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

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Well then pick any European country who were perceived to be more relaxed than us during the summer, who are having their worst waves now?

I offered Germany as an alternative. You are letting the political establishment in the UK away with one if their woes are based solely on a new variant, but we can park that so not to muddy the water.

For your thesis to be true, countries in Europe who were more relaxed during the summer shouldn't be reporting the level of infections or deaths they are currently.

Would you agree?

A typical argument made by the pro restrictions side.

If everyone just stayed locked down since last March, we’d doing better in the Covid leagues.

It’s like burning the house down to kill a rodent.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

A typical argument made by the pro restrictions side.

If everyone just stayed locked down since last March, we’d doing better in the Covid leagues.

It’s like burning the house down to kill a rodent.

Again lad there is no "pro restriction" side.

:rolleyes:

There is the majority of people who accept science and reality and don't inform themselves by dipping into an unsavory well of internet echo chambers frequented by grifters and weak minded unfortunates.

Almost a year in, there is no excuse for it.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Or are you of the opinion a society and economy can function without a health service?

Spoiler: It can't.

But it is equally true that a health service cannot function without an economy, so if it's true that lockdowns do not in fact do anything (or much) to limit Covid-19 deaths (see my post on the previous page with a list of papers/articles suggesting that may be the case), then we're tanking the economy, decimating lives, indebting citizens for generations and storing up future health and wellbeing issues for naught.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

But it is equally true that a health service cannot function without an economy, so if it's true that lockdowns do not in fact do anything (or much) to limit Covid-19 deaths (see my post on the previous page with a list of papers/articles suggesting that may be the case), then we're tanking the economy, decimating lives, indebting citizens for generations and storing up future health and wellbeing issues for naught.

It's why the remit given to public health focused on 2 key things

1. Keeping schools open.

2. Keeping non covid care functioning.

If you have a magical formula based on reality that we should have went down another route, by all means tap it out.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Again lad there is no "pro restriction" side.

:rolleyes:

There is the majority of people who accept science and reality and don't inform themselves by dipping into an unsavory well of internet echo chambers frequented by grifters and weak minded unfortunates.

Almost a year in, there is no excuse for it.

Care to tell me the science behind lidl blocking off the middle aisle?

There is no science behind any of this.

The whole world copied China with no proof that it actually works unless you are prepared to weld people into their houses.

Silentcorner

Boggles wrote: »

Again lad there is no "pro restriction" side.

:rolleyes:

There is the majority of people who accept science and reality and don't inform themselves by dipping into an unsavory well of internet echo chambers frequented by grifters and weak minded unfortunates.

Almost a year in, there is no excuse for it.

There is science behind the lockdowns?

Go on then, share it with us, a poster was good enough to link multiple studies and papers can you provide us with similar?

SAMTALK

Deleted User wrote: »

Care to tell me the science behind lidl blocking off the middle aisle?

There is no science behind any of this.

The whole world copied China with no proof that it actually works unless you are prepared to weld people into their houses.

People browsing ? Did you ever see queues for certain things on offer in middle aisles ?

JP Liz V1

sporina wrote: »

1st world problems i know but man I need a manicure... I can't wait for my nail salon to reopen.. looks like it could be the end of Feb when that happens..

I'd say longer March or April

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

A typical argument made by the pro restrictions side.

If everyone just stayed locked down since last March, we’d doing better in the Covid leagues.

It’s like burning the house down to kill a rodent.

No answer then so

GazzaL

Deleted User wrote: »

Care to tell me the science behind lidl blocking off the middle aisle?

There is no science behind any of this.

The whole world copied China with no proof that it actually works unless you are prepared to weld people into their houses.

The virus knows if you're buying a chainsaw and a sports bra rather than just regular groceries.

GazzaL

sporina wrote: »

1st world problems i know but man I need a manicure... I can't wait for my nail salon to reopen.. looks like it could be the end of Feb when that happens..

Lots of nail technicians are working from home.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

It's why the remit given to public health focused on 2 key things

1. Keeping schools open.

2. Keeping non covid care functioning.

If you have a magical formula based on reality that we should have went down another route, by all means tap it out.

Well, my post on the previous page (which took a while to put together so it'd be nice if you read it) shows growing evidence that lockdowns don't actually do anything when compared to less restrictive measures like social distancing and practicing good hygiene. So in the absence of you providing any similarly comprehensive evidence that lockdowns do work, my (evidence-based, not-at-all-magical) suggestion would be that easing lockdowns and emphasising social distancing and hygiene practices might be the way to go.

Captain_Crash

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Care to tell me the science behind lidl blocking off the middle aisle?

There is no science behind any of this.

The whole world copied China with no proof that it actually works unless you are prepared to weld people into their houses.

I bought stuff from the middle isle in Lidl two days ago! Was also in Dunnes on the same day and lots of the areas that were blocked off in the last L5 we’re open with signs on the blocked off areas saying something to the effect that if you wanted something just ask! Small snapshot but not all stores are blocking off random isles like before

Also, on the topic of stuff being open.... I was reading some exchanges last night between Kermit and Fintan and a few others about pints/haircuts/food etc. I don’t know who any of the posters are nor do I know what establishments they were speaking of.... but I can vouch to a point that if you want something such as a haircut or round of golf you can get it if you look hard enough! The back door in my gym is open a local barber is doing cuts and although I’ve not been, I know of two pubs in the area with a “secret knock”!

average_runner

Deleted User wrote: »

Care to tell me the science behind lidl blocking off the middle aisle?

There is no science behind any of this.

The whole world copied China with no proof that it actually works unless you are prepared to weld people into their houses.

Reason for blocking off the line was because people were on top of each other on certain mornings in those shops. So people caused it to be closed off

SnuggyBear

Good video on lockdowns

https://youtu.be/GqAbeSggcnw

froog

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3543

“Belarus’s beleaguered government remains unfazed by covid-19. President Aleksander Lukashenko, who has been in power since 1994, has flatly denied the seriousness of the pandemic, refusing to impose a lockdown, close schools, or cancel mass events like the Belarusian football league or the Victory Day parade. Yet the country’s death rate is among the lowest in Europe—just over 700 in a population of 9.5 million with over 73 000 confirmed cases.”

i picked one of your articles at random. the one i picked above, in the same link you posted says the following:

Although the low death numbers are encouraging, some experts fear that many coronavirus related deaths are registered as cases of pneumonia—UN data show a difference of 5605 between April-June 2019 compared with the same period in 2020.11

froog

froog wrote: »

i picked one of your articles at random. the one i picked above, in the same link you posted says the following:

Although the low death numbers are encouraging, some experts fear that many coronavirus related deaths are registered as cases of pneumonia—UN data show a difference of 5605 between April-June 2019 compared with the same period in 2020.11

No, Belarus is the model of government we should be moving towards. A real shining star in the world

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, my post on the previous page (which took a while to put together so it'd be nice if you read it) shows growing evidence that lockdowns don't actually do anything when compared to less restrictive measures like social distancing and practicing good hygiene. So in the absence of you providing any similarly comprehensive evidence that lockdowns do work, my (evidence-based, not-at-all-magical) suggestion would be that easing lockdowns and emphasising social distancing and hygiene practices might be the way to go.

May come as a shock to you, but I have read all those studies AFAIK and they have been debated all ready.

Your "evidence" includes a piece on Belarus.

Are you advocating we should be more like them?

I think by and large the dictatorships around the world for one reason or another have done quite well on paper.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Care to tell me the science behind lidl blocking off the middle aisle?

News to me.

froog

froog wrote: »

i picked one of your articles at random. the one i picked above, in the same link you posted says the following:

Although the low death numbers are encouraging, some experts fear that many coronavirus related deaths are registered as cases of pneumonia—UN data show a difference of 5605 between April-June 2019 compared with the same period in 2020.11

I haven't been through every paper and article with a fine comb yet, and I'm certain that fault can be found with at least some of them. That one in particular, given Belarus' obstinate denial of any pandemic occurring in the first place, is likely to be one of the weakest.

But the object here is to assess all available evidence, rather than to find fault with one part of one available paper in order to dismiss the entire body of evidence and default back to a preferred conclusion, right? And the body of evidence taken as a whole strikes me as quite compelling. In particular, the papers that make comparisons between similar countries that have used different measures.

Along that vein, if you have any comparable papers suggesting that lockdowns are effective (with some efficacy measures) I'd be glad to see them.

