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

Boggles

speckle wrote: »

the scientists listed are eminant experts

You should really pick a few at random and do a background check.

But anyway, if the testing throws up so many false positives.

Why weren't the UK showing 10s of 1000s of cases when they had suppressed the virus with restrictions?

drunkmonkey

Tork wrote: »

The demonisation of Tony Holohan is laughable. I don't agree with everything NPHET suggests but the notion that he alone is setting out to spoil everyone's fun and is some sort of Rasputin figure is overestimating his importance.

I totally agree, Tony can give what ever advice he likes at the end of the day it's just advice. The buck stops with Michael Martin this is 100% on him.

Caraibh

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I totally agree, Tony can give what ever advice he likes at the end of the day it's just advice. The buck stops with Michael Martin this is 100% on him.

But it doesn't help when Anthony goes crying to the media when he doesn't get his way.

Tork

Caraibh wrote: »

But it doesn't help when Anthony goes crying to the media when he doesn't get his way.

And politicians don't do this too?

Caraibh

Tork wrote: »

And politicians don't do this too?

But politicians don't have the hold over the vast majority of the public that Anthony has. It's a Stockholm Syndrome situation, in my opinion.

drunkmonkey

Boggles wrote: »

Seasonal as in every season.

Incorrect, like the flu and other coronaviruses, respiratory illnesses are seasonal well at least the worse effects are. This is no different. With the continued flawed testing numbers will rise over the next few months and die off again like last summer. You could put on your tinfoil hat and say it wasn't the season that dramatically reduced cases in the summer and attribute it to the €9 meal or other such pseudoscience.

Boggles

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Incorrect, like the flu and other coronaviruses, respiratory illnesses are seasonal well at least the worse effects are. This is no different. With the continued flawed testing numbers will rise over the next few months and die off again like last summer. You could put on your tinfoil hat and say it wasn't the season that dramatically reduced cases in the summer and attribute it to the €9 meal or other such pseudoscience.

Nonsense.

Restrictions bring down the level of the virus in the community, open again it increases.

It's not hard understand.

But anyway.

And while you are at it, if it is just one big scam as you claim, why? Why would Western Capitalism, particularly a Tory lead UK government intentionally crash itself?

If you could have a crack at that question since I have your attention please.

Tork

Caraibh wrote: »

But politicians don't have the hold over the vast majority of the public that Anthony has. It's a Stockholm Syndrome situation, in my opinion.

It's a good job Dr Eva isn't in charge of NPHET so...

BryanMartin21

Good news in the IT article this morning entitled "First vaccines for elderly and high-risk groups likely to be available in January". Level 3 looks like the lowest level for January/February and the talk of another level 5 extreme lockdown was just to keep Tony Holohan and his mob happy. We are nearly through this BS!

"Meanwhile Taoiseach Micheál Martin told a meeting of his parliamentary party that he does not envisage having to close sectors such as non-essential retail again, even if restrictions are re-introduced after Christmas. Non-essential shops and services reopened for the first time in six weeks on Tuesday with the situation due to be reviewed by Government in the New Year. Mr Martin told Fianna Fáil TDs and senators that there is “light at the end of the tunnel” in the fight against Covid-19 and that Ireland will have access to more vaccines, potentially up to ten, as part of the European framework agreement".

drunkmonkey

Boggles wrote: »

Nonsense.

Restrictions bring down the level of the virus in the community, open again it increases.

There you go again with the pseudoscience

Brake it down for me your estimates from 100%

Masks reduced cases by ??
€9 meal reduced cases by??
Closing the pubs & clubs reduced cases by??
Distancing reduced cases by??
5km travel restriction reduced cases by??
Closing hairdressers reduced cases by??
Closing gyms reduced cases by??
Hand washing reduced cases by??
Underlying immunity from the 30% effective BCG vaccine reduced cases by??
Closing places of worship reduced cases by??

There's a load more things you could add to that list the point is you haven't a clue what actually worked and didn't. Your not giving and credence to the seasonality of coronaviruses in your claim it was lockdown that reduced the spread.

Caraibh

Tork wrote: »

It's a good job Dr Eva isn't in charge of NPHET so...

Who's Dr Eva?

iamwhoiam

Tork wrote: »

It's a good job Dr Eva isn't in charge of NPHET so...

Do you mean the Finnish Dr Eva ?

Boggles

drunkmonkey wrote: »

There you go again with the pseudoscience

Brake it down for me your estimates from 100%

Masks reduced cases by ??
€9 meal reduced cases by??
Closing the pubs & clubs reduced cases by??
Distancing reduced cases by??
5km travel restriction reduced cases by??
Closing hairdressers reduced cases by??
Closing gyms reduced cases by??
Hand washing reduced cases by??
Underlying immunity from the 30% effective BCG vaccine reduced cases by??
Closing places of worship reduced cases by??

