Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IV - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

1…3031333536…325

Comments

  • #962
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,887 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Gael23 wrote: »
    People have swalllwed enough of Tony’s medicine now

    You mean his bull****e?


  • #963
    mean gene
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 875 ✭✭✭mean gene


    Gael23 wrote: »
    People have swalllwed enough of Tony’s medicine now

    Done a good job imo now the restrictions have to go but overall he done welll


  • #964
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,887 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    mean gene wrote: »
    Done a good job imo now the restrictions have to go but overall he done welll

    No he didn’t. We are in the top ten countries for cases and deaths despite being an island off on our own. Now he’s arse covering to try salvage something. Rte et al will eulogise him of course


  • #965
    Ginger n Lemon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,447 ✭✭✭Ginger n Lemon


    mean gene wrote: »
    Done a good job imo now the restrictions have to go but overall he done welll

    The only thing hes done well is scaremongering people into not seeing their mother for 3 months.


  • #966
    alta stare
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,326 ✭✭✭alta stare


    Ginger n Lemon wrote: »
    The only thing hes done well is scaremongering people into not seeing their mother for 3 months.

    It is mad the amount of people on here who have said they have done such a thing. They have essentially abandoned their family because they were basically told to.


  • Advertisement
  • #967
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,887 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    So another week of pointless lockdown with the exchequer haemorrhaging cash.
    All this talk Leo indulges in about quickening the roadmap to bankruptcy seems just that.
    Was in Homesstores earlier sad to witness the farce in all its pathetic glory with the Covid deadly homewares sections railed off.


  • #968
    Arghus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,252 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    Jayesdiem wrote: »
    1600 deaths? That’s a death rate of 0.035% in this country. Fcking bonkers.

    Yes, thankfully because of the restrictions there's been a low rate of exposure to the virus.

    At most they reckon it could be about 5% of the population, but it could be lower - perhaps even as low as 1%.

    The relatively low death rate reflects the very low amount of people in the population that the virus has been exposed to, thanks to the measures taken. If it's exposed to more people then inevitably many more people die.


  • #969
    Lundstram
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭Lundstram


    Amazing to see such crowds at a protest in Dublin of which many would not even understand what they're protesting about yet in Kerry which hasn't had a single case of Covid19 in a long time you can't go beyond 5km for another week. Incredible stuff.

    Another week of no business, another week of 700k people getting a free €350. We are going to pay big time for this, not Leo, not his cabinet, not Tony on his three figure salary. Us!

    Many people sneer at Michal O'Leary's views but that man knows what he's talking about when it comes to money.

    Rocky road ahead is getting rockier because no one has the balls to call a halt to this madness.


  • #970
    Assetbacked
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,969 ✭✭✭Assetbacked


    ZX7R wrote: »
    I know I am anyways

    Met two different sets of friends over the bank holiday. Dont even think social distancing was discussed. The scaremongerers were shut up after there was no spike from the May Bank Holiday despite people getting back out and about. By now it's clear that the virus is dead and we need to reopen everything as soon as possible.


  • #971
    Jayesdiem
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 908 ✭✭✭Jayesdiem


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Indeed, you can get statistics to do about anything you want them to say. You seem terribly disappointed at this low level.

    I’m not really sure what you mean there but of that less than one half of one percent, how many were below the average life expectancy of <82 years? Even less.


  • Advertisement
  • #972
    Viscount Aggro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,478 ✭✭✭Viscount Aggro


    Massive rave going on earlier, flat complex near grand canal dock.
    DJ with mixing desk and PA system.
    Loads of people sitting together at close quarters.


  • #973
    Jayesdiem
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 908 ✭✭✭Jayesdiem


    Arghus wrote: »
    Yes, thankfully because of the restrictions there's been a low rate of exposure to the virus.

    At most they reckon it could be about 5% of the population, but it could be lower - perhaps even as low as 1%.

    The relatively low death rate reflects the very low amount of people in the population that the virus has been exposed to, thanks to the measures taken. If it's exposed to more people then inevitably many more people die.

    Where’s your proof for that? Do you have a control condition with which to compare? Or are you just accepting what clearly looks like a false positive? The likelihood is the death rate would have been the same without the lockdown because deaths were already on the wain when it was applied. Even if they were slightly higher, keeping the economy up and running would have meant less death and suffering due to isolation and the monster recession we are about to experience in about a month’s time. On top of all that, most of the deaths that did occur were in people that exceeded the average life expectancy in this country so they were on track to die anyway. Despite your irrational nature, I don’t think you’re a stupid person but why don’t these very simple facts resonate with you?


  • #974
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,537 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Jayesdiem wrote: »
    Where’s your proof for that? Do you have a control condition with which to compare? Or are you just accepting what clearly looks like a false positive? The likelihood is the death rate would have been the same without the lockdown because deaths were already on the wain when it was applied. Even if they were slightly higher, keeping the economy up and running would have meant less death and suffering due to isolation and the manitou recession we are about to experience in about a month’s time. On top of all that, most of the deaths that did occur were in people that exceeded the average life expectancy in this country so they were on track to die anyway. Despite your irrational nature, I don’t think you’re a stupid person but why don’t these very simple facts resonate with you?




    perhapse because they are possibly opinions rather then facts?

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #975
    Arghus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,252 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    Jayesdiem wrote: »
    Where’s your proof for that? Do you have a control condition with which to compare? Or are you just accepting what clearly looks like a false positive? The likelihood is the death rate would have been the same without the lockdown because deaths were already on the wain when it was applied. Even if they were slightly higher, keeping the economy up and running would have meant less death and suffering due to isolation and the manitou recession we are about to experience in about a month’s time. On top of all that, most of the deaths that did occur were in people that exceeded the average life expectancy in this country so they were on track to die anyway. Despite your irrational nature, I don’t think you’re a stupid person but why don’t these very simple facts resonate with you?

    Deaths weren't on the wane before lockdown was applied. Deaths peaked nearly a month after lockdown was applied.

    That exposure figure is based on what Philip Nolan had to say the week before last.


  • #976
    Jayesdiem
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 908 ✭✭✭Jayesdiem


    end of the road wrote: »
    perhapse because they are possibly opinions rather then facts?

    Divide 4.5 million by 1600 (if you understand long division) and you get a simple calculation of death rate. Are mathematics an opinion these days?


  • #977
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    Jayesdiem wrote: »
    Where’s your proof for that? Do you have a control condition with which to compare? Or are you just accepting what clearly looks like a false positive? The likelihood is the death rate would have been the same without the lockdown because deaths were already on the wain when it was applied. Even if they were slightly higher, keeping the economy up and running would have meant less death and suffering due to isolation and the monster recession we are about to experience in about a month’s time. On top of all that, most of the deaths that did occur were in people that exceeded the average life expectancy in this country so they were on track to die anyway. Despite your irrational nature, I don’t think you’re a stupid person but why don’t these very simple facts resonate with you?

    With many private hospital appointments being cancelled and people not getting screened, I would expect the mortality rate (due to terminal illnesses) grow in the next 1-2 years.


  • #978
    Jayesdiem
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 908 ✭✭✭Jayesdiem


    na1 wrote: »
    With many private hospital appointments being cancelled and people not getting screened, I would expect the mortality rate (due to terminal illnesses) grow in the next 1-2 years.

    Of course. But the numbskulls only care about Covid deaths within a 16 week window.


  • #979
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,887 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Assetbacked wrote: »
    Met two different sets of friends over the bank holiday. Dont even think social distancing was discussed. The scaremongerers were shut up after there was no spike from the May Bank Holiday despite people getting back out and about. By now it's clear that the virus is dead and we need to reopen everything as soon as possible.

    Were they? I see lots of these loons on social media going on about new waves after this bank holiday. How people like this dress themselves is a mystery.
    Seriously sick and tired of the lockdown and lassez faire to Nphet- no one in charge, we seem to drift for weeks hearing nothing but rubbish from Tony and his minions. Wtf are the 170 odd cabbages we elect to Dáil Éireann actually doing?


  • #980
    Deeper Blue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,457 ✭✭✭Deeper Blue


    So I couldn't go to the beach for a swim on the nicest bank holiday weekend in ages yet a couple of thousand SJW virtue signallers can gather in Dublin and nothing is said?

    **** that, I'm done with these restrictions. What's the point?


  • #981
    plodder
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,871 ✭✭✭plodder


    Arghus wrote: »
    Yes, thankfully because of the restrictions there's been a low rate of exposure to the virus.

    At most they reckon it could be about 5% of the population, but it could be lower - perhaps even as low as 1%.

    The relatively low death rate reflects the very low amount of people in the population that the virus has been exposed to, thanks to the measures taken. If it's exposed to more people then inevitably many more people die.
    "Perhaps as low as 1%". Cillian de Gascún or one of the other experts said it could be as high as 15%. We need to get the antibody study going asap to answer the question.


  • Advertisement
  • #982
    Dr. Bre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,853 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    Viscount Aggro wrote: »
    Massive rave going on earlier, flat complex near grand canal dock.
    DJ with mixing desk and PA system.
    Loads of people sitting together at close quarters.

    If you rave beware of the second wave


  • #983
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,887 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    NDWC wrote: »
    So I couldn't go to the beach for a swim on the nicest bank holiday weekend in ages yet a couple of thousand SJW virtue signallers can gather in Dublin and nothing is said?

    **** that, I'm done with these restrictions. What's the point?

    And rte at pains to tell us how “peaceful” they were. Young guys interviewed seemed pretty aggressive to me. Of course nothing to do with Ireland or our ridiculous lockdown


  • #984
    Arghus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,252 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    Jayesdiem wrote: »
    Divide 4.5 million by 1600 (if you understand long division) and you get a simple calculation of death rate. Are mathematics an opinion these days?

    1600 is that percentage figure of the population, but that's only the IFR of the virus in the country if we had 100% of the population infected.


  • #985
    Naos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,740 ✭✭✭Naos


    mooseknunkle wrote: »
    The Guards had no problem going after the Debenhams workers last week protesting for the money they are owed..yet here we have this protest with how many people and not a Guard to be seen...
    iamwhoiam wrote: »
    Harris didn’t want people queueing in Ikea but a massive crowd allowed gather for a protest . Is it any wonder people are just doing their own thing now

    What do you think would have happened if the Gardai tried to break up the crowd?


  • #986
    Arghus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,252 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    plodder wrote: »
    "Perhaps as low as 1%". Cillian de Gascún or one of the other experts said it could be as high as 15%. We need to get the antibody study going asap to answer the question.

    It's true, that we don't actually know the true rate of infection - but I think we can safely assume the vast, vast majority of the population weren't exposed. Even a figure of 15% means 85% weren't - so the potential was always there for literally thousands of more deaths.


  • #987
    bloodless_coup
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,480 ✭✭✭bloodless_coup


    NDWC wrote: »
    So I couldn't go to the beach for a swim on the nicest bank holiday weekend in ages yet a couple of thousand SJW virtue signallers can gather in Dublin and nothing is said?

    **** that, I'm done with these restrictions. What's the point?

    Current restrictions allow for a maximum of 4 people to meet outdoors plus the 5km limit. And this **** was allowed to go ahead without intervention from the Guards?

    They can go and ****e the next time they try to badger me about my movements at a checkpoint.


  • #988
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,887 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Naos wrote: »
    What do you think would have happened if the Gardai tried to break up the crowd?

    Just because one section of society can’t comply with the laws then why should the rest of us be forced to?


  • #989
    na1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 921 ✭✭✭na1


    Jayesdiem wrote: »
    Divide 4.5 million by 1600 (if you understand long division) and you get a simple calculation of death rate. Are mathematics an opinion these days?

    the number 1600 doesn't reflects the actual COVID-19 related death rate.

    For example: Herpes simplex virus is common in between 60 and 95% in adults.
    and around 32000 people die every year in Ireland.
    This means than between 19000-30000 of them were infected with Herpes simplex.

    Can we say that Herpes is taking 25000 lives every year?


  • #990
    Jayesdiem
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 908 ✭✭✭Jayesdiem


    Arghus wrote: »
    1600 is that percentage figure of the population, but that's only the IFR of the virus in the country if we had 100% of the population infected.

    FFS you really are fcking paranoid. On our part of the island, 4.5 million could have theoretically died, or basically had potential exposure. 1600 of them died. Therefore that is the death rate, no ifs, buts or maybes. When you apply the <82 years correction, the risks to people below that age are so low as to be laughable. That’s why people are laughing at you.


  • Advertisement
  • #991
    bloodless_coup
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,480 ✭✭✭bloodless_coup


    Naos wrote: »
    What do you think would have happened if the Gardai tried to break up the crowd?

    A nice batten charge would have been entertaining.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement