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**

1233234236238239324

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,084 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    charlie14 wrote: »
    If you posted the John Hopkins link to inform me, then there was no need.
    I have repeatedly posted here that the ratio of deaths to confirmed cases is 3%.

    There was, and obviously still is, that need.
    Your preferred 3% is not the only, or even best, way of measuring the death toll due to Covid.
    Maybe you should try again to read and understand what is on that Johns Hopkins site.
    Does this "directly related" you are twittering on about contradict both John Hopkins or my posted ratio of deaths to confirmed cases of 3% or is it another could be, may be, nobody knows ??

    "twittering"? oh my gosh you are really something!

    It was you who drew attention to that "directly related" to 3% and seemed to draw incorrect conclusions from it.
    I posted to ensure those incorrect conclusions could not be drawn.

    If that upsets you to the point of you finding it necessary to try to denegrate my post with your silly "twittering" then tough. Get over it.

    You are not going to goad me like that.

    I have already posted about the 3% and the 0.04%.

    Do you deny the Johns Hopkins figure of 0.04%?
    The case-fatality rate for Ireland is 3.0% according to Johns Hopkins
    https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality

    and 40 per 100,000 population ... 0.04% if I am not mistaken.

    I guess people will pick whichever figure suits their purpose.

    I much prefer to see the figures for overall mortality and compare those numbers to previous years.
    Some here might be surprised at how small those excess death figures are.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 245 ✭✭MelbourneMan


    Most people aren't fully ahdering to the lockdowns. There's a poll on another thread and I think over half admitted they're flouting the 'rules' (albeit most in a more cautious way).

    People have lost interest in the whole lockdown thing. They can see that a virus with less than 0.1% fatality rate for majority of the population doesn't justify turning their life completely upside down for. The death figures are very low, and the average age of Corona deaths is the same as the average age of people dying anyway.

    You can champion lockdowns all you want and stay in your house until your government tell you it's safe to leave. The rest of us will get on with our lives. Not having a go at you, but it's just reality.

    Hello. The suppression of corona does not require that people fully adhere to the restrictions. Restrictions are applied according to the epidemiological data and models, and the projections for the health care system to handle the projected case load. This process inherently takes account of the level of non-compliance : the greater the non-compliance, the sooner or the greater the increase in counter measures. There is no escaping this reality, however unpleasant its consequences be.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 245 ✭✭MelbourneMan


    road_high wrote: »
    Imagine a country where an unelected medical autocrat decides if and when shops etc are going to reopen for Christmas - by jasus he isn’t giving it up anytime soon that’s for sure

    Hello. There is a great misunderstanding your statement. And it would seem to me, also some level of irrational personal attack. NPHET, as a group, provides advice to a democratically elected government, for it to take into consideration, with all manner of other economic and societal. The cabinet - elected - decides on and implements policy as it sees fit. No medical autocrat has any authority to decide on such matters as shot openings or other such issues - and indeed they do not even exist, other than as some imagined bogeyman.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,065 ✭✭✭funnydoggy


    Hello. There is a great misunderstanding your statement. And it would seem to me, also some level of irrational personal attack. NPHET, as a group, provides advice to a democratically elected government, for it to take into consideration, with all manner of other economic and societal. The cabinet - elected - decides on and implements policy as it sees fit. No medical autocrat has any authority to decide on such matters as shot openings or other such issues - and indeed they do not even exist, other than as some imagined bogeyman.

    Bye bye


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,229 ✭✭✭✭normanoffside


    Hello. There is a great misunderstanding your statement. And it would seem to me, also some level of irrational personal attack. NPHET, as a group, provides advice to a democratically elected government, for it to take into consideration, with all manner of other economic and societal. The cabinet - elected - decides on and implements policy as it sees fit. No medical autocrat has any authority to decide on such matters as shot openings or other such issues - and indeed they do not even exist, other than as some imagined bogeyman.

    Hello!
    If what you are saying is true then why do they do on TV twice a week to inform the public and answer questions from the press, then use their own personal twitter accounts to tell the world of their opinions.
    They've even announced measures on twitter before government have even met to approve them.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,684 ✭✭✭Penfailed


    Hello!
    If what you are saying is true then why do they do on TV twice a week to inform the public and answer questions from the press, then use their own personal twitter accounts to tell the world of their opinions.
    They've even announced measures on twitter before government have even met to approve them.

    ...because that's what Twitter is for?

    Gigs '24 - Ben Ottewell and Ian Ball (Gomez), The Jesus & Mary Chain, The Smashing Pumpkins/Weezer, Pearl Jam, Green Day, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Electric Picnic, Pixies, Ride, Therapy?, Public Service Broadcasting, IDLES, And So I Watch You From Afar

    Gigs '25 - Spiritualized, Supergrass, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Queens of the Stone Age, Electric Picnic, Vantastival, And So I Watch You From Afar



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,229 ✭✭✭✭normanoffside


    Penfailed wrote: »
    ...because that's what Twitter is for?

    Why do they announce and defend measures on twitter before government have even met to consider their recommendations?

    Nolan and Glynn were telling people why they were closing indoor dining and drinking in Dublin days before the cabinet had even met to approve it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 245 ✭✭MelbourneMan


    Hello!
    If what you are saying is true then why do they do on TV twice a week to inform the public and answer questions from the press, then use their own personal twitter accounts to tell the world of their opinions.
    They've even announced measures on twitter before government have even met to approve them.

    Hello. Unfortunately, I am unable to answer your question at this time. I am considering my position on this boards. I will endeavour to answer questions or enquiries posed through the systems direct messaging facility. Thank you for your forebearance.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,139 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Hello. Unfortunately, I am unable to answer your question at this time. I am considering my position on this boards. I will endeavour to answer questions or enquiries posed through the systems direct messaging facility. Thank you for your forebearance.

    :D Good one.

    Who are you tonight? NPHET or DoH?

    Go on, answer the question.


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


    Hello. There is a great misunderstanding your statement. And it would seem to me, also some level of irrational personal attack. NPHET, as a group, provides advice to a democratically elected government, for it to take into consideration, with all manner of other economic and societal. The cabinet - elected - decides on and implements policy as it sees fit. No medical autocrat has any authority to decide on such matters as shot openings or other such issues - and indeed they do not even exist, other than as some imagined bogeyman.

    NPHET pushed itself to the fore with models that predicted a deadly virus that turned out to be not so deadly. They may have been excused for this in the beginning.

    But perpetuating that fear with inaccurate and wild warnings of catastrophic levels of sickness and death, in the face of evidence to the contrary has no excuse now.

    They have done nothing to clearly communicate accumulated stats, studies and research conducted in the past six months that would alleviate the fear in society.

    They persist in clinging to their importance to the detriment of ‘all manner economic and societal.’ There has been little or no balance in this country.

    They are well aware they hold sway over the public through their messaging and, by proxy, the government. It’s toxic - and yes the government is every bit as much to blame.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,870 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Allinall wrote: »
    Curious as to what you mean by the bolded bits?

    Does a question this stupid even need an answer? It would appear so- None of these Nphet jokers are charity workers (despite their endless virtue signalling and faux hero worship from the interminably braindead), all are in various high profile public medical and academic positions. All of which are extremely lucrative now underscored by new opportunities for research, medical stewardship and medical positions. Also the cosying up to political and media establishments is another advancement opportunity- you don't actually have to do anything tangible- just repeat the same crap over and over about "being careful" and lashing on more lockdowns- job done.
    Nphet have achieved precisely nothing (apart from adding greatly to our national debt, stealing precious resources from down the road)- they're an extremely disruptive talk shop we would be very wise to disband immediately. But like all cults that takes times as they still have a rather large and devoted inexplicable following (for now).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,594 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    There was, and obviously still is, that need.
    Your preferred 3% is not the only, or even best, way of measuring the death toll due to Covid.
    Maybe you should try again to read and understand what is on that Johns Hopkins site.



    "twittering"? oh my gosh you are really something!

    It was you who drew attention to that "directly related" to 3% and seemed to draw incorrect conclusions from it.
    I posted to ensure those incorrect conclusions could not be drawn.