There's a load more things you could add to that list the point is you haven't a clue what actually worked and didn't. Your not giving and credence to the seasonality of coronaviruses in your claim it was lockdown that reduced the spread.

I'll address all if you could just please answer the one question I have asked you 4 times now.

I think it is only fair.

And while you are at it, if it is just one big scam as you claim, why? Why would Western Capitalism, particularly a Tory lead UK government intentionally crash itself?

You are not afraid to answer it are you?

Tork

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Do you mean the Finnish Dr Eva ?

That's the one. They'd be begging for Tony to come back. It's doctor's jobs to tell people what they don't want to hear. You can then agree or disagree with them. We don't know how much the politicians have watered down NPHET's recommendations. And the last time I looked NPHET was made up of several people. Why are they not being called out by name as well?

copeyhagen

Tork wrote: »

That's the one. They'd be begging for Tony to come back. It's doctor's jobs to tell people what they don't want to hear. You can then agree or disagree with them. We don't know how much the politicians have watered down NPHET's recommendations. And the last time I looked NPHET was made up of several people. Why are they not being called out by name as well?

we do know exactly what nphets recommendations were, as they leaked them themselves after every meeting, to drip feed panic into the public and pressure the govt into reacting. which the govt said themselves.

Captain_Crash

Tork wrote: »

We don't know how much the politicians have watered down NPHET's recommendations.

NPHET’s letters to government are published. None of it is watered down by cabinet/MM/TH

Boggles

copeyhagen wrote: »

we do know exactly what nphets recommendations were, as they leaked them themselves after every meeting,

Captain_Crash wrote: »

NPHET’s letters to government are published. None of it is watered down by cabinet/MM/TH

Which is it?

speckle

Boggles wrote: »

You should really pick a few at random and do a background check.

But anyway, if the testing throws up so many false positives.

Why weren't the UK showing 10s of 1000s of cases when they had suppressed the virus with restrictions?

I have looked at many of their backgrounds just as I do the others on the other side of the fence. Scientists dont always agree. Have you, there are good and not so good scientists on both sides.

Regarding waves it is of interest to the second part of your question many places are still in an interupted first wave... (still cannot believe people/not saying yourself are going on about wave two... like the never looked up the definition which I have posted on here before.) lockdown only suppressed the virus because we had enforced socal distance at a great cost. Yet we were still outside in the sunshine etc and our immune systems in general were getting topped up and working better. So less people had the virus in the summer symptomatically or asymtomatically to infect others. So less people to test and the more obvious of those via hospital work etc and those from high risk indoor settings as contact traced where tested. Also the speed of getting to, close high risk contacts increased.
Where as in winter you are overwhelmed with people with other respiratory illnesses naturally wanting tests and people more indoors and education back etc
So if the people you test are more condensed into high risk probably cases the more likely of getting true positives rather than false positives.

It is also true it doess pick up inert old fragments if virus for many days. So if you had covid in the past and where no longer infectious and where unlucky to be contact traced soon after via someone elses true postive you may still test postive though no longer infectious... unless you can afford an antibody test to prove that or an antigen test or get a second pcr test done with an anaylsis of the viral count if it is going down or up along with your clinical overview. The pcr cycle rate was set to high at the beginning but I unferstand why as wwe did not know exactly what we were deaaling with.

My take it does look like there is a seasonal part to this virus... but hopefully as well a response from not just antibodies but the whole of our immune system that will give longer than the average cold immunity. That is speculation on my part at the moment. As its genome is partly like sars and the common cold. That would be the best news, not forgetting those that have died already.
Lets hope testing issues or not this virus goes the way of the Russian flu which is now a common cold.

Oh and in one of my earlier posts there is a diagram of the viruses cycle in your body and the points of where/when false positives are picked up on a pcr test and work arounds on some points, which take time and extra testing/money. I think Martina posted on that on ways to tweak the pcr testing but that those.not cover all the points these scientists are saying.
Apologies if answer rambles not on a computer to make it nicely in bullet points etc.

Important none of the above re pcr testing should be taken as a free pass to avoid isolating yourself if postive... rapid antigen test of a better quality are starting to be rolled out in different countries and that will be a game changer. And note the isolation period has slightly lessen for some people so check the HSE website for details.

Boggles

speckle wrote: »

I have looked at many of their backgrounds just as I do the others on the other side of the fence. Scientists dont always agree. Have you, there are good and not so good scientists on both sides.

Sure it is healthy to have disagreements based on science.

One of the main authors claims it is a continuing scam and the pandemic ended (for some reason) in June.

