The lack of empathy in recommendation of restrictions.

political analyst

For this week's edition of The Sunday Times, David Quinn wrote that NPHET's claim that the fall in the number of additional cases from 1,066 on the day of the start of Level 5 to 866 a week later and 591 the week after wasn't enough is partly a value judgement and only partly a scientific one.

Quinn argued that we need the Varadkar of October the 5th - the date of his appearance on 'Claire Byrne Live' - back on the job because the effect of the ban on household visits mean that there was no need to shut-down retail shops, stop outdoor dining, suspend disability and mental health services, drive so many people back onto the Pandemic Unemployment Payment and further stunt economic growth.

He wrote that Tony Holohan has become the most powerful man in the country and that it is all the more important than Holohan is asked the sort of tough questions that Varadkar was asked.

As chief medical officer, Holohan has a duty of care to sufferers of all illnesses - physical and psychological - not just of Covid - and so he is supposed to have empathy for those people. So where is the empathy for them?

Sleeper12

political analyst wrote:

As chief medical officer, Holohan has a duty of care to sufferers of all illnesses - physical and psychological - not just of Covid - and so he is supposed to have empathy for those people. So where is the empathy for them?

I don't believe that this is the case. His sole mission is Covid-19 and stopping /controlling its spread. He makes recommendations. It's up to the government to factor in people's mental health issues or the effect on the economy.

nofools

political analyst wrote: »

For this week's edition of The Sunday Times, David Quinn wrote that NPHET's claim that the fall in the number of additional cases from 1,066 on the day of the start of Level 5 to 866 a week later and 591 the week after wasn't enough is partly a value judgement and only partly a scientific one.

Quinn argued that we need the Varadkar of October the 5th - the date of his appearance on 'Claire Byrne Live' - back on the job because the effect of the ban on household visits mean that there was no need to shut-down retail shops, stop outdoor dining, suspend disability and mental health services, drive so many people back onto the Pandemic Unemployment Payment and further stunt economic growth.

He wrote that Tony Holohan has become the most powerful man in the country and that it is all the more important than Holohan is asked the sort of tough questions that Varadkar was asked.

As chief medical officer, Holohan has a duty of care to sufferers of all illnesses - physical and psychological - not just of Covid - and so he is supposed to have empathy for those people. So where is the empathy for them?

I see an equal and opposite lack of empathy in the anti restrictions people.

One side is acting in the public best interest and the other side is acting in its own best interest.

political analyst

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I don't believe that this is the case. His sole mission is Covid-19 and stopping /controlling its spread. He makes recommendations. It's up to the government to factor in people's mental health issues or the effect on the economy.

How is it not the case? The clue is in the job title.

I got as far as "David Quinn" and ceased reading further. A stopped clock is right twice a day, however I can't give any credence to a header like him.

VillageIdiot71

nofools wrote: »

I see an equal and opposite lack of empathy in the anti restrictions people.

One side is acting in the public best interest and the other side is acting in its own best interest.

Strangely enough, while I can similarly reduce a complex debate to two cartoon images of sides, I don't recognise the sides as you depict them.

I see one side trying to find a way of having a conversation that reflects the balance that needs to be found between competing needs.

And I see another side wanting to suppress any kind of discussion, typically restoring to seeing it all in black and white terms as if the "public best interest" means looking after only one thing.

Which creates a space where, for the sake of argument, you find the European Commission signing a contract on your behalf for a vaccine that hasn't yet finished development. And, apparently, this is grounds for rejoicing.

.anon.

Deleted User wrote: »

I got as far as "David Quinn" and ceased reading further. A stopped clock is right twice a day, however I can't give any credence to a header like him.

David Quinn? That particular clock stopped some time in the 1950s.

nofools

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

Strangely enough, while I can similarly reduce a complex debate to two cartoon images of sides, I don't recognise the sides as you depict them.

I see one side trying to find a way of having a conversation that reflects the balance that needs to be found between competing needs.

