difficult to shut that box again

Mr. Karate

BeefeaterHat wrote: »

And here we have the excuse for restrictions for the next year. 'Lads we need to stay in lockdown to make sure the vaccines sterilizing/enough people are vaccinated/that there's no mutations.' We've opened Pandora's box and given governments complete overreach into our lives and it'll be very difficult to shut that box again

They've been bracing us for this for weeks. After the whole "We need a vaccine to return to normal" they quickly flipped the narrative to " We might not be able to return to normal even with the vaccine."

This clear as day that they intend to keep lockdowns going for as long as possible.

Boggles

Mr. Karate wrote: »

This clear as day that they intend to keep lockdowns going for as long as possible.

Why would a Tory led government or any government in the UK especially with Brexit a month away want to keep "lockdowns going for as long as possible".?

Essentially why would especially Western Capitalism intentionally harm itself?

Rrrrrr2

martingriff wrote: »

And Government as they are the ones who act on the advice and all of the Dail as they support the advice

Precisely- ban those **** as well hiding behind. Nphet. More culpable in my view

Rrrrrr2

MadYaker wrote: »

Why the constant need to get personal with the insults and belittling of public figures in this thread? Getting happiness or satisfaction from the abuse of others is not a healthy way to be. It’s not personal for him and it shouldn’t be for you.

Because it’s pretty damn personal if people are suffering directly thanks to their “advice”

OwenM

Rrrrrr2 wrote: »

Because it’s pretty damn personal if people are suffering directly thanks to their “advice”

And when the effect on mortality is not apparent, also don't start on about 'Long-Covid' until someone has a decent qualitative study to back any assertions.

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps#z-scores-by-country

[IMG][/img]

At this rate we are going to have to bail out the undertaker industry.

martingriff

Captain_Crash wrote: »

Currently NPHET go to Government and say we need to do X or else Y will happen! This as we know has its flaws but its the way its been since the start of this. The most notable flaw is that if government follow advice (which for the most part they have) then we have no way of actually knowing if Y would have happened and by extension, if the advice was actually correct. We all have our opinions on this but none of us actually know for sure.

Would you (and anyone else) be in support of a slight change in approach in how advice is given, to something like every 2 weeks NPHET provide government with data saying... "In Level 5 we predict x cases in 4 weeks, In Level 4 we predict y cases in 4 weeks..." and so on, leaving it up to government to decide which approach is better suited for any current conditions... basically, NPHET don't advice on what level to move to, they only provide advice for what they think would happen in each given scenario?? Or is this putting too much onus on NPHET to actually do some verifiable and accurate work??

Forecast are not been able to verify ad they are just that a forecast of what could happen so it is hard to say if they are correct I agree. But what had that to do with what I said. My post was a tounge in cheek to a pist saying all NPHET should be banned from pubs due to there advice so my point would be so should all the Dail ad they agree with it.

Just to make clear I do not agree with any of that stuff. I do agree pubs should be able to open if the rest are. I heard somewhere and it could be wrong that in there letter to government they advised restaurants and pubs (both types) should open on the 18th

OwenM

OwenM wrote: »

And when the effect on mortality is not apparent, also don't start on about 'Long-Covid' until someone has a decent qualitative study to back any assertions.

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps#z-scores-by-country

[IMG][/img]

At this rate we are going to have to bail out the undertaker industry.

Any idea why the Belgian chart might be different?



Thread seems to have an issue understanding cause and effect

martingriff

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Don't know, but I can see him refusing to walk away when the time comes like Trump alright.

As for why the advice has now changed, I'd say two reasons:

1. The virus is simply not as dangerous as was feared in March

2. Pressure from the airlines (several of which are State owned)

Oh y a Tony loves this he is getting his kicks and sweet release from this!!!! Jesus I wonder about people sometimes when I hear this crap

martingriff

Rrrrrr2 wrote: »

Precisely- ban those **** as well hiding behind. Nphet. More culpable in my view

I don't actually believe they are trying to hide behind them as some of the public are giving them the excuse to do so

OwenM

Deleted User wrote: »

Any idea why the Belgian chart might be different?



Thread seems to have an issue understanding cause and effect

You can cherry pick random countries all you want, how about the UK and NI?

Especially NI where there has be so much fretting about on here.

OwenM

OwenM wrote: »

You can cherry pick random countries all you want, how about the UK and NI?

Especially NI where there has be so much fretting about on here.

How about looking at the entire EEA so

OwenM

Deleted User wrote: »

How about looking at the entire EEA so

Why not. The WHO figures I can find give deaths at 290k for Covid. I've selected all the countries listed on the Euromomo page for this:




Euromomo gives excess deaths this year of all causes at 265K (roughly from inspection of the graph). Excess deaths over the previous two years (if we average 2018 & 2019 roughly from inspection of the graph) at about 160k. Of course we have to assume nobody is dying of anything else here..... Cancer, diabetes, heart disease, stroke, accidents.