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 VI - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

1…215216218220221…324

Comments

  • #6512
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    Go over the HSE incidence reports for the last 3 months and calculate the percentage of cases requiring hospitalisation and/or ICU. Then come back to me with your projections of thousands in ICU.

    I'll spare you the time. ICU was about 0.2% last time I looked. And 4 out of 5 came out ok. The deaths are actually happening elsewhere.

    And the same analysis from france or spain this week?


  • #6513
    Stormyteacup
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 999 ✭✭✭Stormyteacup


    nofools wrote: »
    Your post is an extreme overreaction.

    Let's just imagine it did happen and not too painfully, what do you fear about a covid free island anyway?Having something less to blame the government for?

    You’re not alone in your thinking, there are many who wish for a covid free strategy. Everything bad would just go away then.

    It’s just impossible to debate relaxation of restrictions with someone who believes that as long as there’s Covid there should be level 5 restrictions.

    No middle ground here.


  • #6514
    CalamariFritti
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,309 ✭✭✭CalamariFritti


    nofools wrote: »
    There are plenty of thought police in this thread keeping the peace and not letting anyone mess with your alternative facts.

    First option doesn't work so that leaves the second option looking more attractive.

    We dont know whether first option works or not. Only plenty of people claiming they know which of course they dont. And no I dont know for sure either.

    I'd still go with second option over the current fumble.


  • #6515
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    Stormyteacup wrote: »
    You’re not alone in your thinking, there are many who wish for a covid free strategy. Everything bad would just go away then.

    It’s just impossible to debate relaxation of restrictions with someone who believes that as long as there’s Covid there should be level 5 restrictions.

    No middle ground here.

    Do you think that is my belief or something?

    Restrictions forever no thanks.

    Common sense forever yes


  • #6516
    CalamariFritti
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,309 ✭✭✭CalamariFritti


    nofools wrote: »
    And the same analysis from france or spain this week?

    Pretty much I'd say. You do the numbers if you want refute me. Not doing your work for you.


  • Advertisement
  • #6517
    Micky 32
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,627 ✭✭✭Micky 32


    dodzy wrote: »
    This level 5 is light years from the last one. .


    Yes you are correct there. My partner lives 10km from me. Going there today i was behind a lot of traffic. Good line of cars, definately going past the “5km” limit. Great to see people living some sort of life. Certainly doesn’t feel like back in March.


  • #6518
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Drink driving wasn't stopped, it was reduced.

    Reduced like a cars speed into a brickwall


  • #6519
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    Pretty much I'd say. You do the numbers if you want refute me. Not doing your work for you.

    I'm not arsed...the intolerable level of death already witnessed is sufficient evidence


  • #6520
    charlie14
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,595 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    Pretty much I'd say. You do the numbers if you want refute me. Not doing your work for you.


    You stated the number of deaths per 1,000 confirmed cases was 1.
    Last wave here that number was over 3%, double that in one country in Europe that did not lock down.
    That means last wave here deaths to confirmed cases here were over 30 per 1,000. Not 1.


  • #6521
    Stormyteacup
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 999 ✭✭✭Stormyteacup


    nofools wrote: »
    Do you think that is my belief or something?

    Restrictions forever no thanks.

    Common sense forever yes

    Ok stand to be corrected it did seem as though you are in favour of highest level restrictions as long as there are cases detected, as capacity in hospitals is not a factor for you in level of restrictions you believe we should be under.

    So restrictions until when?
    Zero cases? Vaccine-aided herd immunity?


  • Advertisement
  • #6522
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,533 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Johnboy1951 wrote: »
    I am not as sure as you are about this point.
    In fact I would disagree, based on the experience so far with various levels of restrictions.



    This is the problem as I see it.
    Yes control the virus spread, but allow sufficient room for it to spread to the maximum our health system can deal with.

    Obviously that is not the case presently.

    That is how we could maximise the economic activity while controlling the spread.



    Yes we do, and we, even belatedly, need to issue public advice on how to boost our immune systems.



    It is probably somewhere, but who has been pushing it?
    Nobody!
    All we hear is numbers of cases and deaths being highlighted.

    We should be hearing the advice every day along with whatever numbers they choose to highlight.



    you can't control the virus spread, but allow sufficient room for it to spread to the maximum our health system can deal with, as by doing that it means the system is operating at it's capacity and means the service will crash should we lose control of the virus spread.
    we have been issuing advice on how to boost our immune systems right from the start, the fact is however that it does not negate the need for restrictions.

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



  • #6523
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    nofools wrote: »

    Plenty don't make it out of ICU.

    That's fairly obvious.

    What utter b*ll****, you are an out and out spoofer.


  • #6524
    CalamariFritti
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,309 ✭✭✭CalamariFritti


    charlie14 wrote: »
    You stated the number of deaths per 1,000 confirmed cases was 1.
    Last wave here that number was over 3%, double that in one country in Europe that did not lock down.
    That means last wave here deaths to confirmed cases here were over 30 per 1,000. Not 1.

    Come on why do we have to do this silly dance again?

    We know for certain that the number of confirmed cases in the first wave was only a fraction of the true number.


  • #6525
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    Stormyteacup wrote: »
    Ok stand to be corrected it did seem as though you are in favour of highest level restrictions as long as there are cases detected, as capacity in hospitals is not a factor for you in level of restrictions you believe we should be under.

    So restrictions until when?
    Zero cases? Vaccine-aided herd immunity?

    I am in favour of people keeping the spirit of the measures and not promoting bull**** arguments to try convince others to take the piss.

    Zero covid is probably the best approach but it does have obvious things to be worked out.

    The current cycle of open close is not sustainable yet the people on here are looking to earn us more lockdown pain with their bolloxology.


  • #6526
    CalamariFritti
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,309 ✭✭✭CalamariFritti


    nofools wrote: »
    I'm not arsed...the intolerable level of death already witnessed is sufficient evidence

    You brought France and Spain up with regards to the numbers.
    So now that I'm asking you for numbers you're telling me you have evidence without numbers.

    Not going to reply to you anymore if thats how you think a debate works.


  • #6527
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    What utter b*ll****, you are an out and out spoofer.

    You my friend are the spoofer.

    Look at yourself, you outrightly refused to even look at the facts yesterday.

    Are you saying ICU has a 100% survival rate?


  • #6528
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    You brought France and Spain up with regards to the numbers.
    So now that I'm asking you for numbers you're telling me you have evidence without numbers.

    Not going to reply to you anymore if thats how you think a debate works.

    Same tactics as yesterday, making lots of claims when asked to back them up only response was deflection and virtue signalling.


  • #6529
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    You brought France and Spain up with regards to the numbers.
    So now that I'm asking you for numbers you're telling me you have evidence without numbers.

    Not going to reply to you anymore if thats how you think a debate works.

    I have this magic ability to make the distinction between big and small.

    These games of diving into the data in microscopic detail are just a ruse, poor debate tactic and a distraction.


  • #6530
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    nofools wrote: »
    You my friend are the spoofer.

    Look at yourself, you outrightly refused to even look at the facts yesterday.

    Are you saying ICU has a 100% survival rate?

    I asked you several times for evidence of claims you made, your only responses were to deflect and post utter rubbish at least you're consistent because you are still at it.
    Your opinions are not facts.


  • #6531
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Same tactics as yesterday, making lots of claims when asked to back them up only response was deflection and virtue signalling.

    Sure

    You are on the record for refusing to notice the data that proves you wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • #6532
    CalamariFritti
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,309 ✭✭✭CalamariFritti


    Loving all those October/November registrations who only post on covid forums. You just know right away what you're going to get. Partisan accounts by users who dont want their regular accounts 'tarnished' by their off the wall covid opinions.


  • #6533
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Same tactics as yesterday, making lots of claims when asked to back them up only response was deflection and virtue signalling.

    Btw these are not "tactics".

    I am trying to have an adult level discussion about the situation we are in.

    This isn't a game


  • #6534
    Stormyteacup
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 999 ✭✭✭Stormyteacup


    end of the road wrote: »
    you can't control the virus spread, but allow sufficient room for it to spread to the maximum our health system can deal with, as by doing that it means the system is operating at it's capacity and means the service will crash should we lose control of the virus spread.
    we have been issuing advice on how to boost our immune systems right from the start, the fact is however that it does not negate the need for restrictions.

    But you must admit that a certain amount of spread is being allowed? Otherwise we would be in as strict a lockdown as before.

    Regardless of whether you think restrictions are too much, too little or just right - there is a certain amount of controlled spread currently, based on perceived ‘low risk’ activities (schools, some sports training, additions to ‘essential workers’ not included last time). And factoring in hospital capacity.


  • #6535
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    nofools wrote: »
    Sure

    You are on the record for refusing to notice the data that proves you wrong.

    I'm on the record of refusing to take your nonsense as fact.
    I read a few of your posts from earlier, I 'm amazed someone could contradict themselves in a short space of time and believe people should still take them seriously. You're a spoofer lad. Have a good one, I'm just going to scroll by your ravings from now on.


  • #6536
    charlie14
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,595 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    Come on why do we have to do this silly dance again?

    We know for certain that the number of confirmed cases in the first wave was only a fraction of the true number.


    What is a silly dance is saying we had only 1 death per 1,000 confirmed cases when it was over 30 times greater.


    What is even a sillier dance is guessing what numbers are. Everyone can play that pointless game.


  • #6537
    Micky 32
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,627 ✭✭✭Micky 32


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    Loving all those October/November registrations who only post on covid forums. You just know right away what you're going to get. Partisan accounts by users who dont want their regular accounts 'tarnished' by their off the wall covid opinions.

    Without a doubt they are re-regs , of course IMO.


  • #6538
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,953 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    nofools wrote: »
    Sure

    You are on the record for refusing to notice the data that proves you wrong.

    What data, you won't show any of it...


  • #6539
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    I asked you several times for evidence of claims you made, your only responses were to deflect and post utter rubbish at least you're consistent because you are still at it.
    Your opinions are not facts.

    Is it my opinion that lots of people died before their time in Europe this week?

    Haven't added it up but well into the thousands.

    Wars were started over less. It is not "rubbish".


  • #6540
    charlie14
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,595 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Stormyteacup wrote: »
    But you must admit that a certain amount of spread is being allowed? Otherwise we would be in as strict a lockdown as before.

    Regardless of whether you think restrictions are too much, too little or just right - there is a certain amount of controlled spread currently, based on perceived ‘low risk’ activities (schools, some sports training, additions to ‘essential workers’ not included last time). And factoring in hospital capacity.


    If it was otherwise we would be attempting to eradicate the virus, and nobody has said that is what we are attempting.


  • Advertisement
  • #6541
    nofools
    Closed Accounts Posts: 608 ✭✭✭nofools


    bucketybuck wrote: »
    What data, you won't show any of it...

    You are confusing me with someone else

    Worldometer -> Europe

    It is all there


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement