Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VIII Read OP For Mod Warnings

Boggles · 01-02-2021 11:51AM

Silentcorner wrote: »

You accused me of being crass.

You know full well this is causing mental health issues, we all know it.

Your point was to insult me. I am not taking that bait, I know your style.

I know full well mental health issues are varied and complex. If you were insulted that because you seeked it. You are the only one making concrete conclusions on anecdotal evidence.

I also know the pandemic denialists are using mental health as a reason to further their false narrative.

As Raind said I have no doubt the pandemic has take it's toll on some people, but the idea that letting it rip would be far better for peoples mental health is remedial in the extreme.

Silentcorner · 01-02-2021 11:54AM

Boggles wrote: »

I know full well mental health issues are varied and complex. If you were insulted that because you seeked it. You are the only one making concrete conclusions on anecdotal evidence.

I also know the pandemic denialists are using mental health as a reason to further their false narrative.

As Raind said I have no doubt the pandemic has take it's toll on some people, but the idea that letting it rip would be far better for peoples mental health is remedial in the extreme.

No, you called me crass, you deliberately did so.

What is a pandemic denialist? Nevermind...more of your "science" no doubt!!

As for your last statement, I never said anything of the sort!!!

Boggles · 01-02-2021 11:56AM

Silentcorner wrote: »

No, you called me crass, you deliberately did so.

What is a pandemic denialist? Nevermind...more of your "science" no doubt!!

As for your last statement, I never said anything of the sort!!!

So you don't want a discussion on it like you claimed?

Fair enough, as you were so.

Kunta Kinte · 01-02-2021 12:01PM

Deleted User wrote: »

We went into lockdown October.
Taoiseach has said we’re going for a prolonged suppression of the virus with hospitality likely not opening until later I’m summer

Level 5 restrictions were implemented in October. Construction, schools operated as normal up until late December/early January. Not a lockdown. And these sectors will also reopen long before June .So to claim the country will be in "lockdown" for 8 out of 9 months is false.

01-02-2021 12:05PM

Boggles wrote: »

So you don't want a discussion on it like you claimed?

Fair enough, as you were so.

Interesting point Boggles, separate to the discussion on mental health, which I believe we should all be careful about what we say as it is far more complex than one liners on a discussion board, however there is a narrative that all people are looking for is a debate on the issues, until certain "facts" and thread shibboleths are actually challenged, at which point the curtain twitcher / WFH warrior / shill / doom monger etc. comments start

Responder XY · 01-02-2021 12:06PM

Kunta Kinte wrote: »

Level 5 restrictions were implemented in October. Construction, schools operated as normal up until late December/early January. Not a lockdown.And these sectors will also reopen long before June .So to claim the country will be in "lockdown" for 8 out of 9 months is false.

It makes no difference to most people what you call it - has the same impact whether you call it lv 5 restriction or a lockdown.

I don't believe we'll be in either as far as June though (At least I sincerely hope not!)

01-02-2021 12:07PM

The mental health of this country is in a terrible place right now.

Not surprising at all to see big increases in anti depressants and mental health hospitals.

Half a million of our workforce have no job. Considering our employment level in 2019 was 2.3M... that is close to 25% out of work.

Financial hell is now a reality for those people. And to top it all off, we’ve removed every single social outlet possible from society.

We should be ashamed of what we have done.
Instead people are patting each other on the back because Covid is al that matters anymore.

Silentcorner · 01-02-2021 12:09PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Interesting point Boggles, separate to the discussion on mental health, which I believe we should all be careful about what we say as it is far more complex than one liners on a discussion board, however there is a narrative that all people are looking for is a debate on the issues, until certain "facts" and thread shibboleths are actually challenged, at which point the curtain twitcher / WFH warrior / shill / doom monger etc. comments start

Aren't you the same poster who dismissed the Oxford Univ Debating society because they are students, a debate which included both sides on an arguement ...and the same poster who doesn't want to see anyone on the telly who doesn't agree with severe lockdowns or who has an alternate opinion on Government policy.

01-02-2021 12:12PM

Kunta Kinte wrote: »

Level 5 restrictions were implemented in October. Construction, schools operated as normal up until late December/early January. Not a lockdown.And these sectors will also reopen long before June .So to claim the country will be in "lockdown" for 8 out of 9 months is false.

Lol! Ok...

So having schools and construction open is now considered not a lockdown.

What have the government done to some of you folks?

Boggles · 01-02-2021 12:16PM

Deleted User wrote: »

So having schools and construction open is now considered not a lockdown.