And I see another side wanting to suppress any kind of discussion, typically restoring to seeing it all in black and white terms as if the "public best interest" means looking after only one thing.

Which creates a space where, for the sake of argument, you find the European Commission signing a contract on your behalf for a vaccine that hasn't yet finished development. And, apparently, this is grounds for rejoicing.

We can go to any level of complexity you want.

I see a side that is supremely unwise in its lack of a precautionary principle. It not an imagined fear what can or would happen if we followed the lead of places with more lax controls who are currently suffering a huge wave of cases or deaths.

I see a lot of wilful ignorance about the situation our European neighbours face. I think personal motivations and biases are the cause of that style of delusion.

The vaccine is a side topic to the OP.

kravmaga

Who is David Quinn, never heard of him , who is he?

Sleeper12

political analyst wrote:

How is it not the case? The clue is in the job title.

I find it hard to believe that this is going on since February & some people still don't know what role he plays in the whole thing. It's been explained by him and the government literally dozens of times already

He has many roles BUT as the head of NPTETT his only role is to control Covid-19. He & his team are tasked with tracking and controlling covid. In this role his job isn't to consider how restrictions effect our health or economy. Its up to the government, HSE etc to take other factors into account.

It's also worth considering that people in prison are confined to a 10 X 8 cell for 18 to 20 hours every day. They eat, siht and sleep in this room. During this covid emergency they are restricted even further. If the chief medical officer doesn't consider that this effects inmates mental health then he's hardly going to be too worried about people with far less restrictions for a few weeks.

Melanchthon

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I don't believe that this is the case. His sole mission is Covid-19 and stopping /controlling its spread. He makes recommendations. It's up to the government to factor in people's mental health issues or the effect on the economy.

I don't think that's correct, the fact schools stayed open and the lack of emphasis on international travel restrictions point to government priorities effecting the emphasis of recommendations

meeeeh

Nphet were lare to the party during first wave, they seriously messed up with masks and they are again very cautious about faster and less reliable tests. They are afraid to take a punt on anything that's not 100% proven. The easiest thing is to close the country it's a lot harder to take a risk and try something new that could not work. The government is running the country so the questions should be aimed at them but St. Tony is a patron of meek and obedient. The restrictions were probably a good call because people care about Christmas so much but Ireland is in no danger to ever try anything new (like masks in spring or like mass testing Slovakia did).

Sleeper12

Melanchthon wrote:

I don't think that's correct, the fact schools stayed open and the lack of emphasis on international travel restrictions point to government priorities effecting the emphasis of recommendations

You misunderstand how it works. NPHET recommended we go to level 5. It was the government that decided what level 5 was. It was the government & not NPHET that came up with our levels 1 to 5. Its the government that decided that schools should stay open at all costs not NPHET. NPHET didn't want pubs open nor did they want pubs opening selling food if they sold alcohol. It was the government that decided that this was a good idea. Obviously they were wrong

political analyst

meeeeh wrote: »

Nphet were lare to the party during first wave, they seriously messed up with masks and they are again very cautious about faster and less reliable tests. They are afraid to take a punt on anything that's not 100% proven. The easiest thing is to close the country it's a lot harder to take a risk and try something new that could not work. The government is running the country so the questions should be aimed at them but St. Tony is a patron of meek and obedient. The restrictions were probably a good call because people care about Christmas so much but Ireland is in no danger to ever try anything new (like masks in spring or like mass testing Slovakia did).

Presumably, NPHET didn't want to have members of the public buying surgical masks because of the fear that there wouldn't be enough of them for hospital workers and started recommending the wearing of masks when manufacturers caught up with demand. Some people in this forum were talking down to others for not knowing how to make masks - the fact is that many people don't have the skill to make masks and that fact had to be taken into account.

VillageIdiot71

nofools wrote: »

I think personal motivations and biases are the cause of that style of delusion.

I think you'll find personal motivations and biases drive a lot of human behaviour, including the desire to frame others as biased. Strangely enough.

nofools

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

I think you'll find personal motivations and biases drive a lot of human behaviour, including the desire to frame others as biased. Strangely enough.

