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

gozunda

Ballynally wrote: »

EU health organisations overall are prone to advocate caution and advise governments to use restrictions in order to surpress ..... fill in the blanks here.
It is still up to governments to make decisions about their country.

Sorry, no relevance to your post but to the initial poster your post was commenting on.
Gozunda has been on my ignore list for a while now

Well thanks for the call out Ballynally. But completly incorrect. What was posted is simply the current stance of the ECDC. Infer thats its all a big a conspiracy to "suppress... fill in the blanks" if you wish . Thats you're perogative of course.

I'm sorry you don't like the facts. But I can't help with that.

gozunda

niallo27 wrote: »

Nphet are not experts on data modelling.

True dat. But this lot are ...

https://www.ucd.ie/research/covid19response/news/irishepidemiologicalmodellingadvisorygrouptonphet/

Degag

prunudo wrote: »

I honestly don't think anything will make some change their opinion. They blindly believe everything they're told without question or ability to be critical. They are either highly insulated from the effects of the pandemic or have a finger in the pie and are benefiting from neverending restrictions.

And to be fair, that also goes the other way. There are those who are going to be ultra-critical regardless of reason. Balance is the key, which admittedly is difficult seeing as the pandemic has affected so many so negatively.

Bsharp

gozunda wrote: »

True dat. But this lot are ...

https://www.ucd.ie/research/covid19response/news/irishepidemiologicalmodellingadvisorygrouptonphet/

"Thus, the precision of pandemic modelling lies somewhere between weather prediction (good) and economic forecasting (poor)". We're basing policy decisions on the extremity result of this; the worst case prediction. The modellers themselves know it's not accurate.

Beechwoodspark

prunudo wrote: »

I honestly don't think anything will make some change their opinion. They blindly believe everything they're told without question or ability to be critical. They are either highly insulated from the effects of the pandemic or have a finger in the pie and are benefiting from neverending restrictions.

I certainly don’t have “blind faith” in NPHET

I accept it for what it is. Qualified experts giving advice to Govt.

I don’t think they are infallible (nobody is) or thst we should blindly accept their recommendations.

However I prefer that we have NPHET there to provide input into govt decisions

I am not in a position to “critique” NPHET recommendations - I have no professional qualifications whatsoever in pandemic /public health.

I’d be modest enough to accept my limits on that score.

Some of yee on this really do seem to be “armchair experts” though, and are not behind the door in running down the actual NPHET experts ....

I suppose at the end of the day everyone has their own opinion and it is up to our political leaders to weigh and assess which advice and recommendations to take heed of

gozunda

Nuts102 wrote: »

We are the most restricted country in Europe and we are one or the worst performing countries in Europe.

Except we're not. So that's incorrect. On the Stringency index both Germany and Portugal have higher levels of restrictions than Ireland. Plenty of other countries have restrictions we don't have and vice versa. And yes we've rolled back quite a lot of restrictions to date.

But maybe you'd be surprised to learn no we're not the "worst performing countries in Europe" at all. If fact we're not doing to badly overall in relation to the pandemic.

https://i.imgflip.com/5fcaiy.jpg

Nuts102 wrote: »

So yes maybe we should look elsewhere and say let's do that aswell because they are open more and performing better than us.I don't think keeping everything closed because of what might happen is a particularly good strategy, firstly the vast majority don't listen anymore and secondly the money will run out eventually.Let's destroy the economy and the future of the country and drive up hospital waiting lists that will kill more people because we might get a 4th wave that no other country seems to be getting.

If you check my comment to which you replied - it is mainly a statement of fact with regard to the position of the ECDC ie other experts on the current delta variant and the risks posed.

But no I don't advocate "destroying the economy..." etc etc

MOR316

Walked past the GPO earlier on, on my way to the iLac centre.

Saw the protest/gathering, whatever you wish to call it. Seemed peaceful and respectful in terms of hassle anyways.

Then again, I only saw about 10 seconds of it or so. Could have turned into a war zone after I turned the corner

Allinall

MOR316 wrote: »

Walked past the GPO earlier on, on my way to the iLac centre.

Saw the protest/gathering, whatever you wish to call it. Seemed peaceful and respectful in terms of hassle anyways.

Then again, I only saw about 10 seconds of it or so. Could have turned into a war zone after I turned the corner

Cabinet and NPHET are holding an emergency meeting tonight as a result of the protest.

Expect all restrictions to be abandoned first thing Monday morning.

MOR316

Allinall wrote: »

Cabinet and NPHET are holding an emergency meeting tonight as a result of the protest.

Expect all restrictions to be abandoned first thing Monday morning.

And to be replaced by newer, harsher restrictions!!

Tony has devised a plan to use a guillotine for anyone who disobeys them.
Philip "Scotch Egg" Nolan is working hard on the modelling
Micheál "The Gimp" Martin is still sleeping.

