Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Relaxation of Restrictions, Part X *Read OP For Mod Warnings*
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Pussyhands wrote: »I really don't understand the walk in centres. They're closing on Wednesday. What's the point of bringing them in when we're at a rather low positivity rate?
Bring them in last May? No.
Bring them in last November? No.
Bring them in last January? No.
Bring them in for a week in March when our cases have dropped 95% from the peak and positivity rate is 3.5%? Yes.
I absolutely disgusted hearing this on the radio couple weeks ago "you should go in and get tested even if you have no symptoms", it was "just go in for a crack of it" sort of thing, and if you're positive - that's great to keep those case numbers going
0 -
-
If it is unfortunately 6 weeks until the next review, which would be 17th May, I'd like to see as part of the announcement on Tuesday reference to where they estimate us to be by 17th May in terms of vaccinations and what that would mean for us in terms of case numbers, hospitalisations and deaths.
For example, I think its reasonable to expect vaccines groupings as far as group 7 to have received at least a first dose by then. That would mean all over 70s and all 16+ of very high risk and 16+ of high risk. That's a rough guide of where I think we'll could be but obviously NPHET should be able to give more accurate data in terms of first and second doses. From that they should be able to estimate how much this take off our R number compared to if nobody was vaccinated. They should be able to tell us how many they'd expect to end up in hospital per 1,000 cases and how many would die from those 1,000 cases. And explain how they came to these figures, not like the throwaway comment '35 hospitalised for every 1,000 cases after elderly and vulnerable hospitalised' from Leo and Ronan Glynn, where it wasn't mentioned what groupings they meant by the elderly and vulnerable and where it wasn't explained how less than 35 of 1,000 cases now of under are hospitalised and but this will somehow increase once the vulnerable are vaccinated
If we know what we are working towards with these lockdowns, what groups we are protecting and by what numbers I think there could be a lot more buy in. At the moment, even if they aren't being dishonest to us a lot of people think they are as they are not being up front with us. Same as now with the slight increase in cases. Be honest and say its more than likely due to the fact we are testing 20,000 extra a week and it's more of a plateau than an increase but they are very slow to say this, the scarier is always the tactic they go for.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
If it is unfortunately 6 weeks until the next review, which would be 17th May, I'd like to see as part of the announcement on Tuesday reference to where they estimate us to be by 17th May in terms of vaccinations and what that would mean for us in terms of case numbers, hospitalisations and deaths.
For example, I think its reasonable to expect vaccines groupings as far as group 7 to have received at least a first dose by then. That would mean all over 70s and all 16+ of very high risk. That's a rough guide of where I think we'll could be but obviously NPHET should be able to give more accurate data in terms of first and second doses. From that they should be able to estimate how much this take off out R number compared to if nobody was vaccinated. They should be able to tell us how many they'd expect to end up in hospital per 1,000 cases and how many would die from those 1,000 cases. And explain how they came to these figures, not like the throwaway comment '35 hospitalised for every 1,000 cases after elderly and vulnerable hospitalised' from Leo and Ronan Glynn, where it wasn't mentioned what groupings they meant by the elderly and vulnerable and where it wasn't explained how less than 35 of 1,000 cases now of under are hospitalised and but this will somehow increase once the vulnerable are vaccinated
If we know what we are working towards with these lockdowns, what groups we are protecting and by what numbers I think there could be a lot more buy in. At the moment, even if they aren't being dishonest to us a lot of people think they are as they are not being up front with us. Same as now with the slight increase in cases. Be honest and say its more than likely due to the fact we are testing 20,000 extra a week and it's more of a plateau than an increase but they are very slow to say this, the scarier is always the tactic they go for.
All you say is possible, its even necessary imho.
But i wouldnt hold my breath waiting for that kind of information to be honest.
We have people here defending restrictions who didnt think it was appropriate at the time asking for details of how many are being vaccinated etc.
I fully expect another sparkling media performance taking the mushroom growing approach. Throw in a little bit of populace fear and guilt to garnish things and a rehash of the "arrah sure we'll see" approach.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement