Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX Read OP For Mod Warnings

robindch · 06-03-2021 02:13AM

bb1234567 wrote: »

they don't even know when is more or less acceptable to do that with absolutely no indication of a timeline to go off.

It'll be safe to socialize again when the virus, as a dangerous or lethal disease, is no longer able to spread from one person to the next.

And that will happen when everybody who wishes to become immune, safely and quickly, is vaccinated as soon as possible. And everybody else, who therefore wishes to become immune to the disease the old way - by either catching it and recovering, or catching it and dying. Well, they can socialize as much as they like until they catch it and then they can recover or die.

The disease doesn't care how upset teenagers or any other people are. It does care about infecting the next person, regardless of age, level of upset, presence of national flag etc.

Klonker · 06-03-2021 02:36AM

robindch wrote: »

It'll be safe to socialize again when the virus, as a dangerous or lethal disease, is no longer able to spread from one person to the next.

And that will happen when everybody who wishes to become immune, safely and quickly, is vaccinated as soon as possible. And everybody else, who therefore wishes to become immune to the disease the old way - by either catching it and recovering, or catching it and dying. Well, they can socialize as much as they like until they catch it and then they can recover or die.

The disease doesn't care how upset teenagers or any other people are. It does care about infecting the next person, regardless of age, level of upset, presence of national flag etc.

Are you sure about that? Because Leo has mentioned more than once about the possibility of restrictions again this winter coming. That should be well after anyone who wants a vaccine getting one.

And the vaccine doesn't make you immune. It significantly decreases your chances of getting covid but it isn't 100% so doesn't make you immune (if only). So going by your hypothetically idea for when it'll be safe to socialise is never

ceadaoin. · 06-03-2021 03:10AM

robindch wrote: »

It'll be safe to socialize again when the virus, as a dangerous or lethal disease, is no longer able to spread from one person to the next.

And that will happen when everybody who wishes to become immune, safely and quickly, is vaccinated as soon as possible. And everybody else, who therefore wishes to become immune to the disease the old way - by either catching it and recovering, or catching it and dying. Well, they can socialize as much as they like until they catch it and then they can recover or die.

The disease doesn't care how upset teenagers or any other people are. It does care about infecting the next person, regardless of age, level of upset, presence of national flag etc.

The disease doesn't care about anything. Its a virus. What is with the constant attempts to portray it as some malevolent entity just waiting for someone to be bold so it can pounce?

06-03-2021 10:24AM

robindch wrote: »

It'll be safe to socialize again when the virus, as a dangerous or lethal disease, is no longer able to spread from one person to the next.

And that will happen when everybody who wishes to become immune, safely and quickly, is vaccinated as soon as possible. And everybody else, who therefore wishes to become immune to the disease the old way - by either catching it and recovering, or catching it and dying. Well, they can socialize as much as they like until they catch it and then they can recover or die.

The disease doesn't care how upset teenagers or any other people are. It does care about infecting the next person, regardless of age, level of upset, presence of national flag etc.

Are you a member of NPHET, by any chance?

Note the definite article, "The" - as if to suggest The Disease is somehow a unique horror that stands out from other "diseases" in some clear and pronounced manner. The King doesn't recognize the authority of any other people who call themselves the king.

It's this kind of doom-laden language that has caught on, with terms such as "The Disease" casually thrown around as if we are talking about the 21st century's answer to the Black Death, which killed upwards of half the entire European population.

Philip Nolan, Holohan et al are literally obsessed with this kind of language. And it has caught on like a bad smell among a small number of the population who positively enjoy using this kind of language. Many of them also speak in an authoritative way as if using this kind of language is some kind of validation mechanism.

And furthermore, we should not refer to "the spread of The Disease", any more than we refer to the spread of the common cold as "the spread of The Disease". It's viral spread who, in some people, causes hospitalization and death. In 25% of people, it is asymptomatic spread - yet they are also told they have an active Disease.

JRant · 06-03-2021 10:26AM

robindch wrote: »

It'll be safe to socialize again when the virus, as a dangerous or lethal disease, is no longer able to spread from one person to the next.

And that will happen when everybody who wishes to become immune, safely and quickly, is vaccinated as soon as possible. And everybody else, who therefore wishes to become immune to the disease the old way - by either catching it and recovering, or catching it and dying. Well, they can socialize as much as they like until they catch it and then they can recover or die.

The disease doesn't care how upset teenagers or any other people are. It does care about infecting the next person, regardless of age, level of upset, presence of national flag etc.

Don't forget that it loves alcohol as well. Well only if you don't have a €9 shield of invincibility in front of you. Oh and it loves any time after 10pm as it's a bit of a night owl, don't ya know.

Young people know this isn't a risk to them so are acting accordingly. After a year of restrictions it's completely understandable that fatigue has set in. Especially for this group who are at almost no risk from the virus but have been disproportionately hit economically.

JRant · 06-03-2021 10:30AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Are you a member of NPHET, by any chance?

Note the definite article, "The" - as if to suggest The Disease is somehow a unique horror that stands out from other "diseases" in some clear and pronounced manner. The King doesn't recognize the authority of any other people who call themselves the king.

It's this kind of doom-laden language that has caught on, with terms such as "The Disease" casually thrown around as if we are talking about the 21st century's answer to the Black Death, which killed upwards of half the entire European population.

Philip Nolan, Holohan et al are literally obsessed with this kind of language. And it has caught on like a bad smell among a small number of the population who positively enjoy using this kind of language. Many of them also speak in an authoritative way as if using this kind of language as some kind of validation mechanism.

And furthermore, we should not refer to "the spread of The Disease", any more than we refer to the spread of the common cold as "the spread of The Disease". It's viral spread who, in some people, causes hospitalization and death. In 25% of people, it is asymptomatic spread - yet they are also told they have an active Disease.

We also have D'Variant being talked about in much the same way.

06-03-2021 10:32AM

JRant wrote: »

We also have D'Variant being talked about in much the same way.

And the new variant has been conveniently repackaged and rebaptized as a "new virus".

Same old tricks at work.

Slimy politicians and nefarious NPHET make pregnant these terms.

Boggles · 06-03-2021 10:43AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Slimy politicians and nefarious NPHET make pregnant these terms.

You think our emergency health team is evil?

Seriously?

I mean you can disagree with their recommendations or how they perceive the threat of a pandemic.

But to imply that a collection of health care specialists trying to advise through a once in a generation pandemic are evil is pretty worrying TBF.

06-03-2021 10:54AM

Boggles wrote: »

You think our emergency health team is evil?

Seriously?

I mean you can disagree with their recommendations or how they perceive the threat of a pandemic.

But to imply that a collection of health care specialists trying to advise through a once in a generation pandemic are evil is pretty worrying TBF.

I think terrifying Irish expectant mothers with the prospect of stillbirth, without a shred of evidence, is a positively nefarious act.

Boggles · 06-03-2021 10:56AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I think terrifying Irish expectant mothers with the prospect of stillbirth, without a shred of evidence, is a positively nefarious act.

Do you know many terrified expectant mothers or have you just assumed they are now terrified?

ypres5 · 06-03-2021 10:59AM

Boggles wrote: »

Do you know many terrified expectant mothers or have you just assumed they are now terrified?

well i somehow doubt they're partying in the streets at the prospect of potentially losing their babies if they catch covid. it's immoral of nphet to spread something that's basically a hypothesis at this point not to mention exploiting the tragedies of 4 families to rub it in

06-03-2021 11:00AM

Boggles wrote: »

Do you know many terrified expectant mothers or have you just assumed they are now terrified?

If you were an Irish expectant mother, and you heard the National Public Health Emergency Team, correlating stillbirth with COVID-19 infection, wouldn't you be even slightly more concerned? That at any moment, you could catch the virus and this could cause stillbirth? You wouldn't be at all concerned, really!?

Even if no Irish expectant mother was worried, it is still a wicked thing to say.

I emphasize "Irish" because it appears that COVID-19 is a racist virus that only causes stillbirth among the Irish expectant mother population. No other nationality is affected, it appears.

And there are some soon-to-be-fathers on here who have openly expressed concern at this latest revelation from NPHET.

Boggles · 06-03-2021 11:06AM

Deleted User wrote: »

If you were an Irish expectant mother, and you heard the National Public Health Emergency Team, correlating stillbirth with COVID-19 infection, wouldn't you be even slightly more concerned?

Well I would probably base is on what Glynn actually said and not what the constantly outraged have turned it into.

Either way I wouldn't think them evil, that's just bonkers.

JRant · 06-03-2021 11:10AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you were an Irish expectant mother, and you heard the National Public Health Emergency Team, correlating stillbirth with COVID-19 infection, wouldn't you be even slightly more concerned? That at any moment, you could catch the virus and this could cause stillbirth? You wouldn't be at all concerned, really!?

Even if no Irish expectant mother was worried, it is still a wicked thing to say.

I emphasize "Irish" because it appears that COVID-19 is a racist virus that only causes stillbirth among the Irish expectant mother population. No other nationality is affected, it appears.

And there are some soon-to-be-fathers on here who have openly expressed concern at this latest revelation from NPHET.

There is so little known about stillbirths or miscarriages even with the incredible advances in medicine. To come out and mention it without a shred of scientific data to back it up, while also counting them as COVID deaths, shows where their heads are at.

They aren't a nefarious bunch out to get us. What they are is a bunch of super conservative medics and career civil servants. Big difference IMO but the way they communicate some of this really blurs the lines for a lot of people.

"Like a new virus", "D'Variant", "the stillborns", all point to a somewhat anti science approach. Add in the use of extended lockdowns and baffling restrictions it's clear they are not working from the best available science.

06-03-2021 11:11AM

Boggles wrote: »

Well I would probably base is on what Glynn actually said and not what the constantly outraged have turned it into.

Either way I wouldn't think them evil, that's just bonkers.

Only you have introduced the term "evil". I've never used that phraseology to describe NPHET.

But I do describe them as nefarious precisely because there is what is now obvious intent to sow fear into the general population - to keep the population in check. I don't say this as if to suggest there is some conspiracy, but it is no doubt part of their long-term strategy. Disseminating terms such as, "The Disease" - of which we have had exposure to in this thread; broadcasting to the population a non-existent correlation between stillbirth and COVID-19 - terrifying half to death expectant mothers and prospective fathers; and positively failing as an entity if you compare the sheer level of lockdown Ireland has experienced; and no concern whatsoever for the collateral damage of terminal lockdown. And I also believe that the power has gone to Holohan's head.

Yes, this is wicked behavior.

ypres5 · 06-03-2021 11:11AM

Boggles wrote: »

Well I would probably base is on what Glynn actually said and not what the constantly outraged have turned it into.

Either way I wouldn't think them evil, that's just bonkers.

the thing is though boggles people aren't rational when it comes to their children. even if expectant mothers were told covid presented a 1 in a million risk to their babies theyd still panic

06-03-2021 11:13AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And the new variant has been conveniently repackaged and rebaptized as a "new virus".

Same old tricks at work.

Slimy politicians and nefarious NPHET make pregnant these terms.

And what were previously known as 'mutations' are now 'mutants', 'mutants' sounding scarier than 'mutations'.

06-03-2021 11:14AM

Deleted User wrote: »

And what were previously known as 'mutations' are now 'mutants', 'mutants' sounding scarier than 'mutations'.

Yes, I should have included that in my list of what constitutes nefarious NPHET.

Mutant almost has a cancer-like quality to it or resembling some dangerous alien species set on destroying the world.

Mutation is a boring genetic process that increases survivability.

I have no doubt at all why NPHET has opted to use the term mutant.

"Mutant new virus that spreads The Disease" VERSUS "variant".

Boggles · 06-03-2021 11:35AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Only you have introduced the term "evil". I've never used that phraseology to describe NPHET.

Nefarious - flagrantly wicked or impious : evil.

Deleted User wrote: »

But I do describe them as nefarious precisely because there is what is now obvious intent to sow fear into the general population - to keep the population in check. I don't say this as if to suggest there is some conspiracy, but it is no doubt part of their long-term strategy. Disseminating terms such as, "The Disease" - of which we have had exposure to in this thread; broadcasting to the population a non-existent correlation between stillbirth and COVID-19 - terrifying half to death expectant mothers and prospective fathers; and positively failing as an entity if you compare the sheer level of lockdown Ireland has experienced; and no concern whatsoever for the collateral damage of terminal lockdown. And I also believe that the power has gone to Holohan's head.

Yes, this is wicked behavior.

It's the very definition of a conspiracy.

You can make the argument that Glynn should not have released what he stressed was preliminary information, but of course the other side of that coin is, if it had got out through other channels he would have been accused of suppressing information.

Lose - Lose.

But the assertion that he released it because he is Nefarious - Wicked - Evil is just absolutely baseless and like I said the very definition of a conspiracy theory.

robindch · 06-03-2021 11:36AM

ceadaoin. wrote: »

The disease doesn't care about anything. Its a virus. What is with the constant attempts to portray it as some malevolent entity just waiting for someone to be bold so it can pounce?

Main reason, I suppose, that a lot of people portray covid as something awful - as you say, just waiting to pounce and infect somebody - is because that's exactly how the disease behaves.

06-03-2021 11:42AM

Boggles wrote: »

Nefarious - flagrantly wicked or impious : evil.

It's the very definition of a conspiracy.

You can make the argument that Glynn should not have released what he stressed was preliminary information, but of course the other side of that coin is, if it had got out through other channels he would have been accused of suppressing information.

Lose - Lose.

But the assertion that he released it because he is Nefarious - Wicked - Evil is just absolutely baseless and like I said the very definition of a conspiracy theory.

There's no conspiracy, however much you repeat it. NPHET is very open about what they state; they're hiding nothing.

And you are conflating nefarious and evil, not me. Nefarious, as per standard definition, refers to wickedness. Telling expectant mothers without a shred of evidence there is a risk of stillbirth, is positively wicked. I stand by that conclusion.

And as for Glynn adding a cautionary warning that it was "preliminary information" is not good enough. This is the Trumpian strategy of adding tiny caveats to major headlines as a "Get Out of Jail Free"-card when the issue is brought up. Classic example is when he said Mexicans were "rapists", but then later in the remarks followed up with, "but some are probably nice people". Trump knew that the "rapists" part is what would grab the headlines.

The same is true regarding Glynn's remarks the other day.

robindch · 06-03-2021 11:42AM

Klonker wrote: »

robindch wrote:

And that will happen when everybody who wishes to become immune, safely and quickly, is vaccinated as soon as possible. And everybody else, who therefore wishes to become immune to the disease the old way - by either catching it and recovering, or catching it and dying. Well, they can socialize as much as they like until they catch it and then they can recover or die.

And the vaccine doesn't make you immune. It significantly decreases your chances of getting covid but it isn't 100% so doesn't make you immune (if only). So going by your hypothetically idea for when it'll be safe to socialise is never

Unfortunately, English doesn't have a single word meaning "confers a significant degree of protection against acquiring an infectious agent, and also confers a significant degree of protection against the disease caused by the infectious agent".

Until somebody does produce such a word, and until such time as it becomes common currency, a lot of people will continue to use the word "immune" as shorthand for the same idea, since it's fairly close to what, in effect, is happening.

Boggles · 06-03-2021 11:46AM

Deleted User wrote: »

And you are conflating nefarious and evil, not me. Nefarious, as per standard definition, refers to wickedness.

I am not conflating anything, I didn't actually have any input to the English dictionary.

It's the phrase you used, at least own it.

Deleted User wrote: »

And as for Glynn adding a cautionary warning that it was "preliminary information" is not good enough. This is the Trumpian strategy of adding tiny caveats to major headlines as a "Get Out of Jail Free"-card when the issue is brought up. Classic example is when he said Mexicans were "rapists", but then later in the remarks followed up with, "but some are probably nice people". Trump knew that the "rapists" part is what would grab the headlines.

The same is true regarding Glynn's remarks the other day.

Jesus. Glynn and Trump 2 peas of a pod.

Anyway back in reality.