So you consider every restriction a "lockdown"?

Malcomex · 01-02-2021 12:18PM

Boggles wrote: »

So you consider every restriction a "lockdown"?

Is there 2 types of lockdown?

Lockdown and full lockdown

Lockdown- stay in a given area

Full lockdown - confined to house

Responder XY · 01-02-2021 12:19PM

Lv. 5 is a stay at home except for specified purposes. That's a lockdown in my book.

Lv. 4 is not a lock down - that's restrictions.

walus · 01-02-2021 12:19PM

Deleted User wrote: »

And you don't see a problem with 27 employees in a care home testing positive?

Jesus wept.

No, not really. They were all asymptomatic I presume, otherwise would not have come in to work, and there was no impact on the mortality rate as such. This is in line with the fact that science is yet prove that asymptomatic cases transfer the virus on. I let your Jesus weep.

Silentcorner · 01-02-2021 12:19PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The mental health of this country is in a terrible place right now.

Not surprising at all to see big increases in anti depressants and mental health hospitals.

Half a million of our workforce have no job. Considering our employment level in 2019 was 2.3M... that is close to 25% out of work.

Financial hell is now a reality for those people. And to top it all off, we’ve removed every single social outlet possible from society.

We should be ashamed of what we have done.
Instead people are patting each other on the back because Covid is al that matters anymore.

Over the next 4 years, we are going to see no difference to our average death rates, the demographic that is most vulnerable to this virus are also the most vulnerable to a myriad of other infections/ailments.

But the legacy of what we have done is going to take an awful toll on our society, because heart disease, cancers, mental health problems are all accumulating as we lock our people into their homes for their own safety.

I know that to some the infection can be very nasty, but we need to have an adult conversation about the cost of our actions.

WE know that there are posters on this thread, who want to bury all other non covid issues under the carpet because that is what "the telly" is telling them to do...but some body has to start talking about it, these problems are mounting day by day!

Kunta Kinte · 01-02-2021 12:21PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Lol! Ok...

So having schools and construction open is now considered not a lockdown.

What have the government done to some of you folks?

So give us your definition of a lockdown then. I`m not convinced you fully grasp the difference between a lockdown and restrictions.

Kunta Kinte · 01-02-2021 12:28PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

Over the next 4 years, we are going to see no difference to our average death rates, the demographic that is most vulnerable to this virus are also the most vulnerable to a myriad of other infections/ailments.

But the legacy of what we have done is going to take an awful toll on our society, because heart disease, cancers, mental health problems are all accumulating as we lock our people into their homes for their own safety.

I know that to some the infection can be very nasty, but we need to have an adult conversation about the cost of our actions.

WE know that there are posters on this thread, who want to bury all other non covid issues under the carpet because that is what "the telly" is telling them to do...but some body has to start talking about it, these problems are mounting day by day!

People have been "locked into their homes" for their own safety? Which people are these and since when has this been happening?

jackal · 01-02-2021 12:39PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

Over the next 4 years, we are going to see no difference to our average death rates, the demographic that is most vulnerable to this virus are also the most vulnerable to a myriad of other infections/ailments.

But the legacy of what we have done is going to take an awful toll on our society, because heart disease, cancers, mental health problems are all accumulating as we lock our people into their homes for their own safety.

I know that to some the infection can be very nasty, but we need to have an adult conversation about the cost of our actions.

WE know that there are posters on this thread, who want to bury all other non covid issues under the carpet because that is what "the telly" is telling them to do...but some body has to start talking about it, these problems are mounting day by day!

Be an adult then and start the conversation. Have you a model in mind that you think we should have followed, some other utopia-like country that has breezed through this serenely, or do you have a unique suggestion of your own as to how we should have gotten through this without over running our hospitals?

It's not the only issue, we are all sick to the back teeth of it, but January was a little scary no? We came pretty close to ambulances being turned away from hospitals. Should we have just stayed the course?

01-02-2021 12:39PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

Aren't you the same poster who dismissed the Oxford Univ Debating society because they are students, a debate which included both sides on an arguement ...and the same poster who doesn't want to see anyone on the telly who doesn't agree with severe lockdowns or who has an alternate opinion on Government policy.

Am, no.

I dismissed the Oxford University debating society as they neither do nor should have a role in formulating policy. It is essentially a game show which votes on the performance on the night among a group of people selected to present opposing cases and not on the merits of otherwise of the issue.

And I dont think you will ever find an argument from me that anyone with a point to put forward should be prevented form airing it. The point I made that you may be conflating with this was that we should not treat the opinions of those who's view is based on half baked contrarian ramblings based on fantasy and misrepresentation as being just as valid as the opinions of those with the experience and expertise in the area being discussed.

Myself and Boggles had a battle over this very point an number of months ago around the bona-fides of Sunetra Gupta from Oxford university and her views on the pandemic. While I did not agree with her opinion as the majority opinion in the field was elsewhere, I challenged Boggles dismissal of her opinion outright as she does have the relevant qualification and experience. Now, her theory that we were reaching herd immunity has now thoroughly been blown out of the water, so with hindsight we can say she was definitely wrong

01-02-2021 12:44PM

walus wrote: »

No, not really. They were all asymptomatic I presume, otherwise would not have come in to work, and there was no impact on the mortality rate as such. This is in line with the fact that science is yet prove that asymptomatic cases transfer the virus on. I let your Jesus weep.

Yep, there is some real regard for "protecting the most vulnerable" in that response.

Silentcorner · 01-02-2021 12:45PM

jackal wrote: »

Be an adult then and start the conversation. Have you a model in mind that you think we should have followed, some other utopia-like country that has breezed through this serenely, or do you have a unique suggestion of your own as to how we should have gotten through this without over running our hospitals?

It's not the only issue, we are all sick to the back teeth of it, but January was a little scary no? We came pretty close to ambulances being turned away from hospitals. Should we have just stayed the course?

Have you heard from anyone at the coalface of the mental health issues?

Or listened to experts on the mid to long term implications of missed cancer screenings or heart disease diagnosis?

Or listened to an expert in anxiety related issues on the effect of pumping hysteria into the population every day for a year?

January is a month where our hospitals are always in crisis, I'm immune to it at this stage.

Boggles · 01-02-2021 12:47PM

walus wrote: »

No, not really. They were all asymptomatic I presume, otherwise would not have come in to work, and there was no impact on the mortality rate as such. This is in line with the fact that science is yet prove that asymptomatic cases transfer the virus on. I let your Jesus weep.

So 27 employees working in the same place were all asymptomatic and you are looking for evidence of asymptomatic spread?

Where was this?

Silentcorner · 01-02-2021 12:51PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Am, no.

I dismissed the Oxford University debating society as they neither do nor should have a role in formulating policy. It is essentially a game show which votes on the performance on the night among a group of people selected to present opposing cases and not on the merits of otherwise of the issue.

And I dont think you will ever find an argument from me that anyone with a point to put forward should be prevented form airing it. The point I made that you may be conflating with this was that we should not treat the opinions of those who's view is based on have baked contrarian ramblings based on fantasy and misrepresentation should not be treated as just as valid as the opinions of those with the experience and expertise in the area being discussed.

Myself and Boggles had a battle over this very point an number of months ago around the bona-fides of Sunetra Gupta from Oxford university and her views on the pandemic. While I did not agree with her opinion as the majority opinion in the field was elsewhere, I challenged Boggles dismissal of her opinion outright as she does have the relevant qualification and experience. Now, her theory that we were reaching herd immunity has now thoroughly been blown out of the water, so with hindsight we can say she was definitely wrong

So you did dismiss the Oxford University debating society...nobody was suggesting they should be given a role in the formulation of policy...don't be daft.

I have asked at least three times now, has there been one expert, one even..who's predictions have been spot on since last March and no one can name one, yet these are the guys you consider valid!! Absolutely bonkers!!!!

Penfailed · 01-02-2021 12:52PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

80% of over 80s have been vaccinated in the UK (and that was 4 days ago). The UK should be ready to go and open up in a week or 2. How many of our over 80s have been vaccinated?

The over 80s plus very vulnerable groups are the only ones that matter. The rest of us can suck it up with a very bad dose of flu for a few days if need be. Micheal Martin is talking about March still having large restrictions. He can jog on if the over 80s are vaccinated.

...and yet their schools are still closed.

Penfailed · 01-02-2021 12:59PM

Kunta Kinte wrote: »

Level 5 restrictions were implemented in October. Construction, schools operated as normal up until late December/early January. Not a lockdown. And these sectors will also reopen long before June .So to claim the country will be in "lockdown" for 8 out of 9 months is false.

He's using restaurant closures as a lockdown metric. That's up to him...

walus · 01-02-2021 01:04PM

Boggles wrote: »

So 27 employees working in the same place were all asymptomatic and you are looking for evidence of asymptomatic spread?

