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

froog

froog wrote: »

Ah ffs, you don't actually believe that do you? That numbers dramatically falling this month has nothing to do with restrictions?

Lads wake up, if you sound foolish on the simple concepts you'll be laughed out of any more complicated debate.

You sound pretty foolish when you say things like lockdown prevented 50M deaths.

Or the economy will bounce right back in 2021. (MM stated that lockdown might continue until late June)

Restrictions can and do help. But if they mean half a million out of work, every school closed and hospital screenings/treatments cancelled then the solution is worse than the perceived problem.

Again, burning your house down will kill a rodent.

Penfailed

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Europe was back to normal for months as Dublin, Kildare and Offaly entered more unnecessary restrictions.

Nope. There were still restrictions in place. Admittedly, they weren't as strict as ours but they certainly weren't back to normal.

Boggles

Whatsisname wrote: »

To end, the first article linked sums up my feelings perfectly.

Sadly, though, the desire to attribute human agency, to find someone to blame, is embedded deep in our DNA. We would rather demand crackdowns than accept that we are dealing with something outside our control. And, alas, we keep getting our wish.

It's very much in our control, J&J vaccine about to come online soon, one dose no need to super store it. More to come behind that one with 3 all ready online, not including the Russian or Chinese vaccine.

May I suggest you stop using your feelings to gauge reality.

CalamariFritti

Deleted User wrote: »

One of the biggest factors in designing a study is the study "Power". This is essentially a measure of the studies ability to detect a change when when there is one. This relies a lot on the team designing a study to determine the appropriate power of the study. Get this wrong and you may erroneously conclude that differences which are a result of inherent variation are real differences or you may fail to detect a real difference.

In the Danish study a number of assumptions where made in determining sample size. Most importantly - the prevalence which was assumed to be 2% for the duration of the study. This allows a statistical calculation to determine appropriate sample size to determine if an effect is real. What the team infact did was go back and check the power of their experiment after the study was executed. This is generally seen as bad practice, however the stats behind it is sound. What they found was for the sample size used they had adequate power to detect a 50% reduction in prevalence when one existed. Eg. If masks reduced prevalence by more than 50%, the study would find that. It didn't, so you can conclude based on the study that wearing masks does not reduce infection rates by more than 50%.
To determine if the effect was lower you would need a larger sample size (or run the study for a much longer period).
This can be seen on the Confidence Interval for the study, -45% to +23%, the interval overlaps zero, therefore you cannot conclude there is a real difference

Thank you. That is what real exchange/debate/discourse should look like.

Mr. Karate

Idbatterim wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/ireland-s-billionaires-saw-their-fortunes-rise-by-3-28bn-last-year-in-worrying-trend-1.4466699?mode=amp

Irish billionaires wealth up hugely last year...

The Rich got Richer and the Poor got Poorer under this Quasi-Communist system we've been under for the last 10 months? Didn't see that one coming. :rolleyes:

Ginger n Lemon

Squiggle wrote: »

107 from Covid.

2245 with Covid and underlying conditions.

Median age at death 83.

( Data valid up to Week 2 2021 )

Isnt life expectancy 82 in our country??

Whatsisname

Boggles wrote: »

It's very much in our control, J&J vaccine about to come online soon, one dose no need to super store it. More to come behind that one with 3 all ready online, not including the Russian or Chinese vaccine.

May I suggest you stop using your feelings to gauge reality.

I’ll make sure to never let my feelings create an opinion again Boggles. Thanks for your advice.

Penfailed

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Isnt life expectancy 82 in our country??

Yes. What's your point? You've already been informed on this thread that if you are actually lucky enough to reach the age of 82, then you can be expected to live for quite a few years beyond that.

Allinall

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Isnt life expectancy 82 in our country??

Life expectancy doesn't apply to individual people. It applies to the population as a whole.

The effects of Covid, including death, applies to individuals.

Ginger n Lemon

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Isnt life expectancy 82 in our country??

Yes but it's not a cut off it's an average of all-cause mortality. If a great deal of older people die from covid it could push the life expectancy down even if most of those who die from it are over 82.

Elmer Blooker

BredonWimsey wrote: »

very true. i'm not sure why some people in ireland with no US connections are so obsessed with US politics and then applying it to Ireland. its wierd

Don't you listen to or watch RTE?
The anti Trump agenda has been non stop and endless, even so called 'entertainment' programmes such as the Late Late Show are used to get an anti Trump agenda across.
Obsessed with US politics eh?

FintanMcluskey

Penfailed wrote: »

Yes. What's your point? You've already been informed on this thread that if you are actually lucky enough to reach the age of 82, then you can be expected to live for quite a few years beyond that.

Yes.

No one passes away between 83 and 86

Windmill100000

Penfailed wrote: »

Yes. What's your point? You've already been informed on this thread that if you are actually lucky enough to reach the age of 82, then you can be expected to live for quite a few years beyond that.

Exactly, you don't suddenly expire.

What is the point of this anyway?

froog

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Don't you listen to or watch RTE?
The anti Trump agenda has been non stop and endless, even so called 'entertainment' programmes such as the Late Late Show are used to get an anti Trump agenda across.
Obsessed with US politics eh?

Take it somewhere else lad. This thread is about covid restrictions.

Windmill100000

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Yes.

No one passes away between 83 and 86

I think you are missing the obvious point.

Penfailed

Windmill100000 wrote: »

I think you are missing the obvious point.

He's isn't missing the point. He's being purposefully obtuse.

froog

Question for the thread regulars: would you consider enforced curfews to be the harshest type of restriction? Something ireland unlike many European countries has not implemented. And does this not fly in the face of your "strictest lockdown in europe" narrative?

Captain_Crash

froog wrote: »

Question for the thread regulars: would you consider enforced curfews to be the harshest type of restriction? Something ireland unlike many European countries has not implemented. And does this not fly in the face of your "strictest lockdown in europe" narrative?

No! In fact enforced curfews with things such as gyms, shops and restaurants open during the day would be much preferable to a blanket ban on non essential services which we have here!

So given the choice of stuff open but with the caveat of a curfew over everything closed anyway, I’d take the curfew!

BredonWimsey

froog wrote: »

Question for the thread regulars: would you consider enforced curfews to be the harshest type of restriction? Something ireland unlike many European countries has not implemented. And does this not fly in the face of your "strictest lockdown in europe" narrative?

IMO curfews are better as there is still a semblance of life for a few hours of the day. rather than being locked down in your house for weeks on end

Boggles

froog wrote: »

Question for the thread regulars: would you consider enforced curfews to be the harshest type of restriction? Something ireland unlike many European countries has not implemented. And does this not fly in the face of your "strictest lockdown in europe" narrative?

Don't forget permission forms to leave your house.

The form needed to leave the home, seen below, includes several options members of the public must tick to explain their reason for being outside.

These cover essential trips such as grocery shopping, exercising, visiting a doctor or for imperative family reasons.

Those who are stopped by police and don't have a form or are judged by the police to be flouting the rules risk a fine of €135 that could rise to €375. Those who are caught flouting the rules three times in 30 days fave a fine of €3,750.

Squiggle

Squiggle wrote: »

107 from Covid.

2245 with Covid and underlying conditions.

Median age at death 83.

( Data valid up to Week 2 2021 )

Deleted User wrote: »

Talk about wilful misrepresentation

No misrepresentation , data taken from HPSC

If you're looking for wilful, and scandalous misrepresentation look no further than the daily reporting of Positive PCR results as being "cases" of Covid 19.

This despite the WHO advisory of December 14th, and updated last week:

https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

BredonWimsey

Captain_Crash wrote: »

No! In fact enforced curfews with things such as gyms, shops and restaurants open during the day would be much preferable to a blanket ban on non essential services which we have here!

So given the choice of stuff open but with the caveat of a curfew over everything closed anyway, I’d take the curfew!

YES!! please government minister sir can i please have a curfew

walus

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Isnt life expectancy 82 in our country??

It was, and then covid came and pushed it beyond 83.

Ginger n Lemon

Penfailed wrote: »

Yes. What's your point? You've already been informed on this thread that if you are actually lucky enough to reach the age of 82, then you can be expected to live for quite a few years beyond that.

Allinall wrote: »

Life expectancy doesn't apply to individual people. It applies to the population as a whole.

The effects of Covid, including death, applies to individuals.

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes but it's not a cut off it's an average of all-cause mortality. If a great deal of older people die from covid it could push the life expectancy down even if most of those who die from it are over 82.

1 things for sure, with the shi*show that lockdown brings you can safely expect life expectancy to reduce.

Higher alcohol consumption
Isolation
Lack of social life
No holidays
House abuse
Obesity
Lack of exercise

So no. I dont believe or agree with Pen's notion of "you can expect to live longer"

Ginger n Lemon

Squiggle wrote: »

No misrepresentation , data taken from HPSC

If you're looking for wilful, and scandalous misrepresentation look no further than the daily reporting of Positive PCR results as being "cases" of Covid 19.

This despite the WHO advisory of December 14th, and updated last week:

https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

This is scandalous is what it is.

Ginger n Lemon

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Yes.

No one passes away between 83 and 86

10/10

Ginger n Lemon

Penfailed wrote: »

He's isn't missing the point. He's being purposefully obtuse.

Thats very harsh. Uncalled for.

Keyzer

Mr. Karate wrote: »

The Rich got Richer and the Poor got Poorer under this Quasi-Communist system we've been under for the last 10 months? Didn't see that one coming. :rolleyes:

Lol... Quasi-communist state...

Far from quasi-communism you were rared pal.

CatalogJinx

I've been a longtime follower of this thread but am getting increasingly pessimistic at any real relaxation of restrictions anytime soon.

I'm a public servant in my 20's, able to wfh, increments coming in and saving loads with no travelling to and from work etc.

However my life is completely on hold, no chance of socialising/meeting a man/holidays/seeing family (they think it's the apocalypse) etc etc etc. I can only imagine what it's like for people who don't have the working conditions that I do.

Part of the problem is that a lot of people (this is anecdotal of course and just the people I work with) are delighted with what's going on as theyre all permanent like me and working from home and in the age bracket of late 30s to mid 50's. Suits them down to the ground being at home all the time with the kids and going for walks etc. A lot are saying they are going to take a 'wait and see approach' with the vaccine too. Probably frightened they might be encouraged back to the clinic if they take it. I dread listening to them on our zoom meetings, I despair when I hear it.

Final point, if we keep using daily case numbers as the metric for everything we are well and truly fecked. As far as I can see the vaccine (which I'll take) doesn't fully prevent transmission so what's the end game? People are still going to catch it and pass it on from my understanding and we'll keep getting the numbers delivered to us with the Angelus everyday.

that was cathartic

Ha Long Bay

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

This is scandalous is what it is.

Can you explain what the scandal is in relation to Irish testing regime?