What it seems you would have preferred is the Health Protection Surveillance Centre report the age range of suspected related deaths last Thursday as 0-97 and for Glynn just to leave it hanging there.

There would have been zero questions on it. None whatsoever.

06-03-2021 11:48AM

Boggles wrote: »

Jesus. Glynn and Trump 2 peas of a pod.

Anyway back in reality.

What it seems you would have preferred is the Health Protection Surveillance Centre report the age range of suspected related deaths last Thursday as 0-97 and for Glynn just to leave it hanging there.

There would have been zero questions on it. None whatsoever.

Not two peas in a pod, but messaging matters - and the two examples share that trait in common.

As for Glynn, I don't think there should be any NPHET press conferences at all - period.

robindch · 06-03-2021 11:48AM

Deleted User wrote: »

In 25% of people, it is asymptomatic spread - yet they are also told they have an active Disease.

Current figure in the UK appears to between 17% and 20%:

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4851

Main reason they'd be told that they're infected is because they're infected with covid-19.

06-03-2021 11:49AM

robindch wrote: »

Current figure in the UK appears to between 17% and 20%:

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4851

Main reason they'd be told that they're infected is because they're infected with covid-19.

There are a variety of figures - some lower than 25%, some higher than 25%.

The true extent may not be known for some time.

In the meantime, we can stop referring to this specific infection as The Disease - as if there is only one malevolent personified disease in the world.

robindch · 06-03-2021 11:51AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Mutation is a boring genetic process that increases survivability.

Genetic mutation generally produces problems which decrease, not increase, the chances of the host organism surviving to the age of reproduction.

Deleted User wrote: »

I have no doubt at all why NPHET has opted to use the term mutant.

They use it because - like the other terms which people seem to find offensive - it accurate describes what's going on.

robindch · 06-03-2021 11:54AM

Deleted User wrote: »

In the meantime, we can stop referring to this specific infection as The Disease - as if there is only one malevolent personified disease in the world.

If you find the term "the disease" offensive to the point of wishing to banish it from public discourse - then, by all means, don't use it yourself.

JRant · 06-03-2021 11:59AM

Boggles wrote: »

I am not conflating anything, I didn't actually have any input to the English dictionary.

It's the phrase you used, at least own it.

Jesus. Glynn and Trump 2 peas of a pod.

Anyway back in reality.

What it seems you would have preferred is the Health Protection Surveillance Centre report the age range of suspected related deaths last Thursday as 0-97 and for Glynn just to leave it hanging there.

There would have been zero questions on it. None whatsoever.

They should not have counted those stillborns as COVID deaths until absolutely sure.

06-03-2021 12:01PM

robindch wrote: »

Genetic mutation generally produces problems which decrease, not increase, the chances of the host organism surviving to the age of reproduction.They use it because - like the other terms which people seem to find offensive - it accurate describes what's going on.

In the context of COVID-19, when we talk about variants and mutations etc., it refers to those which have higher transmissibility.

Generally yes, mutations are overwhelmingly deleterious to the survival of the organism.

robindch wrote: »

If you find the term "the disease" offensive to the point of wishing to banish it from public discourse - then, by all means, don't use it yourself.

It's quite obvious why the definite article, "The", is added.

It adds malevolence. It's also inaccurate.

> 90 percent of people have latent herpes virus in their body. We don't walk around saying to each other, "I have the disease in my body".

When we catch the common cold or flu, we don't walk around saying, "I have the disease this year".

When we have any form of asymptomatic infection, we don't walk around saying, "I have the disease in my body".

But with COVID-19, some people throw these conventions out and refer to COVID-19 in all its forms - symptomatic and asymptomatic - as "The Disease". And it's done to add some extra malevolence to the infection.

Furthermore, COVID-19 in some patients causes ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome), which ultimately is what kills many patients. Many respiratory viruses are in circulation each year that cause ARDS. COVID-19 is no different.

So using the term is:

a) fashionable among a small number of people
b) inaccurate use of language
c) used to add malevolence to the virus, far more than it deserves
d) adding a definite article is completely unnecessary, no more required than for any other virus that causes ARDS

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

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX Read OP For Mod Warnings