Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Covid 19 Part XXIX-85,394 ROI(2,200 deaths) 62,723 NI (1,240 deaths) (26/12) Read OP

18990929495318

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    Arghus wrote: »
    Somebody else has already done a study, I've previously mentioned it:

    https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/media/pressrel/hse-announces-results-of%C2%A0seroprevalence-study.html

    Over 1100 respondents from two different areas of the country, one with high reported incidence, one with low.

    That study has been shown to be pretty worthless.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 725 ✭✭✭ElJeffe


    rodders999 wrote: »
    Buddy of mine is on a work night out tonight so the group Snapchat is on fire. If what’s going on in the pub he’s currently in (it’s like covid never happened) is being replicated across the country then January is going to be incredibly grim.

    Seen a few pictures from that Wetherspoons in Dun Laoighaire last night absolutely rammed. :(


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,519 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    polesheep wrote: »
    That study has been shown to be pretty worthless.

    Please explain.

    Your argument is silly.

    Any claim presented without evidence = plausible, we just don't know.

    Results of real world study = worthless.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 725 ✭✭✭ElJeffe


    polesheep wrote: »
    I don't make things up. I'm here for Covid and I'll be gone soon. I think that comment is more a reflection on you.

    You made up a post earlier. "Likely" in your own mind isn't evidence. You have no evidence or source that most younger people have had the virus. It's complete guess work and hear say.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 5,728 ✭✭✭Widdensushi


    What?

    18-24 year olds are either asymptotic or not seriously I’ll.

    Hospitals would never be overran with cases in that age group

    How is this still been debated

    Their family and friends not in the age group would have gotten it


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,519 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    What?

    18-24 year olds are either asymptotic or not seriously I’ll.

    Hospitals would never be overran with cases in that age group

    How is this still been debated

    You're somehow missing his point entirely. To the extent where I wonder if it's deliberate. He is not claiming that Covid makes young people gravely ill.

    The point he's making is that if you had 70% of 19-24 year olds getting infected with Covid you would have also seen a high incidence outside of that age group because they don't exclusively mix entirely with people in their exact age group, so you would have seen a much higher incidence of older people who would require hospitalisations - as a result of all those masses of young people catching a highly infectious virus and spreading it around.

    The reason that didn't happen is because that didn't happen.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,638 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    Arghus wrote: »
    You're somehow missing his point entirely. To the extent where I wonder if it's deliberate. He is not claiming that Covid makes young people gravely ill.

    The point he's making is that if you had 70% of 19-24 year olds getting infected with Covid you would have also seen a high incidence outside of that age group because they don't exclusively mix entirely with people in their exact age group, so you would have seen a much higher incidence of older people who would require hospitalisations - as a result of all those masses of young people catching a highly infectious virus and spreading it around.

    The reason that didn't happen is because that didn't happen.

    You would also have the close contacts of a confirmed case positivity rate being 70% in 19-24 year olds, which by Christ would raise a massive red flag!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,867 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    polesheep wrote: »
    That study was broad, not specific. Hmm's reference to Manaus is worth noting when you say not plausible. I was really taken aback when I read that. The numbers of Covid positive 18-24 year olds may be well short of herd immunity but, equally, they may not be. The fact is, we are not seeing sufficient science on this. Yes, there may be studies taking place that we will hear about later, but to my mind we are not seeing enough exploration right now. I was speaking with an immunologist just ten minutes ago and where you used the word 'worthless' he said, "well, we just don't know." Unless we investigate we can't know. You seem to think that there are just two ways to see things, I find that way of thinking both frustrating and limiting.


    If 18-24 year olds made up 70% of the population all of them would need to be immune to achieve herd immunity.



    From CSO data 5 years ago in the 13-18 year group, (the 18- 23 year group now), would number around 331,000. Just 7% of the population.
    A long way of the number required.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 568 ✭✭✭72sheep


    Kay Burley has had a front row seat watching those setting the Covid agenda and is clearly not scared by Covid in any way at all. She is not from a privileged background and so her actions cannot be just dismissed as class arrogance. Do we think then it is because Kay is stupid (thicker than us posters!) or is she knowingly negligent (i.e. borderline evil)?

    (BTW” Obviously her “I am an idiot” confession relates only to being caught. If it was because she now recognized the imminent danger posed she would not be heading to the local airport to go on holliers.)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,524 ✭✭✭harr


    With what I seen from various friends on social media last night people haven’t learned any lessons.
    Christmas parties in full swing with little or no social distancing as the night went on. Meals finished by 8 and large groups allowed continue drinking till early hours.
    A lot of the same people going to be heading home at Christmas and mixing with family groups.

    I think people have the mindset that the vaccine has suddenly changed things when in reality we are probably looking at lockdowns for another 6 months.
    January is going be a nightmare for case numbers.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 419 ✭✭AutoTuning


    People are like that though. It's just part of human behaviour. We know something's dangerous, so we probe it a bit and see what happens. If nothing happens, we often still keep probing. Or, we'll become accustomed to a dangerous situation and become desensitised to it and just do the dangerous thing anyway.

    Journalists, media types, politicians and so on are often by nature risk takers and not risk averse at all. Otherwise, they wouldn't put their neck on the line to chase stories, go to war zones, stand in the middle of protests, ask brazen questions to powerful individuals, go on stage, go on TV, stand for election etc etc etc.

    Those behaviours are positive in some scenarios, negative in others. Right now, those characteristics are probably going to walk a lot of people into trouble.

    If you've ever encountered anything to do with health and safety, you'll see how hard it is to get people to cop on.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,224 ✭✭✭zerosugarbuzz


    AutoTuning wrote: »
    People are like that though. It's just part of human behaviour. We know something's dangerous, so we probe it a bit and see what happens. If nothing happens, we often still keep probing. Or, we'll become accustomed to a dangerous situation and become desensitised to it and just do the dangerous thing anyway.

    Journalists, media types, politicians and so on are often by nature risk takers and not risk averse at all. Otherwise, they wouldn't put their neck on the line to chase stories, go to war zones, stand in the middle of protests, ask brazen questions to powerful individuals, go on stage, go on TV, stand for election etc etc etc.

    Those behaviours are positive in some scenarios, negative in others. Right now, those characteristics are probably going to walk a lot of people into trouble.

    If you've ever encountered anything to do with health and safety, you'll see how hard it is to get people to cop on.

    Pray tell where are those elusive journalists you speak of that display such characteristics? Cos they certainly ain’t in Ireland 😂


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,169 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Anyone seeing any breaches of the regulations, please contact Tramore garda station.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 8,140 ✭✭✭plodder


    I presume this has already been pointed out:

    Two Dublin bars suspend €9 ‘substantial meal’ to stop food waste

    All perfectly legal it seems. I guess it shows the futility of trying to control people's behaviour with laws. I think it hastens the day when these places get shutdown again in January though.

    “Fanaticism is always a sign of repressed doubt” - Carl Jung



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,142 ✭✭✭jackboy


    plodder wrote: »
    I presume this has already been pointed out:

    Two Dublin bars suspend €9 ‘substantial meal’ to stop food waste

    All perfectly legal it seems. I guess it shows the futility of trying to control people's behaviour with laws. I think it hastens the day when these places get shutdown again in January though.

    In fairness the 9 euro meal is a laughable rule which has no benefit for controlling the virus. Such rules decrease the public’s respect for all the rules.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    jackboy wrote: »
    In fairness the 9 euro meal is a laughable rule which has no benefit for controlling the virus. Such rules decrease the public’s respect for all the rules.
    Its aim is political and an economic counterbalance. On that front it's served a purpose of sorts and it's temporary. Those exploiting it are more likely to be rule breakers anyway.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    jackboy wrote: »
    In fairness the 9 euro meal is a laughable rule which has no benefit for controlling the virus. Such rules decrease the public’s respect for all the rules.