    If that upsets you to the point of you finding it necessary to try to denegrate my post with your silly "twittering" then tough. Get over it.

    You are not going to goad me like that.

    I have already posted about the 3% and the 0.04%.

    Do you deny the Johns Hopkins figure of 0.04%?


    Stop the childish nonsense. The only directly related figure we have on the ratio of deaths to confirmed cases is from the first wave. 3% for Ireland and 6% for Sweden. It`s a simple mathematical calculation that you can do for any country you choose. Worldwide if you wish.
    Anything else is nothing other than guesswork and supposition.

    Seeing as you have nothing much to add on this topic, (other than attempting to move goalposts), rather than being on here getting huffy you might be better off spending your time having a chat with your friend in Sweden.
    He may not know tomorrow his region comes under new recommendations/restrictions.
    Yet another region in Sweden that has dumping those of the government in favour of its own. Practically all of Sweden at this stage in fact.


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


    road_high wrote: »
    Does a question this stupid even need an answer? It would appear so- None of these Nphet jokers are charity workers (despite their endless virtue signalling and faux hero worship from the interminably braindead), all are in various high profile public medical and academic positions. All of which are extremely lucrative now underscored by new opportunities for research, medical stewardship and medical positions. Also the cosying up to political and media establishments is another advancement opportunity- you don't actually have to do anything tangible- just repeat the same crap over and over about "being careful" and lashing on more lockdowns- job done.
    Nphet have achieved precisely nothing (apart from adding greatly to our national debt, stealing precious resources from down the road)- they're an extremely disruptive talk shop we would be very wise to disband immediately. But like all cults that takes times as they still have a rather large and devoted inexplicable following (for now).

    Yes whatever the individual intentions of the members of NPHET were or are (and as often with such groups, intentions may have been genuinely for the good of society), there is no doubt their academic futures are looking bright with the possibility of managing future possible pandemics and with studying and researching Covid. They will certainly be very much aware of their personal stake in this.

    It’s not unreasonable to be wary of advice to the public resulting in potential personal gain.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,684 ✭✭✭Penfailed


    Why do they announce and defend measures on twitter before government have even met to consider their recommendations?

    Nolan and Glynn were telling people why they were closing indoor dining and drinking in Dublin days before the cabinet had even met to approve it.

    No idea. It wouldn't be my idea of fun to follow them on Twitter, so I don't. They're free to Tweet what they want though (within Twitter's T&Cs).

    Gigs '24 - Ben Ottewell and Ian Ball (Gomez), The Jesus & Mary Chain, The Smashing Pumpkins/Weezer, Pearl Jam, Green Day, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Electric Picnic, Pixies, Ride, Therapy?, Public Service Broadcasting, IDLES, And So I Watch You From Afar

    Gigs '25 - Spiritualized, Supergrass, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Queens of the Stone Age, Electric Picnic, Vantastival, And So I Watch You From Afar



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,229 ✭✭✭✭normanoffside


    Penfailed wrote: »
    No idea.

    Because they expect their recommendations to be accepted 100% by government so they announce them to the public first to ensure they are pushed though.

    They've gone far beyond their remit of just recommending government.

    Anyone who can't see this game being played is blind.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,139 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Penfailed wrote: »
    No idea. It wouldn't be my idea of fun to follow them on Twitter, so I don't. They're free to Tweet what they want though (within Twitter's T&Cs).

    In fairness he was asking Deep Throat from the NHEPT/DoH/Cabinet Room.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,684 ✭✭✭Penfailed


    Because they expect their recommendations to be accepted 100% by government so they announce them to the public first to ensure they are pushed though.

    They've gone far beyond their remit of just recommending government.

    Anyone who can't see this game being played is blind.

    I see. You were asking a rhetorical question. Except your own answer is incorrect. They (NPHET) wanted Level 5 weeks before it actually happened because the government didn't want it pushed through. The government call the shots. Anyone who can't see this is blind.

    Gigs '24 - Ben Ottewell and Ian Ball (Gomez), The Jesus & Mary Chain, The Smashing Pumpkins/Weezer, Pearl Jam, Green Day, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Electric Picnic, Pixies, Ride, Therapy?, Public Service Broadcasting, IDLES, And So I Watch You From Afar

    Gigs '25 - Spiritualized, Supergrass, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Queens of the Stone Age, Electric Picnic, Vantastival, And So I Watch You From Afar



  • Posts: 3,656 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Jim_Hodge wrote: »
    :D Good one.

    Who are you tonight? NPHET or DoH?

    Go on, answer the question.

    Mod

    Don't discuss other users bans.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,084 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    charlie14 wrote: »
    Stop the childish nonsense. The only directly related figure we have on the ratio of deaths to confirmed cases is from the first wave. 3% for Ireland and 6% for Sweden. It`s a simple mathematical calculation that you can do for any country you choose. Worldwide if you wish.
    Anything else is nothing other than guesswork and supposition.

    Is that a denial of the Johns Hopkins 0.04% figure?
    or maybe you would prefer to answer my question directly?
    Seeing as you have nothing much to add on this topic, (other than attempting to move goalposts), rather than being on here getting huffy you might be better off spending your time having a chat with your friend in Sweden.
    He may not know tomorrow his region comes under new recommendations/restrictions.
    Yet another region in Sweden that has dumping those of the government in favour of its own. Practically all of Sweden at this stage in fact.

    Thank you for the advice.
    I will be sure to give it the consideration it deserves.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,594 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Cyrus wrote: »
    if people are going to persist with a 3% mortality rate then i think we can.


    If that is in reference to my posts perhaps you would be good enough to stop attempting to misrepresent what I posted.

    The mortality ratio for confirmed cases for Ireland was 3% from the first wave.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    charlie14 wrote: »
    If that is in reference to my posts perhaps you would be good enough to stop attempting to misrepresent what I posted.

    The mortality ratio for confirmed cases for Ireland was 3% from the first wave.

    Back when thousands waiting on tests got cancelled, back when we wouldn’t test unless you had multiple symptoms, back when we only tested a fraction of what we do now and clearly missed god only knows how many asymptomatic cases...

    Your 3% is a useless stat.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,594 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Is that a denial of the Johns Hopkins 0.04% figure?
    or maybe you would prefer to answer my question directly?



    Thank you for the advice.
    I will be sure to give it the consideration it deserves.


    I already did.

    I already told you I had no intention of going down rabbit holes playing your transparent attempt at changing goalposts.


    If he is a friend giving it a bit more than just consideration might be a good idea. Otherwise he could end up tomorrow still following defunct government restrictions/recommendations rather than the much stricter ones of the local authority.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,594 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Back when thousands waiting on tests got cancelled, back when we wouldn’t test unless you had multiple symptoms, back when we only tested a fraction of what we do now and clearly missed god only knows how many asymptomatic cases...

    Your 3% is a useless stat.


    Some countries were doing more testing, some less, but funnily enough it is the same ratio worldwide of deaths to confirmed cases.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,084 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    Appears to be quite a range of CFR according to Johns Hopkins
    https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality

    CFR.png

    Seems to me to range between 1.2% and 9.8% rather than all at 3%.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,301 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    Appears to be quite a range of CFR according to Johns Hopkins
    https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality

    CFR.png

    Seems to me to range between 1.2% and 9.8% rather than all at 3%.

    Charlie is obsessed with that 3% number. Nothing will make him change his mind.
    If someone is a believer there is no chance to reason with faith.

    "They paint the world full of shadows...
    and then tell their children to stay close to the light...

    Their light. Their reasons, their judgments.

    Because in the darkness, there be dragons.

    But it isn't true. We can prove that it isn't true.
    In the dark, there is discovery, there is a possibility.
    There is freedom in the dark once someone has illuminated it."

    (some day he will see the light he just needs to venture in the dark to find it)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,003 ✭✭✭Captain_Crash


    Back when thousands waiting on tests got cancelled, back when we wouldn’t test unless you had multiple symptoms, back when we only tested a fraction of what we do now and clearly missed god only knows how many asymptomatic cases...

    It’s funny cause NPHET think they caught 2 of every 3 cases back in March and April and ruled out the possibility of multiples more having had the virus than we know of!

    Obvs the only basis for this claim was a short study they completed during the summer, which discounted the HSE’s very own antibody tests (which showed 5% had it at the time). Along with also discounting WHO’s assessment regarding probable numbers come the end of the summer of 10% globally having had it!

    But NPHET know all and are right and it’s not possible that they be wrong!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,300 ✭✭✭Allinall


    road_high wrote: »
    Does a question this stupid even need an answer? It would appear so- None of these Nphet jokers are charity workers (despite their endless virtue signalling and faux hero worship from the interminably braindead), all are in various high profile public medical and academic positions. All of which are extremely lucrative now underscored by new opportunities for research, medical stewardship and medical positions. Also the cosying up to political and media establishments is another advancement opportunity- you don't actually have to do anything tangible- just repeat the same crap over and over about "being careful" and lashing on more lockdowns- job done.
    Nphet have achieved precisely nothing (apart from adding greatly to our national debt, stealing precious resources from down the road)- they're an extremely disruptive talk shop we would be very wise to disband immediately. But like all cults that takes times as they still have a rather large and devoted inexplicable following (for now).

    How much are they being paid, and how much extra are they earning because of the pandemic?

    You appear to know, so maybe share it here to back up your claims.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,047 ✭✭✭Clonmel1000


    Just glancing through the vaccine thread and the main thread. It’s noticeable that some of the most pro lockdown people are now the ones who seem most reluctant to acknowledge the possible vaccine. I really don’t understand this surely the ones most “scared” by covid should be the ones welcoming a vaccine? For me once the vaccine comes on stream this “new normal” crap has to end.


  • Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Just glancing through the vaccine thread and the main thread. It’s noticeable that some of the most pro lockdown people are now the ones who seem most reluctant to acknowledge the possible vaccine. I really don’t understand this surely the ones most “scared” by covid should be the ones welcoming a vaccine? For me once the vaccine comes on stream this “new normal” crap has to end.

    I have noticed that as well and it certainly confirms to me that some people enjoyed lockdown for various reasons.

    Perhaps some were earning more money or had the ability to save much more. Some people loved working at home. Some public servants had extremely reduced hours and full pay.

    And of course, there was a whole cohort of posters that just want to see others suffer. The type that were delighted to see pubs closed. The people harping on about how we should be more cultured and dine out. Or criticising the young for daring to have a party.

    There will be plenty of people unhappy that the vaccine is here. You can already see them hopeful about the mink situation. But normality will return in 2021.

    No masks, no restrictions, no new normal. Just full pubs and celebrations.

    We will have a huge recession to deal with. The pro restrictions will be surprised by that. They thought we’d just print free money and borrow high with no consequences.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,684 ✭✭✭Penfailed


    I have noticed that as well and it certainly confirms to me that some people enjoyed lockdown for various reasons.

    Quite possibly true.

    Perhaps some were earning more money or had the ability to save much more. Some people loved working at home. Some public servants had extremely reduced hours and full pay.

    Definitely true for some, I'd imagine.

    And of course, there was a whole cohort of posters that just want to see others suffer.

    Nonsense. I haven't seen any posters that want to see people suffer.

    The type that were delighted to see pubs closed. The people harping on about how we should be more cultured and dine out. Or criticising the young for daring to have a party.

    There will be plenty of people unhappy that the vaccine is here. You can already see them hopeful about the mink situation. But normality will return in 2021.

    No masks, no restrictions, no new normal. Just full pubs and celebrations.

    I really hope so.

    We will have a huge recession to deal with. The pro restrictions will be surprised by that. They thought we’d just print free money and borrow high with no consequences.

    Possibly true for some. I wouldn't tar everyone with the same brush though. You're making a massive generalisation.

    .

    Gigs '24 - Ben Ottewell and Ian Ball (Gomez), The Jesus & Mary Chain, The Smashing Pumpkins/Weezer, Pearl Jam, Green Day, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Electric Picnic, Pixies, Ride, Therapy?, Public Service Broadcasting, IDLES, And So I Watch You From Afar

    Gigs '25 - Spiritualized, Supergrass, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Queens of the Stone Age, Electric Picnic, Vantastival, And So I Watch You From Afar



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement