Covid 19 Part XXVII- 62,002 ROI (1,915 deaths) 39,609 NI (724 deaths) (02/11) Read OP

is_that_so · 25-10-2020 01:29PM

amadangomor wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Nicely done, the pre-pubescent response!

growleaves · 25-10-2020 01:29PM

amadangomor wrote: »

Reported.

To the guards?

amadangomor · 25-10-2020 01:29PM

mloc123 wrote: »

You don't need to post to report... Just click the little icon

I did

Happydays2020 · 25-10-2020 01:30PM

is_that_so wrote: »

You should ask them rather than posit something you're convinced they're doing wrong anyway.

You are posting a figure from them, and I am asking what was the methodology? Because that 2% figure may be nonsense if limited or no testing is done.

mloc123 · 25-10-2020 01:30PM

amadangomor wrote: »

I did

Very good. Thanks for keeping us all in the loop.

amadangomor · 25-10-2020 01:30PM

is_that_so wrote: »

Nicely done, the pre-pubescent response!

Pointless arguing with you.

WoollyRedHat · 25-10-2020 01:32PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

To be fair, there isn't that many covid patients in hospital as most cases are mild. It's more an issue with staff than issues of bed space at the moment.

Should we not be looking at setting up community field centres for those who show mild to moderate symptomsp, like they did in South Korea.

speckle · 25-10-2020 01:32PM

amadangomor wrote: »

It's simple, masks protect people from this virus.

Not wearing a mask for whatever reason, great but don't go to a place where you will be around other people potentially infecting them.

Some of the people know they are high risk and are in the minority who cant wear masks are the most concious of the risks, many of them use all other protective measures and for example may only go to shop every 2/3 weeks having had zero close contacts.. and socially distance while doing so. Where as the mask wearers may have had many social/home contacts and dont bother staying 2 metres away from people shopping.
Which are you more likely to get infected by?

All I am saying is dont judge a book by its cover or in this case mask or not.

Boggles · 25-10-2020 01:33PM

Biological humans under the age of 19 spread Covid shocker.

Hopefully we stop pretending they don't before Wave 3.

majcos · 25-10-2020 01:34PM

speckle wrote: »

Say that to people who have asthma attacks triggered by hot and humid conditions or those including hospital staff that have allergic reactions to some of the materials and how they are treated. They maybe in the minority both dont discount them at a drop of a hat.
Some interesting scientific research papers on those minority hospital workers, and have a look at comments on asthma websites, before judging people. Some people with asthma can wear them, others not.

Very easy to day just cocoon, when supports have decreased for those people and services closing due to funding issues which will only get worse if a recession appears.

And if staff taking precautions and everyone else in the public why shouldnt a person who is exempt be not allowed?

I didn’t discount them or say they should not be allowed in.

My post was in reply to AI screening of those wearing masks on entry to shops. Such a system could allow those wearing masks in but also alert a security guard or other member of staff if someone tried to enter without a mask. In that case, the staff could attend to that individual and check if they have a medical exemption.

I intended to imply that those exempt from mask wearing was a smaller proportion of the general population compared to those who can wear masks. I suggested that they should cocoon if they could but my post also acknowledges that this might not be possible for everyone so I suggested that in those cases they could be addressed on an individual basis rather than not be allowed in by AI screening.

UrbanFret · 25-10-2020 01:34PM

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/coronavirus-vaccine-could-available-nhs-19162139

Happydays2020 · 25-10-2020 01:34PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Apparently playing GAA and rugby also makes a person immune.

Not so with golf and tennis, it has been scientifically proved that smaller numbers of people playing non contact sport together makes the virus more transmittable.

(It has nothing to do with GAA matches being pay-per-view on the GAAGO streaming service, sponsors etc)

There is a difference between rugby and GAA.

The rugby players are professional and it is their job so they can bubble to a degree and the testing has picked up cases.

GAA players are amateur (teachers, doctors, factory workers etc). Interesting to see that one county forfeited a game as employers of some players are saying players will have to quarantine for 14 days before coming back to the workplace.

Psychiatric Patrick · 25-10-2020 01:35PM

Happydays2020 wrote: »

Prob not a good idea to get the Guards involved.

If you have any relationship with your siblings ask them to socially distance if your mother is vulnerable and to keep the house ventilated when there.

The isolation involved in lock downs is really difficult for people. And the best thing they can do is to follow the safest practices while there (short of not going at all).

My niece is intelligent and she just shrugs her shoulders at it. It is happening and cannot be stopped - none of them have Covid anyway - she is just so her Nana just lose her mind from the copious about dog BS that will be spouted.

The sister I do get along well with said not much point of arguing or calling the Guards. It would just result in more bad feeling from my father creating actual real upset for my mother against the possible chance there would be an infection.

She suggested should the opportunity arise of making my opinion and disdain known. And that the sight of me going around the house when I get back might help renew my father’s previously help Covid concerns

JP Liz V1 · 25-10-2020 01:35PM

https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1320307797582614528

is_that_so · 25-10-2020 01:35PM

Happydays2020 wrote: »

You are posting a figure from them, and I am asking what was the methodology? Because that 2% figure may be nonsense if limited or no testing is done.

The 2% is data. Your opinion and mine are just that, driven by whatever confirmation bias we have of this. They have consistently stuck by those numbers. That may be based on the government desire to keep schools open. If that is the case one could also question the motivation of people who continue to challenge them.

Boggles · 25-10-2020 01:35PM

is_that_so wrote: »

HSE say they have rates of about 2% in positivity to go on, that's real life data.

HSE says there has been 10 infections traced to pubs.

"real life data"

Indeed.

MerlinSouthDub · 25-10-2020 01:35PM

khalessi wrote: »

HSE dont want cases in schools, they dont care if they turn up elsewhere, but the fact is there are asymptomatic children in schools not being tested because they are asymptomatic, so parents dont know and schools dont know. There is also unidentifibale community spread hmmm

Levels of community spread are the same now as in August. Those magical schools even managed to cause spread when they were closed....

smellyoldboot · 25-10-2020 01:36PM

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

Are you sniffing something?

What are you talking about ? “muddy the waters”

I said I didn’t understand the new restrictions and I asked if this gathering at my parents house was against the rules.

You acting as though I’m trying to make “excuses” because we “got caught having a party” - that makes zero sense. Why would I mention the gathering here in be first place?

The only slow mind here is yourself.

A whole family full of simpletons. What hope is there at all.

is_that_so · 25-10-2020 01:37PM

Boggles wrote: »

HSE says there has been 10 infections traced to pubs.

"real life data"

Indeed.

Indeed, all about our confirmation bias.

speckle · 25-10-2020 01:37PM

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Masks are to protect others. It isn't rocket science, if you do not wear one, whatever your excuse, then do not enter public transport and buildings. A person unwilling to maintain hygiene should not have a job in a hospital. Partially sighted people are not allowed drive, whether or not this inconveniences them, because they would be a threat to everyone else. And a

By the way some people who are partially sighted may be in the minority of the very people not wearing a mask. Think.. that is why there are exemptions for a minority of people.

Happydays2020 · 25-10-2020 01:38PM

is_that_so wrote: »

The 2% is data. Your opinion and mine are just that, driven by whatever confirmation bias we have of this. They have consistently stuck by those numbers. That may be based on the government desire to keep schools open. If that is the case one could also question the motivation of people who continue to challenge them.

I am fine if risks are taken and I have said in another post that the risk of not being in school might be greater than being in a regulated environment. I just do not like if there is a policy decision to pretend a risk does not exist.
I know it is delicate and political.

Boggles · 25-10-2020 01:38PM

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1320307797582614528

We're all be part of the solution. Let's keep this going

Paul you are not part of the solution, you are making it harder for everyone because you an incompetent clown who thinks aiming for 70% is an acceptable target during a once in a generation pandemic.

Fúck off Paul.

growleaves · 25-10-2020 01:38PM

Don't forget to mask your intentions if you're talking to a beautiful woman.

speckle · 25-10-2020 01:38PM

majcos wrote: »

I didn’t discount them or say they should not be allowed in.

My post was in reply to AI screening of those wearing masks on entry to shops. Such a system could allow those wearing masks in but also alert a security guard or other member of staff if someone tried to enter without a mask. In that case, the staff could attend to that individual and check if they have a medical exemption.

I intended to imply that those exempt from mask wearing was a smaller proportion of the general population compared to those who can wear masks. I suggested that they should cocoon if they could but my post also acknowledges that this might not be possible for everyone so I suggested that in those cases they could be addressed on an individual basis rather than not be allowed in by AI screening.

That is a fair enough balanced and nuanced approach unlike some on here. Thankyou

Psychiatric Patrick · 25-10-2020 01:40PM

mloc123 wrote: »

Well, if that is your attitude... It is pretty obvious from your posts that your aren't the sharpest

Grow some balls and stop acting like a child. If you don't want your siblings visiting, tell them.

Stop derailing conversations

25-10-2020 01:41PM

Happydays2020 wrote: »

There is a difference between rugby and GAA.

The rugby players are professional and it is their job so they can bubble to a degree and the testing has picked up cases.

GAA players are amateur (teachers, doctors, factory workers etc). Interesting to see that one county forfeited a game as employers of some players are saying players will have to quarantine for 14 days before coming back to the workplace.

Then why have golf and tennis been restricted under level 5 regulations, and GAA and rugby have not?

GAA is pay-per-view if you use the new GAAGO streaming app. Individual matches are €5 and an all season pass is €79.

Golf and tennis are not pay-per-view, and they are not bound by large sponsorship contracts. Allianz, AIB, Centra, Eir, Electric Ireland all sponsor the GAA.

Drumpot · 25-10-2020 01:41PM

mloc123 wrote: »

So... There are people saying children aren't being tested, but then some people pointing out the rate of cases in that age group being high. The positivity rate is 2% in kids per NPHET.

So it can't be all three.

Regardless of anybody’s stance on a topic, with regards to “schools affect on transmission” , if a person or institution refuses to Acknowledge and address information that contradicts a particular stance I’m always very concerned with their message.

There is and has been plenty of information and data that suggests children are no less likely to spread the disease and that a school environment , while more controlled , is just as likely to spread disease as the average office. And yet people are being strongly encouraged to work from home and currently most of us can’t work in an office even if we wanted!

The HSE and NEPHET have refused to elaborate on their sentiments on schools, quite often repeating the phrase that most cases in schools are gotten outside of them. They were saying this before our schools opened and appear to be recording the data that only corroborates these sentiments.

When I see the Authorities being this absolute and confident about the school’s conundrum when you can find plenty of evidence That suggests otherwise, I don’t trust them. Even on the WHOs is website while it tries to push the narrative that schools aren’t so bad it says “ The role of children in transmission is not yet fully understood.“. There you go, even the politically manipulated mouth piece “WHO” admit they really just don’t know how much schools are involved in transmission.

Incidentally they recommend children over 12 wear masks in schools and that between 5-12 that maybe they should Aswell. If it’s clear children don’t really spread the virus much why would this be needed?

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease-covid-19-schools

I could go on a lot more but this is just very difficult to digest when you think of it on any basic level. It’s a virus, it spreads among people like a virus. There is no definitive evidence that suggests children transmit it any less, just sentiments by the looks of it. “The virus doesn’t spread as much among children” is the unverified narrative that’s being used to promote safety of schools.

There is a huge importance to keeping schools open on many levels , so the government at the very least has a motive to promote a lie to make it more palatable for parents/society.

Boggles · 25-10-2020 01:41PM

is_that_so wrote: »

Indeed, all about our confirmation bias.

At least your honest I suppose.

amadangomor · 25-10-2020 01:43PM

speckle wrote: »

Some of the people know they are high risk and are in the minority who cant wear masks are the most concious of the risks, many of them use all other protective measures and for example may only go to shop every 2/3 weeks having had zero close contacts.. and socially distance while doing so. Where as the mask wearers may have had many social/home contacts and dont bother staying 2 metres away from people shopping.
Which are you more likely to get infected by?

All I am saying is dont judge a book by its cover or in this case mask or not.

Why would they be putting themselves or others at unnecessary risk?

I have asthma/breathing problems as a legacy from suspected Covid in March. I don't want anyone around me without a mask.

I've had to self isolate twice this year and was easy to get everything I need online.

Strumms · 25-10-2020 01:45PM

mloc123 wrote: »

Yeah... Because all parents do such a great job at that. Just need to look at the gangs of teenagers out every night setting off fireworks.

Parenting seems to have become seriously unfashionable these days in certain quarters.

Covid 19 Part XXVII- 62,002 ROI (1,915 deaths) 39,609 NI (724 deaths) (02/11) Read OP

Comments