More data is never going to harm anyone.

froog

Deleted User wrote: »

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3764553

"Studies which differentiate between the two types of behavioral change find that, on average, mandated behavior changes accounts for only 9% (median: 0%) of the total effect on the growth of the pandemic stemming from behavioral changes. The remaining 91% (median: 100%) of the effect was due to voluntary behavior changes."

your last paper caught my eye because it seemed genuinely interesting. only to discover the paper is not peer reviewed or published in a journal, from an author who is an economist, and who is part of the American Economic Research Institute, known mostly for climate change and covid denial in general. also notable for being found to pay for facebook ads against social distancing and mask wearing.

froog

Deleted User wrote: »

I haven't been through every paper and article with a fine comb yet, and I'm certain that fault can be found with at least some of them. That one in particular, given Belarus' obstinate denial of any pandemic occurring in the first place, is likely to be one of the weakest.

But the object here is to assess all available evidence, rather than to find fault with one part of one available paper in order to dismiss the entire body of evidence and default back to a preferred conclusion, right? And the body of evidence taken as a whole strikes me as quite compelling. In particular, the papers that make comparisons between similar countries that have used different measures.

Along that vein, if you have any comparable papers suggesting that lockdowns are effective (with some efficacy measures) I'd be glad to see them.

More data is never going to harm anyone.

be honest, you haven't read any of them have you? you just googled searched "lockdowns don't work" or similar and copied every link you could find.

grizzcol2

Boggles wrote: »

News to me.

cause their not allowed get an advantage over shops that cant sell those types of goods which have been forced to close - same reason why dunnes cant sell clothes instore at present

Windmill100000

Boggles wrote: »

News to me.

They have not closed aisles.

They stopped the sale of some non-essential goods, in line with many other stores like Dunnes who have clothes all sectioned off.

It was reported in the media end of October..

Windmill100000

grizzcol2 wrote: »

cause their not allowed get an advantage over shops that cant sell those types of goods which have been forced to close - same reason why dunnes cant sell clothes instore at present

Yep. It's all to stop people being in shops for non-essential shopping. The idea being you go in, get what you need and get out, no browsing

Kunta Kinte

Windmill100000 wrote: »

Yep. It's all to stop people being in shops for non-essential shopping. The idea being you go in, get what you need and get out, no browsing

Precisely. The fact that anyone can not understand(or claim not to)an obvious matter like this is mind boggling.

Windmill100000

Interesting article here on lockdowns

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-lockdowns-idUSKBN2842WS

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Along that vein, if you have any comparable papers suggesting that lockdowns are effective (with some efficacy measures) I'd be glad to see them.

There is reams of them. Why not google them, like you obviously googled "lockdowns don't work".

SnuggyBear

Boggles wrote: »

There is reams of them. Why not google them, like you obviously googled "lockdowns don't work".

Link please

froog

A lot of people seem very invested in lockdowns being effective. This is entirely understandable, given that we're a year into this thing and the idea that they are not effective means a lot of damage has been done and sacrifice made for no benefit. But a desire for a given outcome does not evidence make.

By all means, if the evidence I've presented has been debunked or is contradicted, present the counter-evidence. I'm asking for it.

But, look. I bought an extra freezer and stocked it before most people had even heard of SARS-CoV-2, I spent last February being looked at like I was out of my tree for wearing a mask to the shops, and I endured my friends and family laughing at me when I warned them that a pandemic was beginning and they should start shoring up their immune systems and buying a bit extra with every shop. I've lost friends to Covid. I'm not even close to a "Covid denier" and I won't brook accusations that suggest that I am. What I am is very concerned that we're on the wrong path and doing a lot more harm than good. I don't think that's an unreasonable thing to be concerned about.

froog wrote: »

be honest, you haven't read any of them have you? you just googled searched "lockdowns don't work" or similar and copied every link you could find.

No, froog, and that's a very mean-spirited post, mate.

Show me the evidence that lockdowns work and I'll gladly take a gander. I'm not going to flout the restrictions that we're all expected to follow in any case because there's something to be said for solidarity. I'm also not very put-out by the restrictions at all. I've a lovely home full of people I love, nobody's income has been affected, we're all healthy, and we're all sort of hermits anyway. But that's not the case for everyone, and they are owed consideration just as much as those in groups vulnerable to Covid-19 are.