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

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

What do you mean "we're saying"?

On a lighter note, Boggles' access to the emoji should be revoked.

2021 quota has already been far surpassed :pac:

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

CSO: The average age of people dying from Covid is 83, the same as that for all deaths.

.

Could you link to the CSO claim please?

Parachutes

A curfew when nothing is open anyway? What are you going to do, drive your car and get covid through the vents?? These lockdown lunatics won't be content till every single person bar the politicians are living in a padded cell 24 hours a day.

Doctor Jimbob

Parachutes wrote: »

A curfew when nothing is open anyway? What are you going to do, drive your car and get covid through the vents?? These lockdown lunatics won't be content till every single person bar the politicians are living in a padded cell 24 hours a day.

Where has anyone said anything about a curfew in addition to the current measures?

muddypuppy

My opinion on curfews is that they are completely useless, it's not like covid spread more after it's dark. It might help to reduce house parties, but the solution is simply to sleep where you are having fun, do an all-nighter until the curfew end or just use one of the many reasons you might break it if anybody stops you (unless you are found drunk or in groups having fun just say that you work nightshifts and are going home).

I would happily take a temporary curfew in exchange of relaxations of the lockdown in other areas but let's be realistic, it's a lot more likely that we would get the curfew without anything in exchange.
I think countries that have one (maybe outside of France where the curfew is pretty strong) are just doing it to show they are doing something.

ArthurDayne

Deleted User wrote: »

The great depression was a consequence of economic policy and not the post WW1 /Spanish Epidemic boom.

The post WW2 US economic boom highlighted how the lessons of the 20's had been learned and a sustained economic boom followed until the oil crisis put paid to that 25 years later.

Well, I wasn’t saying in my post that the Great Depression was caused by Spanish Flu or WWI, but I take your point nonetheless — though to an extent I still disagree. I don’t think that one can utterly rule out that the dawn of mechanised warfare did not have any effect on how global policy panned out over the course of the succeeding decade — the extent to which Spanish flu had any influence I’m not so sure.

Nonetheless, it is more or less a matter of historical record that lingering grievances from the First World War were exacerbated by the economic fallout of the Depression (most acutely in Germany, where the tinderbox of festering resentment was set alight by the crash). People tend to forget that the Roaring Twenties was also a decade of deepening social divisions, where the booms belied resentment in demographic changes and fuelled a surge in extremism (ethnicity and class divisions etc).

And that’s the danger I see ahead, a schism in society and a generation of young people who will ask, with some justification, why was our future tossed to the wind in favour of the longest-living generation in human history who enjoyed the post-war social democratic boom and the explosion of opportunity and prosperity / welfare? Where is our reward? Where is our safety net? Where is our welfare state? In a world which is already showing signs of reverting back towards the radical right, the support of an angered generation of young people is now up for grabs.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Could you link to the CSO claim please?

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/br/b-cdc/covid-19deathsandcases/

"In almost 88% of deaths there was an underlying condition, the median age of these deaths was 83, the same as that for all deaths. This compares to the median age of 48 for all those with a confirmed case of the virus".

For the amount of time spent discussing this topic, you should already know this, Boggles, to be fair.

C__MC

Many checkpoints on the Motorways folks around Dublin

normanoffside

Boggles wrote: »

Could you link to the CSO claim please?

The CSO don't make claims they present statistical facts.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/br/b-cdc/covid-19deathsandcases/

"In almost 88% of deaths there was an underlying condition, the median age of these deaths was 83, the same as that for all deaths. This compares to the median age of 48 for all those with a confirmed case of the virus".

For the amount of time spent discussing this topic, you should already know this, Boggles, to be fair.

That's not what you claimed they claimed.

normanoffside wrote: »

The CSO don't make claims they present statistical facts.

I am aware, thanks Norman.

Russman

normanoffside wrote: »

One of the journalists last night called him out on NPHET’s dithering and inability to take or make decisions on things because they seem to need to be 100% sure before doing anything.

He got very flustered and almost angry in his defensiveness.

I thought he did a decent job countering some of her sh1te to be honest, especially re antigen testing, vitamin D etc.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

That's not what you claimed they claimed.

As another poster said when this was discussed previously "the above is about the median age as well, so less skewed than the average by say a few 100+ year olds"

So again, based on the statistics, I'd like to hear your reasoning/justification for continuing lockdowns/level 5 restrictions after the elderly and medically vulnerable have been vaccinated.

growleaves

Deleted User wrote: »

So again, based on the statistics, I'd like to hear your reasoning/justification for continuing lockdowns/level 5 restrictions after the elderly and medically vulnerable have been vaccinated.

He doesn't have any reasoning or justification. If the government were enforcing Level 3 he would be supporting Level 3 and writing '' at anyone who wanted Level 2 or Level 4.

'Debate' with conformist bots is a waste of time. Most of the pro-restrictions supporters on this thread are now obsessed with scoring pedantry points over turns of phrase.

growleaves

growleaves wrote: »

He doesn't have any reasoning or justification. If the government were enforcing Level 3 he would be supporting Level 3 and writing '' at anyone who wanted Level 2 or Level 4.

'Debate' with conformist bots is a waste of time. Most of the pro-restrictions supporters on this thread are now obsessed with scoring pedantry points over turns of phrase.

Ah, I know he doesn't, as there isn't any to be made. Just wanted to hear if he'd attempt a reply.

normanoffside

Russman wrote: »

I thought he did a decent job countering some of her sh1te to be honest, especially re antigen testing, vitamin D etc.

Oh so don't use them in case they aren't 100% accurate or effective? That's just crazy not to use tools that will probably help just because we can't be 100% sure they will work. We do know they won't do any harm so why not try?

People need to question NPHET and their dithering. She was dead right to do so, Most journalist just play along and ask question based on their statistics with no critical questions.

Here is part of that questioning ref Contact tracing. Full of excuses and dithering from Dr Glynn.

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1362505588433903617

Russman

normanoffside wrote: »

Oh so don't use them in case they aren't 100% accurate or effective? That's just crazy not to use tools that will probably help just because we can't be 100% sure they will work. We do know they won't do any harm so why not try?

People need to question NPHET and their dithering. She was dead right to do so, Most journalist just play along and ask question based on their statistics with no critical questions.

Here is part of that questioning ref Contact tracing. Full of excuses and dithering from Dr Glynn.

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1362505588433903617

Well if I remember correctly he said that basically they've been looking at antigen tests since August and many of them, in real world settings, have fallen way short of what the manufacturers claim regarding accuracy. He also mentioned that we have a very good PCR testing capacity and many hospitals are opting for those tests anyway because they're a better test.

With regard to contact tracing, I totally agree they should have been going back as far as the incubation period for COVID, but what sort of a response was she expecting ? He's not going to throw his employer under the bus at a press conference. Its not like its a secret that the HSE was shambolic pre COVID.

statesaver

Parachutes wrote: »

How long until we give the two fingers to the government and the NPHET junta and just go back to living normally? All business owners just open up for business, we're not going to take this abuse anymore.

We are not French, unfortunately, we are a pacified people.

Pigeon Chaser

Nine more weeks... Casually mentioned to The Irish Mirror by our "leader" at 9pm on a Thursday..

I sincerely hope this is the turning point and people simply refuse to get tested..

fin12

UsBus wrote: »

Happy Friday everyone,
Just a few more hours work then off on an 80km round trip to visit family.
Enough is enough.. Am done with this farce of a policy

And u will make it today with more than likely meeting no checkpoint cause it’s absolutely pissing = no checkpoints. Great day for traveling.

JMNolan

My son has a few buddies over today and he's heading off tonight for a house party. He's thrilled and I'm thrilled for him.

normanoffside

Russman wrote: »

Well if I remember correctly he said that basically they've been looking at antigen tests since August and many of them, in real world settings, have fallen way short of what the manufacturers claim regarding accuracy. He also mentioned that we have a very good PCR testing capacity and many hospitals are opting for those tests anyway because they're a better test.

Does it really matter if they are 40% effective or 99% effective?
They are supposed to be used where PCR testing is not usually required so any infection they catch is one which would have been missed.
This point seems to go over the head of NPHET and the HSE.

The fact that they have been 'studying' it since August says it all, that's why I used the term 'dithering'.

thebaz

thebaz wrote: »

A precedent has been set, any kind of bad flu from now on, will require lockdowns ior calls for lockdown by our new Nanny state masters.

This is an important point, btw, incase nobody picked up on it. Lockdowns have/will become normalized, in a way. I wonder if conditioning will result in people accepting it so easily next time 'round.

Hopefully we'll never get back to this point again, but it's something to be aware of.

RobitTV

JMNolan wrote: »

My son has a few buddies over today and he's heading off tonight for a house party. He's thrilled and I'm thrilled for him.

Oh my god :eek: pure and utter evil.

UDAWINNER

JMNolan wrote: »

My son has a few buddies over today and he's heading off tonight for a house party. He's thrilled and I'm thrilled for him.

Will you be so thrilled if he brings covid in to household I wonder, then people wonder why theses lockdowns will last longer. But hey, live you life:)

Russman

normanoffside wrote: »

Does it really matter if they are 40% effective or 99% effective?
They are supposed to be used where PCR testing is not usually required so any infection they catch is one which would have been missed.
This point seems to go over the head of NPHET and the HSE.

The fact that they have been 'studying' it since August says it all, that's why I used the term 'dithering'.

Why would you opt for one in a real world situation if you can have a PCR though ?

What if they'd come out and said "yeah, we looked at them and they're not worth a f--k" ? People wouldn't be happy then either. All they can do, as he said last night, is to continue to look at them and when the evidence is there, change their view. It'd be different if he'd said we're against them on principle and won't change our mind.
To be honest, I'd be more inclined to accept the view of the medical professionals charged with dealing with this, than some journalist pontificating.

JMNolan

UDAWINNER wrote: »

Will you be so thrilled if he brings covid in to household I wonder, then people wonder why theses lockdowns will last longer. But hey, live you life:)

I'll be grand, don't worry about old JMNolan!

UDAWINNER

UDAWINNER wrote: »

Will you be so thrilled if he brings covid in to household I wonder, then people wonder why theses lockdowns will last longer. But hey, live you life:)

You're constantly virtue signalling, my friend.

They've probably assessed their own risk and deemed it acceptable. You can expect more of this as time goes on. Right, or wrong, people just aren't going to continue adhering to never-ending lockdowns.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

By "we", I evidently mean the majority of this thread, and presumably at this stage, the majority of the country who can objectively view the situation based on statistics, not emotion.

CSO: The average age of people dying from Covid is 83, the same as that for all deaths.
Most also had underlying conditions.

Please explain your reasoning why we should continue with level 5 restrictions and lockdowns after the elderly and medically vulnerable have been vaccinated. Economic justification would also be appreciated.

Given that most estimates put the odds of dying from covid at roughly the same as the odds of dying from all other causes that is hardly surprising. If old people were disproportionately at risk, relative to the base risk, the average age would be above that for all deaths

nj27

Deleted User wrote: »

This is an important point, btw, incase nobody picked up on it. Lockdowns have/will become normalized, in a way. I wonder if conditioning will result in people accepting it so easily next time 'round.

Hopefully we'll never get back to this point again, but it's something to be aware of.

Climate lockdowns have been bandied about in some circles. Actually a good strategy might be to extend level 5 into the summer then segue straight into a climate lockdown which will last until the autumn lockdown for the 4th wave of covid.

C__MC

UDAWINNER wrote: »

Will you be so thrilled if he brings covid in to household I wonder, then people wonder why theses lockdowns will last longer. But hey, live you life:)

See this is the thing
It’s wrong to go to the party but in terms of people under 50 getting COVID, more than likely they’ll make a full recovery