Where was this?

The only thing that it proves is that you can protect the vulnerable by using pup gear and procedures, and removing those who actually exhibit symptoms from the vulnerable peoples' environment. A bit of common sense goes a long way.

As I say they were all shocked seeing the results as there was no impact on the mortality of the residents.

01-02-2021 01:04PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

So you did dismiss the Oxford University debating society...nobody was suggesting they should be given a role in the formulation of policy...don't be daft.

I have asked at least three times now, has there been one expert, one even..who's predictions have been spot on since last March and no one can name one, yet these are the guys you consider valid!! Absolutely bonkers!!!!

Aren't you the same poster who dismissed the Oxford Univ Debating society because they are students

Once again the attempts to misrepresent persist. I gave a clear reason as to why a debating society is not a arbiter of fact. And my comment at the time was in response to someone presenting the outcome of a student debate as somehow meaning the tide was turning against restrictions.

Your second point - you believe that last march, when a pandemic was emerging, when no one knew what actions different countries may or may not take, that someone could have put together a model combining the impacts of varying levels of restrictions across the globe, varying adherence in different societies, emerging strains, new information on how the virus spreads and a myriad of other factors that change on a daily basis, to produce an accurate model on how things would play though? And because someone didn't you can therefore dismiss science completely? Are you for real?

Penfailed · 01-02-2021 01:05PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

Aren't you the same poster who dismissed the Oxford Univ Debating society because they are students, a debate which included both sides on an arguement ...and the same poster who doesn't want to see anyone on the telly who doesn't agree with severe lockdowns or who has an alternate opinion on Government policy.

I would also dismiss a university debate as a reason for locking down or not.

Boggles · 01-02-2021 01:10PM

walus wrote: »

The only thing that it proves is that you can protect the vulnerable by using pup gear and procedures, and removing those who actually exhibit symptoms from the vulnerable peoples' environment. A bit of common sense goes a long way.

As I say they were all shocked seeing the results as there was no impact on the mortality of the residents.

Well no, I think the one thing it proves given the rather vague information is the thing that you said science hasn't proved, you basically proved it for them with your anecdote.

Again where did this happen, have you a link to an article or study?

cadaliac · 01-02-2021 01:16PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The mental health of this country is in a terrible place right now.

Not surprising at all to see big increases in anti depressants and mental health hospitals.

Half a million of our workforce have no job. Considering our employment level in 2019 was 2.3M... that is close to 25% out of work.

Financial hell is now a reality for those people. And to top it all off, we’ve removed every single social outlet possible from society.

We should be ashamed of what we have done.
Instead people are patting each other on the back because Covid is al that matters anymore.

Fairly wreck-less statement tbf.
Who is patting each other on the back?

Silentcorner · 01-02-2021 01:20PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Am, no.

I dismissed the Oxford University debating society as they neither do nor should have a role in formulating policy. It is essentially a game show which votes on the performance on the night among a group of people selected to present opposing cases and not on the merits of otherwise of the issue.

Deleted User wrote: »

Once again the attempts to misrepresent persist. I gave a clear reason as to why a debating society is not a arbiter of fact. And my comment at the time was in response to someone presenting the outcome of a student debate as somehow meaning the tide was turning against restrictions.

Your second point - you believe that last march, when a pandemic was emerging, when no one knew what actions different countries may or may not take, that someone could have put together a model combining the impacts of varying levels of restrictions across the globe, varying adherence in different societies, emerging strains, new information on how the virus spreads and a myriad of other factors that change on a daily basis, to produce an accurate model on how things would play though? And because someone didn't you can therefore dismiss science completely? Are you for real?

You are doing a great job at misrepresenting yourself Raind...

Firstly no one said the outcome of an Oxford University should be used in formulating Government policy or that they are the arbiter of truth...so please stop misrepresenting what was said....as you correctly point out, it was suggested that the tide is turning against restrictions, that is all.

I can understand back in March how experts got projections wrong, but by September there was no excuse who so many of them are consistently wildly off and still get so much airtime.

I gave you an example of a doctor, who had to step down from his position on a health authority because he aired an opinion critical of lockdowns and his reasoning for holding that opinion has now played out in front of us, he was as accurate as I have seen...he didn't project that we would need Mass Graves and Freezer Trucks full of bodies, which Luke O'Neill projected!!!

How much hyperbole can one nation take before starting to reject it? You can see it in this thread, more and more people have stopped buying into the hysteria.

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VIII *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VIII Read OP For Mod Warnings