Would you call him a "not so good scientist"?

speckle wrote: »

Regarding waves it is of interest to the second part of your question many places are still in an interupted first wave... (still cannot believe people/not saying yourself are going on about wave two... like the never looked up the definition which I have posted on here before.) lockdown only suppressed the virus because we had enforced socal distance at a great cost. Yet we were still outside in the sunshine etc and our immune systems in general were getting topped up and working better. So less people had the virus in the summer symptomatically or asymtomatically to infect others. So less people to test and the more obvious of those via hospital work etc and those from high risk indoor settings as contact traced where tested. Also the speed of getting to, close high risk contacts increased.
Where as in winter you are overwhelmed with people with other respiratory illnesses naturally wanting tests and people more indoors and education back etc
So if the people you test are more condensed into high risk probably cases the more likely of getting true positives rather than false positives.

It is also true it doess pick up inert old fragments if virus for many days. So if you had covid in the past and where no longer infectious and where unlucky to be contact traced soon after via someone elses true postive you may still test postive though no longer infectious... unless you can afford an antibody test to prove that or an antigen test or get a second pcr test done with an anaylsis of the viral count if it is going down or up along with your clinical overview. The pcr cycle rate was set to high at the beginning but I unferstand why as wwe did not know exactly what we were deaaling with.

My take it does look like there is a seasonal part to this virus... but hopefully as well a response from not just antibodies but the whole of our immune system that will give longer than the average cold immunity. That is speculation on my part at the moment. As its genome is partly like sars and the common cold. That would be the best news, not forgetting those that have died already.
Lets hope testing issues or not this virus goes the way of the Russian flu which is now a common cold.

Oh and in one of my earlier posts there is a diagram of the viruses cycle in your body and the points of where/when false positives are picked up on a pcr test and work arounds on some points, which take time and extra testing/money. I think Martina posted on that on ways to tweak the pcr testing but that those.not cover all the points these scientists are saying.
Apologies if answer rambles not on a computer to make it nicely in bullet points etc.

Important none of the above re pcr testing should be taken as a free pass to avoid isolating yourself if postive... rapid antigen test of a better quality are starting to be rolled out in different countries and that will be a game changer. And note the isolation period has slightly lessen for some people so check the HSE website for details.

Nope, none of that explains their claim that the tests and faulty and the vast majority of cases picked up by it are false positives.

If that claim were true, you would see (maybe) a slight deviation in positive results, not 80-90% reductions.

It's the most basic of maths.

thebaz

This is some of the sensationalism the mainstream media are using :-
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/health/explainer-winter-is-coming-so-where-is-the-flu-39820356.html

The Indo call the flu - a potential killer - is it any wonder half the poplulation has over anxiety with the amount of irrational Fear spread , since man began life has always carried some amount of risk.

titan18

drunkmonkey wrote: »

There you go again with the pseudoscience

Brake it down for me your estimates from 100%

Masks reduced cases by ??
€9 meal reduced cases by??
Closing the pubs & clubs reduced cases by??
Distancing reduced cases by??
5km travel restriction reduced cases by??
Closing hairdressers reduced cases by??
Closing gyms reduced cases by??
Hand washing reduced cases by??
Underlying immunity from the 30% effective BCG vaccine reduced cases by??
Closing places of worship reduced cases by??

There's a load more things you could add to that list the point is you haven't a clue what actually worked and didn't. Your not giving and credence to the seasonality of coronaviruses in your claim it was lockdown that reduced the spread.

Why did cases drop after we went to level 3 and then level 5 in October and November then? What seasonality is in that period when we were seeing cases rise across Europe at the same point?

speckle

Boggles wrote: »

Sure it is healthy to have disagreements based on science.

One of the main authors claims it is a continuing scam and the pandemic ended (for some reason) in June.

Would you call him a "not so good scientist"?

Techinically the pandemic did end we have now endemic virus which may or.may not be seasonal or have a seasonal component to it or a once off were we are ommune a long time. Its status as a virus has been down graded. That does not mean that more people will not die from it. You and even I may not like that fact because of potentially losing loved ones to it in the future but that doesnt change it.
So yes the scientists who state that are correct. You dont have to agree with everything that every scientist/author/expert says as they dont either.
As to your second part we will just have to disagree and come back to it probably a year from now.. when more research is carried out and we see if the data/math proves an normal viral infection curve. Some data coming in now but not enough to make a final decsion on that. ie we are not through a full first and hopefully only wave in all.places around the globe.

bb1234567

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Incorrect, like the flu and other coronaviruses, respiratory illnesses are seasonal well at least the worse effects are. This is no different. With the continued flawed testing numbers will rise over the next few months and die off again like last summer. You could put on your tinfoil hat and say it wasn't the season that dramatically reduced cases in the summer and attribute it to the €9 meal or other such pseudoscience.

Remember when posters a few months ago jumped down that poster Kermit's throat because he suggested it was a seasonal illness (which would meant it would resurge in proceeding months) and now this same quadrant are now ironically desperately pushing that it's a strongly cyclical natural seasonal occurence, and so, nothing to be alarmed about(I think because we also have other mild seasonal respitaory illnesses we don't worry too much about it?) or else their point is that because it's seasonal and following natural pattern, this means man can do nothing to suppress it and again reason to just give up and forget about it

And could you explain how Moscow/ Eastern Russia had it's peak of COVID infections in June and July then if you're so sure of your theory? Don't think Russia has been seeing as any mid-Summer flu peaks in the last few decades.

questionmark?

dalyboy wrote: »

There will have to be a mind shift regarding this absurd myth that masks somehow PROTECT the user of contracting this or other viruses. Even states clearly on the PPE packaging that masks offer zero protection against covid contraction.
How has this cognitive disassociation with reality not been corrected by media and doctors I’ll never understand.

Masks are part and parcel of constant visual misery to the restrictions these days and should be sent back to the hell they belong as quick as we possibly can.

Vast majority of people know that the mask they wear doesn't protect them! You wear a mask to help protect others(help as in reduce the risk not fully protect!)
I don't like wearing masks but I do it as I understand why they are looking at anything that helps even a little. Don't understand why this is so hard for some to understand.

Boggles

speckle wrote: »

Techinically the pandemic did end we have now endemic virus which may or.may not be seasonal or have a seasonal component to it.

How can a novel disease where the vast majority of the hosts have no immunity be endemic?

speckle

I agree with what you say re Kermit dont know enough about eastern Russia weather though
However with a novel highly transmittable virus in it first wave it might pushe into the summer months if it first hits in Spring? Think we need at least one full year of seasons if not two to know one way or the other.

speckle

speckle wrote: »

I normally agree with alot of your posts and look forward to your charts but on this will have to disagree... the scientists listed are eminant experts and the data shows that there are problems associated with the pcr test wwhen using it as a public health screening tool as to its original purpose as a in hospital clinical diagnosing tool. It was even discussed with the HSe proposal released on Oct 8 and that is why we are seeing more quality rapid antigen tests etc being rolled out to check if you are actually infectious at the time.

Edit..science evolves and the pcr was the only tool earlier along with clinical diagnosis.

Its deliberate misrepresentation which in my book is the same as outright lying. The PCR is not a useful test for determining the level of virus within a host. Why, because the sampling method does not produce a repeatable amount everytime, its not like taking a ml. of blood. But it is a highly specific test. If there is no SARS-CoV-2, it wont find any. Now if you are getting to high Ct levels, over 40, you may get fragments of virus from earlier infection or normally undetectable levels of cross reactivity with related genetic material, and thats where the criticism of the method comes in. We don't however count any case with a Ct over 35 as a positive. We retest. What the test cannot also tell you is if you have just been infected, are infectious or just clear of the virus. What do the critics of the test propose - ignore the test? Just send these people who have virus in their system back out into the world not knowing if the are infectious or not?

None of those proposing these theories can also answer the question as to why 10million tests in Wuhan during mass testing only found 300 asymptomatic positives, or why we were only getting a handful of cases in June with thousands of tests every day. Surely if the test was so bad we would have had loads.

Johnboy1951

How "deadly" is this virus?

Cut through the hype and scaremongering and look at the numbers for deaths to determine that.

For those who would like to know how deadly it is, please compare "all-cause mortality" on a month by month basis with figures from previous years.

You then have a definitive answer to the question of how deadly this virus is.

Caraibh

Tork wrote: »

That's the one. They'd be begging for Tony to come back. It's doctor's jobs to tell people what they don't want to hear. You can then agree or disagree with them. We don't know how much the politicians have watered down NPHET's recommendations. And the last time I looked NPHET was made up of several people. Why are they not being called out by name as well?

Dr Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford said that he was taught in medical school that doctors are not supposed to sow panic. They are supposed to reassure, give accurate information about risks, and trust people to make good judgements on their own behalf. Do you think Anthony has done any of that since he first appeared back in March?

Paddygreen

PTH2009 wrote: »

When this ****e is all over (hopefully sooner rather than later) what will still stay in society ?

I think social distancing might stay in an extent but tbh it always existed pre covid. Mask wearing might also still be around

Mandatory masks are here to stay my friend, forever and ever and ever, just in case. I am upgrading to bioVyzr going forward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIu4W-oSZtM