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

Nibs05

Nibs05 wrote: »

I’ve tried searching but haven’t found a answer, can we now travel across the border or is inter county travel just for the republic.

Thanks

It was illegal to cross a county boundary for unnecessary purposes, but in the moment the wheels of your car pass into NI, that rule no longer applies. As of today, you can go anywhere on the island.

TomSweeney wrote: »

Nope point stands, look at what he has said about indoor mask wearing after all this, you don't find it strange the way his opinion has changed ?

I wouldn't insult O'Neill by likening him to Churchill — that would be a pretty laughable stretch anyway – but what was that quote? 'When the facts change, I change my mind; what do you do?'

KrustyUCC

Jack Chambers on the radio with Claire Byrne

No even testing of spectators at games until July

The lack of ambition and urgency is unreal

gozunda

TomSweeney wrote: »

Ireland is basically where we were at in Spain in January - shops open, tennis open, gyms open (are gyms even open?) ... It's good that it's finally happening, but it should have been a lot earlier.

Spain has had no outbreaks related to any of these openings (schools have also been fully open since September) - but of course that's becuase we have to wear masks outside ...:rolleyes::rolleyes:

This is the only thing I am critical about with Spain, mask wearing outside - even in outdoor spaces where you are completely alone.

But a small price to pay to be able to eat in restaurants / play tennis/ go to non grocery shops since last summer.

Thats the funny thing. It's not a competition. Every country has faced massively different challenges and difficulties.

Saying we didn't do this when they did that and etc is pointless and makes no sense. We are not Spain and Spain is not Ireland. As for Schools - different EU countries have tackled reopening with a wide range of solutions some opened, then closed etc.

Not to compare but to highlight differences in approach - in Portugal half a million schoolchildren up to the age of 15 returned to classes last Monday for the first time since Portugal went into lockdown in January. (Primary school students had already returned for lessons on 15 March)

Here schooling was prioritised as soon as possible after the massive rise in the rate in infection early in the year and have stayed open.

Things are reopening. We've managed to keep down our rate of infection. The largest vaccination programme in the states history is well underway. There should be Kudos for that.

Tbh I don't get the constant whinging and comparison with other countries engaged in. It serves no purpose.

RGS

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Jack Chambers on the radio with Claire Byrne

No even testing of spectators at games until July

The lack of ambition and urgency is unreal

Didn't hear the interview but agree its a total lack of ambition.


Theres enough LOI games, rugby rainbow cup and GAA league games to choose over the next few weeks to run a test under controlled conditions.

We really are led by a cowardly bunch of incompetent ministers.

charlie14

RGS wrote: »

Didn't hear the interview but agree its a total lack of ambition.


Theres enough LOI games, rugby rainbow cup and GAA league games to choose over the next few weeks to run a test under controlled conditions.

We really are led by a cowardly bunch of incompetent ministers.

Bravery is when one goes against a normal reaction in an attempt of a better outcome.
Foolishness is simply when you do not perceive any hazard in an unnecessary action.

While it would be ideal to be at the same or higher level of vaccinations than a few others, not being so also has its advantages.
We can simply learn from their data without have to partake in unnecessary actions.

TomTomTim

A Lamb Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It was illegal to cross a county boundary for unnecessary purposes, but in the moment the wheels of your car pass into NI, that rule no longer applies. As of today, you can go anywhere on the island.



I wouldn't insult O'Neill by likening him to Churchill — that would be a pretty laughable stretch anyway – but what was that quote? 'When the facts change, I change my mind; what do you do?'

This is the very issue though. People seem to be struggling greatly with the difference between a fact and an opinion, objectivity and subjectivity. A fact doesn't change it is a fact, so it was never a fact in the first place. Treating things that are not factual as being factual is a very dangerous game.

TomTomTim

TomTomTim wrote: »

This is the very issue though. People seem to be struggling greatly with the difference between a fact and an opinion, objectivity and subjectivity.

Who is? Please be specific. O'Neill?

Changing your mind doesn't imply subjectivity. It means changing your view as the facts emerge, and clarify. This is exactly what you would hope a scientist — well, anyone – should do.

Silentcorner

A Lamb Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Who is? Please be specific. O'Neill?

Changing your mind doesn't imply subjectivity. It means changing your view as the facts emerge, and clarify. This is exactly what you would hope a scientist — well, anyone – should do.

I think the issue people have is these so called experts do change their mind but it never seems to alternate from what the Government and Nphet are suggesting....

For instance, we know this virus does't spread outdoors in any meaningful way...we didn't know that this time last year...where has this been reflected in policy?

We could all be back in sports grounds (even in restricted numbers) but we are months away from that....and no one is questioning it!

We have seen this time and time again...the mask mandate was only imposed on us last summer, July or August....on reflection, that was madness....along with the bevy of other meaningless restrictions we were subjected to last summer!!!

Then you have the PCR and Antigen tests...if there was no PCR tests would we be using Antigen tests, my guess is we would....so why aren't we using both?

Why can't I take an antigen test if I want to go to a pub or concert or mass even....

We saw one of our leading health officials just yesterday make a complete idiot out of himself over that very issue....that same official has been directing policy for over 14 months!!!!

Silentcorner

Silentcorner wrote: »

I think the issue people have is these so called experts do change their mind but it never seems to alternate from what the Government and Nphet are suggesting....

For instance, we know this virus does't spread outdoors in any meaningful way...we didn't know that this time last year...where has this been reflected in policy?

We could all be back in sports grounds (even in restricted numbers) but we are months away from that....and no one is questioning it!

We have seen this time and time again...the mask mandate was only imposed on us last summer, July or August....on reflection, that was madness....along with the bevy of other meaningless restrictions we were subjected to last summer!!!

Then you have the PCR and Antigen tests...if there was no PCR tests would we be using Antigen tests, my guess is we would....so why aren't we using both?

Why can't I take an antigen test if I want to go to a pub or concert or mass even....

We saw one of our leading health officials just yesterday make a complete idiot out of himself over that very issue....that same official has been directing policy for over 14 months!!!!

Plenty of experts deviating from what NPHET and the government say. ISAG for one. Kingston Mills was on earlier talking the benefits of antigen testing, and the person the thread has been denigrating all morning has had a very positive outlook relative to NPHET for months

Silentcorner

Deleted User wrote: »

Plenty of experts deviating from what NPHET and the government say. ISAG for one. Kingston Mills was on earlier talking the benefits of antigen testing, and the person the thread has been denigrating all morning has had a very positive outlook relative to NPHET for months

Any of them critical of lock downs?

Silentcorner

Silentcorner wrote: »

Any of them critical of lock downs?

Ah, I get it, the only acceptable experts who deviate from the NPHET views are those who question restrictions.

Maybe there is a reason they are rarer than hens teeth

Silentcorner

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah, I get it, the only acceptable experts who deviate from the NPHET views are those who question restrictions.

Maybe there is a reason they are rarer than hens teeth

Typical sledge hammer approach from you there Raind!!!!

And you are the very same poster who on the one hand believes that the relaxing of restrictions is slower than it should be but you also inexplicably suggest that you understand why...

You make an expert who questions the effectiveness of lock downs as some kind of dangerous being who shouldn't be allowed near the public for fear of contaminating them with wrong think!!!

Silentcorner

Silentcorner wrote: »

Typical sledge hammer approach from you there Raind!!!!

And you are the very same poster who on the one hand believes that the relaxing of restrictions is slower than it should be but you also inexplicably suggest that you understand why...

You make an expert who questions the effectiveness of lock downs as some kind of dangerous being who shouldn't be allowed near the public for fear of contaminating them with wrong think!!!

Source?

And no one knows the exact appropriate rate at which to relax measures, so while I believe it could be quicker, there is absolutely no contradiction in understanding why someone with a more conservative mindset can think differently. Holding longer to be sure to be sure. Just like the driver who keeps the speedo below 100kph to be sure even though they know they wont be nabbed when under 110kph.

Silentcorner

Deleted User wrote: »

Source?

And no one knows the exact appropriate rate at which to relax measures, so while I believe it could be quicker, there is absolutely no contradiction in understanding why someone with a more conservative mindset can think differently. Holding longer to be sure to be sure. Just like the driver who keeps the speedo below 100kph to be sure even though they know they wont be nabbed when under 110kph.

John Ioannidis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ioannidis

Widely regarded as the most prominent experts in Epidemiology on the planet, you think there isn't one expert in this country who agrees with him? We know one, Sam "there'll be 120,000 deaths" McConkey has never heard of him and has been given a free reign on media throughout the pandemic...but we have no issue giving people who spread hysteria media exposure...surely among our academics or experts there is one who has read his work and agrees with the position he takes.

I take your point, you err on the cautious end of relaxing restrictions.

But then you must also ignore the accepted science that this virus does not transmit outdoors in any meaningful way or that healthy people do not transmit the virus in any meaningful way in order to hold that cautious opinion.

Or that antigen tests cannot be used to much greater effect to return us to somewhat normality...

That is a lot of accepted science we are rejecting in favour of caution don't you think.

Silentcorner

Silentcorner wrote: »

John Ioannidis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ioannidis

Widely regarded as the most prominent experts in Epidemiology on the planet, you think there isn't one expert in this country who agrees with him? We know one, Sam "there'll be 120,000 deaths" McConkey has never heard of him and has been given a free reign on media throughout the pandemic...but we have no issue giving people who spread hysteria media exposure...surely among our academics or experts there is one who has read his work and agrees with the position he takes.

I take your point, you err on the cautious end of relaxing restrictions.

But then you must also ignore the accepted science that this virus does not transmit outdoors in any meaningful way or that healthy people do not transmit the virus in any meaningful way in order to hold that cautious opinion.

Or that antigen tests cannot be used to much greater effect to return us to somewhat normality...

That is a lot of accepted science we are rejecting in favour of caution don't you think.

I think you are ascribing views to me that I have never expressed, but you are free to point them out

Silentcorner

Silentcorner wrote: »

John Ioannidis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ioannidis

Widely regarded as the most prominent experts in Epidemiology on the planet, you think there isn't one expert in this country who agrees with him? We know one, Sam "there'll be 120,000 deaths" McConkey has never heard of him and has been given a free reign on media throughout the pandemic...but we have no issue giving people who spread hysteria media exposure...surely among our academics or experts there is one who has read his work and agrees with the position he takes.

I take your point, you err on the cautious end of relaxing restrictions.

But then you must also ignore the accepted science that this virus does not transmit outdoors in any meaningful way or that healthy people do not transmit the virus in any meaningful way in order to hold that cautious opinion.

Or that antigen tests cannot be used to much greater effect to return us to somewhat normality...

That is a lot of accepted science we are rejecting in favour of caution don't you think.

Ah, Sham McDonkey. The greatest spoofer of them all. The media continue to rely on this discredited chancer for soundbites, tells you everything you need to know about their reliability. We have been fed one-dimensional swill long enough, people are wise to the game by now except the most gullible and ignorant.

PTH2009

Slowly on the road back to normal

I knw it wont happen but how great would it be if they pushed stuff forward and we could have almost everything open by mid/end June.

Those pesky Bank holidays are a reason for that I'd say esp for Hospitality

The lack of urgency to get people back to events is irritating. Bloody kicking the can down the road in that regard 'ah sure look we'll wait til July to start it but do it in a very slow conservative way'

Bit cynical

Deleted User wrote: »

What you call opinion, is actually science - eg. assessing available evidence, formulating hypothesises and continually revising as evidence emerges. The person to be more suspicious about is the one who's view does not change in the face of an evolving situation

However, what is also a bit suspicious is experts forming a very definite position and then promoting that position in a very forceful way in absence of much evidence one way or the the other.

If these people were being honest, their position would have been that, while there is still uncertainty, transmission of Covid-19 is probably slowed down by masks.

gozunda

Silentcorner wrote: »

John Ioannidis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ioannidis

Widely regarded as the most prominent experts in Epidemiology on the planet, you think there isn't one expert in this country who agrees with him? We know one, Sam "there'll be 120,000 deaths" McConkey has never heard of him and has been given a free reign on media throughout the pandemic...but we have no issue giving people who spread hysteria media exposure...surely among our academics or experts there is one who has read his work and agrees with the position he takes.

I take your point, you err on the cautious end of relaxing restrictions.

But then you must also ignore the accepted science that this virus does not transmit outdoors in any meaningful way or that healthy people do not transmit the virus in any meaningful way in order to hold that cautious opinion.

Or that antigen tests cannot be used to much greater effect to return us to somewhat normality...

That is a lot of accepted science we are rejecting in favour of caution don't you think.

Do you believe all our current experts are wrong without exception?

Tbf I see a lot of this repeated without context.

First how do you define "meaningful" in relation to viral spread?

Restrictions on outdoor activities have been a common feature of restrictions on a global level.

Why have they been used? As we know the answer does not relate specifically to spread between individuals outdoors rather social distancing / close contact which comes with people mixing, travelling and socialising as part of those activities. And no thats not just 'changing rooms' or similar.

With regards to the 'healthy'. We know know that people may not know they are infected and can go on to develop the full blown disease. Some may also have very minimal / unrecognised symptoms - all potentially going towards increasing the rate of infection in the wider community where there are few restrictions

Antigen tests have been shown as being best and most accurate when handled by professionals. Can they be used by the general population? Yes they can but at an estimated <60% accuracy when done at home - I for one wouldn't be promoting them as a promoted means of a return to normality until people are at least vaccinated.

PTH2009

PTH2009 wrote: »

Slowly on the road back to normal

I knw it wont happen but how great would it be if they pushed stuff forward and we could have almost everything open by mid/end June.

Those pesky Bank holidays are a reason for that I'd say esp for Hospitality

The lack of urgency to get people back to events is irritating. Bloody kicking the can down the road in that regard 'ah sure look we'll wait til July to start it but do it in a very slow conservative way'

There's no rhyme or reason to it, random arbitrary dates based on idle speculation and nothing more. And bank holidays are no longer a valid bogeyman, vaccines put the kibosh on that. What we have is a government paralysed by irrational fear of another Christmas spike, all too keen to hide behind NPHET. I and many others won't forget this cowardly abdication of responsibility when the next general election rolls around.

ArthurDayne

gozunda wrote: »

Thats the funny thing. It's not a competition. Every country has faced massively different challenges and difficulties.

Saying we didn't do this when they did that and etc is pointless and makes no sense. We are not Spain and Spain is not Ireland. As for Schools - different EU countries have tackled reopening with a wide range of solutions some opened, then closed etc.

Not to compare but to highlight differences in approach - in Portugal half a million schoolchildren up to the age of 15 returned to classes last Monday for the first time since Portugal went into lockdown in January. (Primary school students had already returned for lessons on 15 March)

Here schooling was prioritised as soon as possible after the massive rise in the rate in infection early in the year and have stayed open.

Things are reopening. We've managed to keep down our rate of infection. The largest vaccination programme in the states history is well underway. There should be Kudos for that.

Tbh I don't get the constant whinging and comparison with other countries engaged in. It serves no purpose.

So you don’t get people comparing countries but in the very same post you compare Ireland to Portugal — and then carefully make sure to call a spade anything else except a spade by saying you absolutely are not comparing them but just highlighting the difference in approach. Right.

If we are going to compare highlight the difference in approach between Ireland and Portugal — it might be worth remembering that Portugal was praised and held up as an exemplar for its swift and decisive actions in imposing lockdown in March 2020. They continued to be seen as an exemplar until Christmas when the horse finally bolted and they nearly emulated Sweden’s 12 month Covid death toll in about a quarter of that time period with a similar population.

They imposed what was considered somewhat of a model lockdown (in comparison to neighbouring Spain) and ended up with an utter tidal wave of infection when the lockdown could no longer hold — hence why they re-entered a long-lasting lockdown in January.

gozunda

ArthurDayne wrote: »

So you don’t get people comparing countries but in the very same post you compare Ireland to Portugal — and then carefully make sure to call a spade anything else except a spade by saying you absolutely are not comparing them but just highlighting the difference in approach. Right.
If we are going to compare highlight the difference in approach between Ireland and Portugal — it might be worth remembering that Portugal was praised and held up as an exemplar for its swift and decisive actions in imposing lockdown in March 2020. They continued to be seen as an exemplar until Christmas when the horse finally bolted and they nearly emulated Sweden’s 12 month Covid death toll in about a quarter of that time period with a similar population.They imposed what was considered somewhat of a model lockdown (in comparison to neighbouring Spain) and ended up with an utter tidal wave of infection when the lockdown could no longer hold — hence why they re-entered a long-lasting lockdown in January.

So you obviously missd the bit where I replied to the OP referring solely to school openings in Spain and Ireland.?

And I replied to that where I clearly stated

Not to compare but to highlight differences in approach

 -

Or I stated that

We are not Spain and Spain is not Ireland. As for Schools - different EU countries have tackled reopening with a wide range of solutions some opened, then closed etc.

I do have to laugh that if you mention another country - its an automatic "comparison" even where that is not evidently the case.

Thanks for the humour ... :pac:

Maybe you could explain how the rest of us can refer to other countries in a way that isn't an automatic comparison according to your good self?

I'm all ears ..

Silentcorner

gozunda wrote: »

Do you believe all our current experts are wrong without exception?

Tbf I see a lot of this repeated without context.

First how do you define "meaningful" in relation to viral spread?

Restrictions on outdoor activities have been a common feature of restrictions on a global level.

Why have they been used? As we know the answer does not relate specifically to spread between individuals outdoors rather social distancing / close contact which comes with people mixing, travelling and socialising as part of those activities. And no thats not just 'changing rooms' or similar.

With regards to the 'healthy'. We know know that people may not know they are infected and can go on to develop the full blown disease. Some may also have very minimal / unrecognised symptoms - all potentially going towards increasing the rate of infection in the wider community where there are few restrictions

Antigen tests have been shown as being best and most accurate when handled by professionals. Can they be used by the general population? Yes they can but at an estimated <60% accuracy when done at home - I for one wouldn't be promoting them as a promoted means of a return to normality until people are at least vaccinated.

I don't believe that I am in a position to suggest who is wrong or right, but what I can do is observe a media outlet presenting an expert who is or maybe compromised...any expert who uses hysteria or emotive language is to be dismissed as a credible source in my view...that knocks out most of the "experts" who are now household names.

I do understand the need for restrictions, and even tailored restrictions for each country as the people behave differently and the virus behaves differently (in terms of the speed of the spread)...

But I can't ignore numerous elements that simply don't make sense.

The use of Antigen tests
The seemingly non-existence of effective therapeutics
The heavy restrictions on outdoor sports for all ages.
The absence of a Vit D program/campaign to help mitigate the damage the virus causes.

Also the huge body of health, medical and academic experts who signed the Great Barrington Declaration...60,000 of them I think it is at this stage...who advocate for a much different approach.

By meaningful I mean that whilst there will be outliers, it is not enough to justify the draconian restrictions we have been subjected to....in other words, whilst I agree with the need for restrictions, I believe that the proportionality has been way out of kilter for a virus that is no where near as deadly as we were initially led to believe.

ArthurDayne

gozunda wrote: »

Rflol.

So you missd this bit where I replied tob the OP who was referring solely to school openings in neighbouring Spain and Ireland.?

And I replied to that where I clearly stated
 -

I do have to laugh that if you mention another country - its an automatic comparison- even where that is not evidently the case.

Thanks for the humour ... :pac:

Maybe you could explain how the rest of us can refer to other countries in a way that isn't a comparison according to your good self?

I'm all ears ..

Look I’m not going to get dragged into a discussion on the definition of “compare” — suffice to say that coming out with a statement like “I’m not comparing but just highlighting the differences” is something akin to saying “I’m not going for a p**s, just a pee”.

Don’t want to derail the thread here with what should be a rather basic point.

PTH2009

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There's no rhyme or reason to it, random arbitrary dates based on idle speculation and nothing more. And bank holidays are no longer a valid bogeyman, vaccines put the kibosh on that. What we have is a government paralysed by irrational fear of another Christmas spike, all too keen to hide behind NPHET. I and many others won't forget this cowardly abdication of responsibility when the next general election rolls around.

Very true

June's reopening is not a guarantee either (subject to the public health situation at the time) but all things pointing to it are positive. A u turn on June's openings would be detrimental and not one person in Ireland wants it

gozunda

Silentcorner wrote: »

I don't believe that I am in a position to suggest who is wrong or right, but what I can do is observe a media outlet presenting an expert who is or maybe compromised...any expert who uses hysteria or emotive language is to be dismissed as a credible source in my view...that knocks out most of the "experts" who are now household names.

I do understand the need for restrictions, and even tailored restrictions for each country as the people behave differently and the virus behaves differently (in terms of the speed of the spread)...

But I can't ignore numerous elements that simply don't make sense.

The use of Antigen tests
The seemingly non-existence of effective therapeutics
The heavy restrictions on outdoor sports for all ages.
The absence of a Vit D program/campaign to help mitigate the damage the virus causes.

Also the huge body of health, medical and academic experts who signed the Great Barrington Declaration...60,000 of them I think it is at this stage...who advocate for a much different approach.

By meaningful I mean that whilst there will be outliers, it is not enough to justify the draconian restrictions we have been subjected to....in other words, whilst I agree with the need for restrictions, I believe that the proportionality has been way out of kilter for a virus that is no where near as deadly as we were initially led to believe.

Fair enough.

Yet thankfully we are not reliant on one expert. As for the media - I pay them the small amount of attention they deserve.

I won't make much other comment other than to say the "Great Barrington Declaration" was signed some who seem genuine but also many who evidently would be pushed to open the door to a virology lab.

gozunda

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Look I’m not going to get dragged into a discussion on the definition of “compare” — suffice to say that coming out with a statement like “I’m not comparing but just highlighting the differences” is something akin to saying “I’m not going for a p**s, just a pee”.
Don’t want to derail the thread here with what should be a rather basic point.

So do tell us how - when highlighting the many different approaches many different countries have taken and using an example - in this case Portugal - how the fuk does mentioning that country- make it an automatic comparison where I clearly state that's not my purpose?

As a basic point- I'd say that's taking the pee for sure.

niallo27

Lads its ok we cant compare our restrictions to other countries but we can highlight any differences. All you can do is laugh at this stage.

gozunda

niallo27 wrote: »

Lads its ok we cant compare our restrictions to other countries but we can highlight any differences. All you can do is laugh at this stage.

Ah the even more things not said in a comment competition. Love it

Or just making up rubbish again? The point is its not a competition - therexare many differences with different EU countries having tackled reopening with a wide range of solutions. Or do you think different?

But fuq we should ALL be the same is that the idea? Yup that sounds logical ...

paddyisreal

gozunda wrote: »

Ah the even more things not said in a comment competition. Love it

Or just making up rubbish again? The point is its not a competition - therexare many differences with different EU countries having tackled reopening with a wide range of solutions. Or do you think different?

But fuq we should ALL be the same is that the idea? Yup that sounds logical ...

Like there ALL the same in the Catholic church ....