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

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

I presume she's good looking:

Well within your range.

namloc1980

Aviva closing for a rugger match while Donnelly is predicting armageddon and the need to get as many vaccines as possible done asap. Not a great look.

niallo27

gozunda wrote: »

Ah so the goal posts have not only been moved - they have been seized and were last scene heading over the horizon?

The issue being ranted about was why NIAC decision to recommend additional vaccines wasn’t included in the model and report in the first place.

And we now know that the briefing on the model was already completed on day NIACs recommendation was announced.

So OK now thats moved to why didn't they delay?

Simply because a decision on indoor dining, needed to be made ASAP. The information presented was what what was relevant to a short delay in the opening of indoor dining and not several months down the line as more vaccines were being made available. Imo they made the correct decision at that point in time with existing data. There was no omissions because the parameters for the extra vaccines had yet to be worked out.

Once they have the new parameters- it shouldn't be a problem producing a new model.

Honestly, if someone presented a paper for decision to senior managers at work for an immediate issue but declared instead "ah listen lads there's some additional stuff coming down the line that I'll add in - so I didnt bother producing that paper which is needed now" - I would hope the individual would be taken to one side and given a serious talking to.
.

If someone presented a paper to senior management on future projections for the company that were so widely different, they wouldn't be given a talking to they would have been told to **** off out of the company.

melekalikimaka

namloc1980 wrote: »

Aviva closing for a rugger match while Donnelly is predicting armageddon and the need to get as many vaccines as possible done asap. Not a great look.

you are aware the stadium is privately owned?

gozunda

namloc1980 wrote: »

Not sure what this rant is trying to achieve but it's quite amusing, fair play.You think it's acceptable to present outdated and incomplete data to decision makers? They presented data unrelated to reality and with a 10 fold difference between the best and worst case scenario. Absolutely farcical nonsense. But you seem happy with it so no wonder they can present this stuff and certain people with cheer and clap.

Well done - you're argument was soundly trashed so now that's reverted to first position that they should have used a time machine and brought that data back in time so it could be already modeled on the same day it was announced. And all that despite the fact that a decision on the status of indoor dining was required asap? Brillant. You may also wish to look up how best case / worst case modeling is used btw.

Sofa King Great

melekalikimaka wrote: »

you are aware the stadium is privately owned?

You are aware that hundreds of privately owned businesses remain closed pending further progress on the vaccine roll out?

namloc1980

melekalikimaka wrote: »

you are aware the stadium is privately owned?

Yes what has that got to do with it? There's no plan in place to even temporarily replace that capacity. Again with Donnelly and NPHET predicating doomsday stuff if we don't vaccinate and tell us every day counts. It's just yet another shambles to add to the omnishambles.

namloc1980

gozunda wrote: »

Well done - you're argument was soundly trashed so now that's reverted to first position that they should have used a time machine and brought that data back in time so it could be already modeled on the same day it was announced. And all that despite the fact that a decision on the status of indoor dining was required asap? Brillant. You may also wish to look up how best case / worst case modeling is used btw.

:pac: Only in your head bud.

You keep saying this. Are you trying to convince yourself of it at this point? Seems so. The decision, as you have rightly pointed out and appear to accept, was based on flawed and outdated data. You're still cheering for it though as you have done throughout - NPHET can never be wrong!!

A 10 fold difference between best and worst case scenarios is absolute nonsense and is absolutely useless for decision makers. It means your inputs/model are junk or complete guesswork, if that's what you're getting out.

gozunda

lawred2 wrote: »

ASAP? Not even a few days to reassess? Was needed immediately! That very second!?That's a bit weak to be honest when something is of this import.

Not me saying that

Last week, the Restaurants Association of Ireland called on the Irish government to make a decision by Tuesday on whether all indoor entertainment will be allowed to resume from 5 July.

And tbf I can understand why - restaurants cafes etc needed to have a quick decision allow for logistics etc if opening was going to happen. Maybe have a word with them if that didn't suit.

Bsharp

gozunda wrote: »

Well yes. I believe that was already covered. Afaik the mathematical model used was the population-based SEIR model

From the Irish Epidemiological Modelling Advisory Group to NPHET


Tbf the modelling is being overseen by the Irish Epidemiological Modelling Advisory Group whose members have considerable expertise in this area despite what some want to believe.

Thanks, appreciate the response. I'm interested in the assumption they've used in the model i.e. is it recorded cases which will be an underestimation of the actual total, under by a substantial amount I'd imagine. All the little things in modelling add up.

There's things in their modelling approach which could also lead to an underestimation. Assuming last years' social interactions as a basis for this year is an interesting one. Whilst indoor hospitality is closed, the risk tolerance for young people is probably a lot higher this year, leading to many more contacts.

gozunda

namloc1980 wrote: »

You keep saying this. Are you trying to convince yourself of it at this point? Seems so. The decision, as you have rightly pointed out and appear to accept, was based on flawed and outdated data. You're still cheering for it though as you have done throughout - NPHET can never be wrong!!A 10 fold difference between best and worst case scenarios is absolute nonsense and is absolutely useless for decision makers. It means your inputs/model are junk or complete guesswork, if that's what you're getting out.

They didn't have the data ergo the model wasn't outdated but more importantly the information presented was what what was relevant to a short delay in the opening of indoor dining and not several months down the line as more vaccines were being made available.

So time machine scenario it is them

Fair enough.

Ps. Highlighted bit - back to the old game of things never said?

OwenM

namloc1980 wrote: »

:pac: Only in your head bud.

You keep saying this. Are you trying to convince yourself of it at this point? Seems so. The decision, as you have rightly pointed out and appear to accept, was based on flawed and outdated data. You're still cheering for it though as you have done throughout - NPHET can never be wrong!!

A 10 fold difference between best and worst case scenarios is absolute nonsense and is absolutely useless for decision makers. It means your inputs/model are junk or complete guesswork, if that's what you're getting out.

It's always been junk, when they publish R numbers with a ranges like 0.7-1.1 then it should have been obvious - a range like that says

ummm, infections could be falling rapidly or growing slowly

totally useless.

Leftwaffe

I reckon I’m gonna have to book a staycation ASAP by the sounds of it, these ****ers are gonna lock us all up again.

Shelga

Anyone else feel like the vast majority of politicians are still too scared of coming out and saying they just don’t believe the CMO’s projections anymore, for fear of being portrayed as nutters?

Rather, they’re criticising things like indoor dining for vaccinated people only (which is obviously still worthy of criticism but detracts from the main issue).

lawred2

gozunda wrote: »

Not me saying that



And tbf I can understand why - restaurants cafes etc needed to have a quick decision allow for logistics etc if opening was going to happen. Maybe have a word with them if that didn't suit.

Well in the circumstances I think the RAI might have been amenable to a few day's delay. Or do you not think so? Not that lobby groups get to dictate such deadlines to government anyway.

TomTomTim

Sofa King Great wrote: »

You are aware that hundreds of privately owned businesses remain closed pending further progress on the vaccine roll out?

That's one of the worst arguments I've heard on here. Your house is privately owned too, yet I can't do what I want in my house, I still have to follow the law.

TomTomTim

Shelga wrote: »

Anyone else feel like the vast majority of politicians are still too scared of coming out and saying they just don’t believe the CMO’s projections anymore, for fear of being portrayed as nutters?

Rather, they’re criticising things like indoor dining for vaccinated people only (which is obviously still worthy of criticism but detracts from the main issue).

This mindset is effecting all policy in Ireland, not just COVID. Anything that exists outside of "accepted speech" or standards, will not be opposed, mainly due to cowardice. We truly have a broken democracy in this country.

namloc1980

gozunda wrote: »

Not me saying that



And tbf I can understand why - restaurants cafes etc needed to have a quick decision allow for logistics etc if opening was going to happen. Maybe have a word with them if that didn't suit.

I'm certain the Restaurants Assocaiation, and the wider public, would've expected any decision to be an informed one and not a guesstimate not based on reality.

Sofa King Great

TomTomTim wrote: »

That's one of the worst arguments I've heard on here. Your house is privately owned too, yet I can't do what I want in my house, I still have to follow the law.

If your house was being used as a HSE vaccination centre you'd have a valid point here

TomTomTim

TomTomTim wrote: »

This mindset is effecting all policy in Ireland, not just COVID. Anything that exists outside of "accepted speech" or standards, will not be opposed, mainly due to cowardice. We truly have a broken democracy in this country.

Agree. Its been that way for a long time.

Russman

lawred2 wrote: »

Well in the circumstances I think the RAI might have been amenable to a few day's delay. Or do you not think so? Not that lobby groups get to dictate such deadlines to government anyway.

To be fair though, no matter what side of the debate you're on, if that had happened, there would have been an equal amount of whining on forums like this (which I suppose are ultimately meaningless anyway), about how ".......peoples livelihoods being at stake and these guys are waiting for more data, what more info do they need ?...." bla, bla, bla.

lawred2

Russman wrote: »

To be fair though, no matter what side of the debate you're on, if that had happened, there would have been an equal amount of whining on forums like this (which I suppose are ultimately meaningless anyway), about how ".......peoples livelihoods being at stake and these guys are waiting for more data, what more info do they need ?...." bla, bla, bla.

you're probably right however that's a communication issue

namloc1980

gozunda wrote: »

They didn't have the data ergo the model wasn't outdated but more importantly the information presented was what what was relevant to a short delay in the opening of indoor dining and not several months down the line as more vaccines were being made available.

So time machine scenario it is them

Fair enough.

Ps. Highlighted bit - back to the old game of things never said?

You didn't read the NPHET letter did you? They modelled scenarios of indoor social mixing from the 5th of July, as was planned, up to end of Sept 2021. To do this without taking account of the NIAC advice on vaccines, which would significantly change the landscape, makes their scenarios from July-Sept redundant.

Maybe you should read the actual letter before commenting further.

Stormyteacup

gozunda wrote: »

Well done - you're argument was soundly trashed so now that's reverted to first position that they should have used a time machine and brought that data back in time so it could be already modeled on the same day it was announced. And all that despite the fact that a decision on the status of indoor dining was required asap? Brillant. You may also wish to look up how best case / worst case modeling is used btw.

You’ve invented the argument that people expected the modelling to be based on NIACs recent decision.

Not the case - simply querying why a speedier vaccine rollout wasn’t considered in any potential modelling scenario. You’ve determined that it’s a complicated metric to input to a modelling system. I disagree completely. They can theorise about rising R0 (though I believe this time they left R0 as current), they can input various close contact numbers for potential scenarios, different levels of base cases, various percentage of Delta proportionality - but it’s impossible to model for example a 20% faster vaccination rollout. A 20% faster vaccine schedule is as likely a postulate as a 20% increase in close contacts.

You can cling to the fact that NIAC rubber-stamped their decision at the same time as models were completed therefore the models couldn’t have included them. It’s completely true but it’s also completely irrelevant.

Anyway that’s only part of what is bonkers about the biased models presented to government. If it forces them to re-model with more accurate inputs it’s a good thing and will be very interesting to see how the updated models diverge from the ‘stark’ ones that put the fear of god into government on Tuesday.

gozunda

lawred2 wrote: »

Well in the circumstances I think the RAI might have been amenable to a few day's delay. Or do you not think so? Not that lobby groups get to dictate such deadlines to government anyway.

You sure about that? How many restaurateurs restaurants cafes which have to organise staff and perishable food etc would be amenable to suddenly saying yeah they didn't need a decision made ASAP. But yeah it was a "lobby group" which called for the Tuesday meeting. Maybe make a complaint.

Last week, the Restaurants Association of Ireland called on the Irish government to make a decision by Tuesday on whether all indoor entertainment will be allowed to resume from 5 July.

Beasty

Boggles wrote: »

II'm not sure they would entertain your myopic wholly unqualified musings, but sure you never know.

Let us know how you get on.

Do not post in this thread again

Zebra3

Shelga wrote: »

Anyone else feel like the vast majority of politicians are still too scared of coming out and saying they just don’t believe the CMO’s projections anymore, for fear of being portrayed as nutters?

Rather, they’re criticising things like indoor dining for vaccinated people only (which is obviously still worthy of criticism but detracts from the main issue).

It’s the emperor has no clothes on stuff.

Every gombeen politician waiting for someone else to call it out.

lawred2

gozunda wrote: »

You sure about that? How many restaurateurs restaurants cafes which have to organise staff and perishable food etc would be amenable to suddenly saying yeah they didn't need a decision made ASAP. But yeah it was a "lobby group" which called for the Tuesday meeting. Maybe make a complaint.

Are you sure about the opposite?

As for "Maybe make a complaint"

Is that trolling? Or bait posting? I don't quite understand what you're trying to achieve there. Are you holding the RAI responsible for government and NPHET timelines?

PTH2009

Let's hope we're now a step closer to the reopening of indoor hospitality by the end of the July

Still a lot of hurdles

gozunda

namloc1980 wrote: »

You didn't read the NPHET letter did you? They modelled scenarios of indoor social mixing from the 5th of July, as was planned, up to end of Sept 2021. To do this without taking account of the NIAC advice on vaccines, which would significantly change the landscape, makes their scenarios from July-Sept redundant. Maybe you should read the actual letter before commenting further.

Can you not accept you're completely off base on this now?

And again I see you're pushing the Time machine scenario that they should have included the data before they had it. Grand so.

And yes I read the letter. I was the first to post a link to it here afair. And when are restaurants being proposed to open following the delay? Atm mid to late July seems to on the cards all things going well.

Maybe you should look at all the information in context before commenting further.