Touché

What will do in that case?

All my biases are selfish. I hate covid and the want it gone without being childishly naive that we can make believe there is no problem.

Yours?

Melanchthon

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You misunderstand how it works. NPHET recommended we go to level 5. It was the government that decided what level 5 was. It was the government & not NPHET that came up with our levels 1 to 5. Its the government that decided that schools should stay open at all costs not NPHET. NPHET didn't want pubs open nor did they want pubs opening selling food if they sold alcohol. It was the government that decided that this was a good idea. Obviously they were wrong

Having read some of the NPHET briefings that are available that's not the case IMO, they will have a throwaway line about international travel restrictions but will reference closing down hospitality multiple times underlined. NPHET could still recommend schools close they are apparently not beholden to government priorities, at a minimum they should be modelling impacts of spread with school closures and without school closures which they do not appear to have done.

I am not sure the government were wrong about the pubs, what countries have had as long and as strict restrictions on hospitality as Dublin? It's a going to be a very very short list if any?

NPHETs biggest failure was the nursing home disaster. Moving untested patients into nursing homes and also insisting they stay open to visitors was criminal incompetence on a grand scale.and was most likely responsible for the majority of our COVID death toll.

political analyst

Deleted User wrote: »

NPHETs biggest failure was the nursing home disaster. Moving untested patients into nursing homes and also insisting they stay open to visitors was criminal incompetence on a grand scale.and was most likely responsible for the majority of our COVID death toll.

It's no worse than NPHET's counterparts in Britain, Sweden, Italy or Spain. Many nursing home residents had dementia or other terminal illnesses and so Covid merely hastened their deaths. Let's not forget that the blame for the global spread of the virus that causes Covid rests with the Chinese Communist Party.

ILoveYourVibes

political analyst wrote: »

So where is the empathy for them?

He is showing it by trying to stop the most vulnerable getting covid. You think people have mental health issues now?

Check back after they get covid and have trouble walking up the stairs or lose a loved one or a child to covid.


People miss their families i get it.

I don't get that they are prepared to RISK losing their families FOREVER just to see them ...now more than ever that there is a vaccine.

You lose your wife ..husband etc or worse a child ..tell me how your mental health is.

paw patrol

political analyst wrote: »

It's no worse than NPHET's counterparts in Britain, Sweden, Italy or Spain.

while this is correct NPHET aren't paid to follow the leader.
We are continually bombarded with PR of their expertise and anybody who decries NPHET are sneering questioned over their expertise

political analyst wrote: »

Many nursing home residents had dementia or other terminal illnesses and so Covid merely hastened their deaths. Let's not forget that the blame for the global spread of the virus that causes Covid rests with the Chinese Communist Party.

I fully agree with your analysis on the deaths in nursing homes, but given 62% of deaths were in nursing homes why have NPHET chosen to impose regulations on society as a whole ?

I'll tell you why.
cos NPHET (and the government) instead of taking ownership of protecting vulnerable people and offering support and structures for this, have shifted the responsibility of low (or zero) covid onto the entire population.

Therefor the blame for covid was moved from any state apparatus onto joe-soap. Along with their cheerleaders in the media launched a campaign to demonise teenagers, house parties , an imaginary far right and anybody else who spoke out - oddly excusing travellers and BLM.

NPHET and the government are now free from most responsibly and can act with impunity as the common people are squabble among themselves over who is the worst granny killer and all that good stuff.

copeyhagen

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

You lose your wife ..husband etc or worse a child ..tell me how your mental health is.

the median age of death was 82 a few weeks back. 'a child'...scare mongering is amazing.

VillageIdiot71

nofools wrote: »

Touché

What will do in that case?

All my biases are selfish. I hate covid and the want it gone without being childishly naive that we can make believe there is no problem.

Yours?

I've a bias against people who lack self awareness and a sense of proportion.

But I recognise it, and try to compensate.

political analyst

paw patrol wrote: »

while this is correct NPHET aren't paid to follow the leader.
We are continually bombarded with PR of their expertise and anybody who decries NPHET are sneering questioned over their expertise




I fully agree with your analysis on the deaths in nursing homes, but given 62% of deaths were in nursing homes why have NPHET chosen to impose regulations on society as a whole ?

I'll tell you why.
cos NPHET (and the government) instead of taking ownership of protecting vulnerable people and offering support and structures for this, have shifted the responsibility of low (or zero) covid onto the entire population.

Therefor the blame for covid was moved from any state apparatus onto joe-soap. Along with their cheerleaders in the media launched a campaign to demonise teenagers, house parties , an imaginary far right and anybody else who spoke out - oddly excusing travellers and BLM.

NPHET and the government are now free from most responsibly and can act with impunity as the common people are squabble among themselves over who is the worst granny killer and all that good stuff.

Here's the counter-argument - posted by 'Stark' on the main Covid thread.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=115304798#post115304798

It's a false trade-off between "protecting the economy" and "protecting public health" anyway. Uncontrolled covid spread is devastating for both supply (businesses forced to shut down due to sick employees) and demand (no-one wants to go out for dinner during a raging pandemic). You can see this in economic data from the US states with very relaxed restrictions, they suffered far more economic damage than the states that locked down. Sweden isn't looking too good compared to its Nordic neighbours either. The question isn't whether we lift lockdown and accept higher case numbers in turn for "protecting the economy", it's how can we come up with measures of controlling covid that give more bang for buck.

In Ireland, from what I can see, we need to up our contract tracing game and also do something to tackle outbreaks in private homes.

Mr. Karate

I can't watch or listen to these clowns without wanting to punch them. Look at them smirking whenever they give these calls for more restrictions. They're enjoying ruining people's lives. Look at Varadkar smirking as he told people not to plans for Christmas. Tells you biased and weak the media is. No one dared called them out for it.

If Trump dared smirk while talking about more restrictions they'd be in manufactured outrage mode.

Richard Hillman

The whole operation is being run by people who lack empathy. NPHET are career medical workers. Medical workers in general have a lot of empathy but the ones that strive for continuous promotion, careerists, are generally sociopaths. Government is always run by people who would sell their granny down the road for a vote. Media, who are sponsoring lockdowns because its good for business, naturally lack empathy. They knock on the doors of bereaved parents for a scoop or a emotional comment, they have the phones of dead children, they whip up frenzied trying to turn everyone against each other.

All the worst of the worst, who would run society on an excel sheet file.

CIARAN_BOYLE

political analyst wrote: »

Presumably, NPHET didn't want to have members of the public buying surgical masks because of the fear that there wouldn't be enough of them for hospital workers and started recommending the wearing of masks when manufacturers caught up with demand. Some people in this forum were talking down to others for not knowing how to make masks - the fact is that many people don't have the skill to make masks and that fact had to be taken into account.

I always felt that NPHET felt the public was too stupid to wear masks properly. Eventually they caved and recommended masks because it was obviously a good idea for people who made an effort and used their brains.

Donr even think about making masks. Wearing them is hard enough for the majority.

Judging by how people tend to wear them they were probably right to reccomend against them.

nofools

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

I've a bias against people who lack self awareness and a sense of proportion.

But I recognise it, and try to compensate.

I agree, people lacking proportionality and self awareness of their actions is why we are where we are.

VillageIdiot71

nofools wrote: »

I agree, people lacking proportionality and self awareness of their actions is why we are where we are.

Indeed, our parents lived in a culture where prohibition of contraception seemed rational.

Ironically, if they'd had more of a perspective on things many of us would not be where we are.

nofools

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

Indeed, our parents lived in a culture where prohibition of contraception seemed rational.

Ironically, if they'd had more of a perspective on things many of us would not be where we are.

Is there supposed to be some profound point that I am missing?

VillageIdiot71

nofools wrote: »

Is there supposed to be some profound point that I am missing?

Yes.