Eamon Ryan is wondering why his artificial plants aren't growing

Penfailed

melekalikimaka wrote: »

alot of people here seem to know more than professionals... worrying times

Are all the professionals in the rest of Europe wrong...but our lads are right?

MOR316

Allinall wrote: »

Cabinet and NPHET are holding an emergency meeting tonight as a result of the protest.

Expect all restrictions to be abandoned first thing Monday morning.

Ha to be serious though, I get it. I'm badly affected by this latest ****show, to the point where I'm going to have to decide if I have to leave the country. I don't protest or attend such events but, I totally understand people's anger and emotions with this.

As long as people aren't causing harm to others, I'm cool with it

namloc1980

Just watching the F1 qualifying in Austria. Huge crowd at it. Outdoors of course.

gozunda

Bsharp wrote: »

"Thus, the precision of pandemic modelling lies somewhere between weather prediction (good) and economic forecasting (poor)". We're basing policy decisions on the extremity result of this; the worst case prediction. The modellers themselves know it's not accurate.

Well no five models were produced from worst case to benign - which indicated a rise in the rate of infection over the next couple of months.

And yes its called modelling not "divining the future" for good reason

Of course context of course is always useful

Numerous Parameters

Professor Lynch continued:"The results depend sensitively on these parameters. A subcommittee of IEMAG was established to examine the numerous parameters and to determine the most probable values under varying conditions.

"To allow for uncertainty, the model is run for a range of parameter values, giving a probable distribution of predicted values. This is reminiscent of ensemble prediction for weather forecasting. However, people are more fickle than parcels of air: while human behaviour does not much influence the weather, it has major consequences for the evolution of an infectious outbreak. Thus, the precision of pandemic modelling lies somewhere between weather prediction (good) and economic forecasting (poor).

"As a result of interventions, there has been a very significant suppression of Covid-19 spread in Ireland. The figure, using data up to May 16th, clearly shows the impact of interventions on the reproduction number. There were marked drops on March 13th to 14th, when schools and universities closed, and March 28th, when the major lockdown started. The reproduction rate of the virus, the R-number, has remained below 1 since then.

"The number of deaths per day has been greatly reduced following mitigating steps. However, if measures are relaxed too soon, an R-number above 1 could cause a dangerous peak in infections. If it were allowed to go above 2, the much more extreme consequences would be difficult to cope with...

MOR316

All this talk of models and not a sign of FHM magazines anywhere

Philip Nolan should be sacked for that alone

The HorsesMouth

What's the story with play centres and the like? Surely they are opening Monday 5th no?

km79

The HorsesMouth wrote: »

What's the story with play centres and the like? Surely they are opening Monday 5th no?

No is correct

The HorsesMouth

km79 wrote: »

No is correct

You're right just had a look at a few spots.
So they will operate like indoor dining...vaccination for admittance..apart from the fact the main clientele are under 10! What a nonsense decision.

namloc1980

The HorsesMouth wrote: »

What's the story with play centres and the like? Surely they are opening Monday 5th no?

No. All indoor changes were postponed with the exception of the weddings going up to 50.

Bsharp

Bsharp wrote: »

"Thus, the precision of pandemic modelling lies somewhere between weather prediction (good) and economic forecasting (poor)".

Sick burn.

Reminds me of the quote by George Box, one of the greatest statisticians of all time: 'All Models are wrong, but some are useful'.

...yet indoor hospitality is likely to remain closed beyond 19 July.

It's a sick joke.

https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1411235797756416005

Bsharp

gozunda wrote: »

Well no five models were produced from worst case to benign - which indicated a rise in the rate of infection over the next couple of months.

And yes its called modelling not "divining the future" for good reason

Of course context of course is always useful

I provided a direct statement from someone involved in the modelling process. The context doesn't change the validity of that statement. Or do you disagree with the statement made by the professor?

Five scenarios were assessed using one model based off a range of factual and assumed parameter inputs. Quite a wide a range of assumed input parameter values were used to give the range of outcomes presented. A probability for each outcome would help to provide a better understanding of likelihood. Were probabilities provided? If not, why not? This is how a decision is usually made when there's a range of possible outcomes.

So the government is making a decision where they've no understanding of the likelihood of an event taking place. They haven't planned any contingencies for this uncertainty either. It's simply not good enough from the government.

Bsharp

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Sick burn.

Reminds me of the quote by George Box, one of the greatest statisticians of all time: 'All Models are wrong, but some are useful'.

Haha, nice cheap shot from the professor, particularly in the context of Irish weather forecasting.

gozunda

kwestfan08 wrote: »

New infections that will primarily be in the younger aged unvaccinated cohort of which 99.99% won’t die.

Reason enough to keep the economy from taking off isn’t it? A less deadly strain of a virus that for the most part is harmless to those who will now catch it.

Well no not quite. The ECDC report details those most at risk include people who have not been vaccinated but also those who have only received the first dose of a two-dose vaccination
course and are less well protected against infection with the Delta variant*. It remains we have a substantial proportion of individuals who have as if yet have only received one dose.

*And that is simply a statement from the ECDC who also state that the lifting of non pharmaceutical interventions would lead to a further rise is infections.

I presume you do know that deaths from covid are not the sole metric which are relevant here yes?

MOR316

[Deleted User] wrote: »

...yet indoor hospitality is likely to remain closed beyond 19 July.

It's a sick joke.

https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1411235797756416005

He used to work for Telecom Eireann before he got that gig.... Expert indeed...

prunudo

[Deleted User] wrote: »

...yet indoor hospitality is likely to remain closed beyond 19 July.

It's a sick joke.


"We should plan for Delta with concern & a level of confidence also. Almost 4.3M vaccines administered. Over 2.56M adults partially vaccinated (68%) & over 1.8M (48%) fully vaccinated. Over 55,000 administered on each of the last 4 days, & over 272,000 so far this week. @HSELive"

https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1411235797756416005

Have to say i find the reporting of figures regarding those vaccinated as odd. Looking at that tweet you would be fogiven for thinking 2.56m + 1.8m adults have been vaccinated where as the reality is only 2.56m have been vaccinated. The same person can't be full and partially vaccinated at the same time.

It should be reported as 2.56m have been vaccinated, of which 1.8m are fully vaccinated. The & shouldn't be there.

Lumen

prunudo wrote: »

Have to say i find the reporting of figures regarding those vaccinated as odd. Looking at that tweet you would be fogiven for thinking 2.56m + 1.8m adults have been vaccinated where as the reality is only 2.56m have been vaccinated. The same person can't be full and partially vaccinated at the same time.

It should be reported as 2.58m have been vaccinated, of which 1.8m are fully vaccinated. The & shouldn't be there.

Yeah, it's a misinterpretation of dose numbers. As far as I can tell what's reported/recorded internally is first doses (d1), second doses (d2) and single doses (ds).

Then d1 is reported as "partially vaccinated" (incorrect), and d2+ds is reported as "fully vaccinated" (correct).

gozunda

Bsharp wrote: »

I provided a direct statement from someone involved in the modelling process. The context doesn't change the validity of that statement. Or do you disagree with the statement made by the professor?

Five scenarios were assessed using one model based off a range of factual and assumed parameter inputs. Quite a wide a range of assumed input parameter values were used to give the range of outcomes presented. A probability for each outcome would help to provide a better understanding of likelihood. Were probabilities provided? If not, why not? This is how a decision is usually made when there's a range of possible outcomes.

So the government is making a decision where they've no understanding of the likelihood of an event taking place. They haven't planned any contingencies for this uncertainty either. It's simply not good enough from the government.

Well frankly yes it does - especially who said it and what it means in relation to the whole comment made by the professor. Or do you think he deliberately meant to undermine his own and his colleagues work instead of explaining how modelling works in simple language?

Context is everything. It shapes the meaning in all communication. Without context you can't communicate effectively. When your message is delivered in one context, but received in another, it likely leads to miscommunication.

https://vanseodesign.com/web-design/importance-context/

Tbh looks like you're making a lot of presumptions there on how the models were created without actually knowing the answers and then jumping to the conclusion they were invalid because you personally don't know if probabilities were provided.

And no I don't know the answer to that either. But anyway not sure why you're going off on a tangent btw - considering I made no statement as to the workings of this particular model other than it wasn't Nphet who are undertaking them as was suggested by the poster to whom I replied. But hey no matter

Lumen

Phishnet wrote: »

BUT WAIT A MINUTE, MORE PEOPLE WHO WERE FULLY VACCINATED AGAINST THE VIRUS DIED LAST WEEK IN THE UK WITH THE DELTA VARIANT THAN DOES WHO WERE UNVACCINATED!

75% of car occupant fatalities last year were wearing seatbelts.

It's shocking that we are still using these dangerous devices. :pac:

lawred2

Phishnet wrote: »

But hang on a minute!



The figures from the UK of people who died with the Delta variant are as follows:


117 total deaths.

44 unvaccinated

23 single dose

50 fully vaccinated

All these deaths occurred in people over 50 years of age.


BUT WAIT A MINUTE, MORE PEOPLE WHO WERE FULLY VACCINATED AGAINST THE VIRUS DIED LAST WEEK IN THE UK WITH THE DELTA VARIANT THAN DOES WHO WERE UNVACCINATED!

AND?

agoodpunt

Phishnet wrote: »

But hang on a minute!



The figures from the UK of people who died with the Delta variant are as follows:


117 total deaths.

44 unvaccinated

23 single dose

50 fully vaccinated

All these deaths occurred in people over 50 years of age.


BUT WAIT A MINUTE, MORE PEOPLE WHO WERE FULLY VACCINATED AGAINST THE VIRUS DIED LAST WEEK IN THE UK WITH THE DELTA VARIANT THAN DOES WHO WERE UNVACCINATED!

Selective data, ages, underlying conds?