    It is a bit silly really, but it does stop a pub crawl.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,631 ✭✭✭MerlinSouthDub


    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-13/germany-to-enter-hard-lockdown-on-wednesday-as-infections-swell

    Germany into lockdown. Non essential retail closed. Children encouraged not to go to the school. Curfews in certain areas.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,172 ✭✭✭wadacrack




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,524 ✭✭✭harr


    Anyone know why the vaccine is yet to be approved in Europe when other countries have already started vaccine programs ?
    Well into December now and I can’t imagine any meaningful rollout happening before February at this stage.
    Some European countries getting swamped by covid in the last few weeks


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    harr wrote: »
    Anyone know why the vaccine is yet to be approved in Europe when other countries have already started vaccine programs ?
    Well into December now and I can’t imagine any meaningful rollout happening before February at this stage.
    Some European countries getting swamped by covid in the last few weeks
    Think the approvals granted are all emergency, I think the European approval is broader


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,142 ✭✭✭jackboy


    harr wrote: »
    Anyone know why the vaccine is yet to be approved in Europe when other countries have already started vaccine programs ?
    Well into December now and I can’t imagine any meaningful rollout happening before February at this stage.
    Some European countries getting swamped by covid in the last few weeks

    Hopefully because they are being thorough and not because they are finding issues with the data.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    charlie14 wrote: »
    If 18-24 year olds made up 70% of the population all of them would need to be immune to achieve herd immunity.



    From CSO data 5 years ago in the 13-18 year group, (the 18- 23 year group now), would number around 331,000. Just 7% of the population.
    A long way of the number required.

    I referred to the particular cohort, not the entire population.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 8,140 ✭✭✭plodder


    jackboy wrote: »
    In fairness the 9 euro meal is a laughable rule which has no benefit for controlling the virus. Such rules decrease the public’s respect for all the rules.
    Possibly. Though I can understand the intent behind it. Even the time limit rule seems understandable on paper. But, people seem to be going from one place to the next, whereas if they stayed in the same place all night, it would be less risky.

    I think you can't micro-manage people like that. Pubs/restaurants are going to be just open or closed. That seems to be the only level of control in that area.

    “Fanaticism is always a sign of repressed doubt” - Carl Jung



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    ElJeffe wrote: »
    You made up a post earlier. "Likely" in your own mind isn't evidence. You have no evidence or source that most younger people have had the virus. It's complete guess work and hear say.

    Every post is 'made up'. I didn't present anything as a fact, I gave an opinion. Some on here would argue with their own shadow.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    ElJeffe wrote: »
    The general population will do as they always have done and do as they are told.

    Source?

    See how silly it is?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    harr wrote: »
    Anyone know why the vaccine is yet to be approved in Europe when other countries have already started vaccine programs ?
    Well into December now and I can’t imagine any meaningful rollout happening before February at this stage.
    Some European countries getting swamped by covid in the last few weeks
    There are five countries. Rollout will happen almost instantly, they have the stocks and early January was always the EU plan. We'll see our plan this coming week and the EMA will decide by Dec 29 at the latest, on the vaccine, with Moderna to follow in early January.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,441 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    polesheep wrote: »
    Every post is 'made up'. I didn't present anything as a fact, I gave an opinion. Some on here would argue with their own shadow.

    :rolleyes: Pot meet kettle .


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    plodder wrote: »
    I presume this has already been pointed out:

    Two Dublin bars suspend €9 ‘substantial meal’ to stop food waste

    All perfectly legal it seems. I guess it shows the futility of trying to control people's behaviour with laws. I think it hastens the day when these places get shutdown again in January though.

    The police have told both venues they must serve food


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,199 ✭✭✭Ger Roe


    jackboy wrote: »
    In fairness the 9 euro meal is a laughable rule which has no benefit for controlling the virus. Such rules decrease the public’s respect for all the rules.

    It is a restriction, designed to keep you at your table for longer and to drink less alcohol in the limited time that you are supposed to have available to you - all designed to limit the spread of the virus, by limiting the potential for an increased amount of contacts per person.

    It's just that simple. The only simpler alternative, or maybe the easiest to understand and with less scope for 'clever' workarounds, would be to go back to total closure.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement