Relaxation of Restrictions, Part X Read OP For Mod Warnings

PTH2009 · 11-04-2021 05:00PM

PintOfView wrote: »

Why do you think the restrictions were ridiculous?
What would you have done if you were the leader of the country?

Create a plan like England

NPHET calling the shots here

PintOfView · 11-04-2021 05:01PM

Multipass wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3128886/chile-covid-19-vaccination-drive-adds-sinovac-efficacy-data

3% efficacy after first dose, rising to 56% after second.
You say as we get near the finishing line - that line keeps shifting, and there is no acknowledgement or discussion by anyone in government of it even existing.

Thanks, the 3% efficacy after first dose could account for Chile's poor performance so far.

As regards the finishing line, it only shifted due to supplies of the vaccine not coming through as expected.
We're being told there will be a much bigger supply coming through in the next couple of months, so that's what I'm basing it on.

And no, the government don't appear to be spelling it out, they may be afraid of making promises they can't guarantee to keep.
However, being realistic, what do you think will happen when 70% of the population are vaccinated?

Graham · 11-04-2021 05:02PM

PTH2009 wrote: »

Create a plan

Reported here:

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0330/1207069-covid-ireland-update/

_Kaiser_ · 11-04-2021 05:06PM

2 deaths announced this evening, one from March. Still at that I see.

Bit like the nonsense idea of test centres that they only want people who aren't sick to go to.

Walk in centres would have been a good idea this time last year, but at this point it's a mix of sunk cost fallacy and good old ass covering on the part of NPHET and the HSE.

11-04-2021 05:08PM

Graham wrote: »

Imagine people thinking vaccinations are a reasonable response to a virus :rolleyes:

Imagine thinking locking down the country perpetually because you've pinned your hopes on failing vaccine supplies is a viable strategy.

The mindset towards this explains why the Government feels they can get away with literally anything. Holy christ.

Graham · 11-04-2021 05:09PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Walk in centres would have been a good idea this time last year, but at this point it's a mix of sunk cost fallacy and good old ass covering on the part of NPHET and the HSE.

Struggling to understand why anyone would be against identifying asymptomatic carriers.

FintanMcluskey · 11-04-2021 05:09PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

2 deaths announced this evening, one from March. Still at that I see.

Bit like the nonsense idea of test centres that they only want people who aren't sick to go to.

Walk in centres would have been a good idea this time last year, but at this point it's a mix of sunk cost fallacy and good old ass covering on the part of NPHET and the HSE.

I was listening to the news and they interviewed some doctor from Monaghan who warned people not to become complacent tomorrow when lockdown lifts!!!

It’s still a lockdown

PintOfView · 11-04-2021 05:10PM

M_Murphy57 wrote: »

The Irish government quarantined vaccinated arrivals from Israel this week and they were only released because they had the means to bring a legal challenge.

Why would we look to Israel for "the future is brighter" when the minister for health has made it very clear hes completely incompetent and lacks any ability to understand risk and make sound decisions ?

A year ago I'd gave thought what I just wrote was conspiracy theory but this is our current lived reality. The only vaccine "bonus" to date is to allow 2 people to meet indoors!

You'll have to take up with the government what they do as regards implementing the restrictions.

And it won't be just the minister looking at the vaccine results in Israel, and in the Uk, etc.
We'll all be able to see, as time goes on, and if their outcomes are good why wouldn't we follow?

It's a bit early to expect a vaccine bonus for the bulk of the population just yet,
but the nursing homes, and the health service, seem to be seeing a big improvement.

PintOfView · 11-04-2021 05:16PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

2 deaths announced this evening, one from March. Still at that I see.

Bit like the nonsense idea of test centres that they only want people who aren't sick to go to.

Walk in centres would have been a good idea this time last year, but at this point it's a mix of sunk cost fallacy and good old ass covering on the part of NPHET and the HSE.

Deaths may not be notified to whoever collects this info for weeks, and sometimes months, after the death.
This is the same for most countries.

As regards walk in test centres, what's wrong with random testing?
They appear to be getting from 2% to 5% positivity rate, so isn't it a good thing to inform those people to self quarantine for 10 days?

PintOfView · 11-04-2021 05:19PM

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

I was listening to the news and they interviewed some doctor from Monaghan who warned people not to become complacent tomorrow when lockdown lifts!!!

It’s still a lockdown

We're not out of the woods yet,
what's wrong with someone asking people not to be complacent?

GooglePlus · 11-04-2021 05:19PM

Dis is bleedin mad we shud be allowed out and do what we want at this stage, police state at it again and the government not a clue is what. Dis can only go on so long until we the people take to the streets and move them government lads off the seats in the dail, I swear it's all a way to keep us under the thumb. What else cud it be like?

normanoffside · 11-04-2021 05:19PM

Graham wrote: »

Struggling to understand why anyone would be against identifying asymptomatic carriers.

Because they have absolutely no effect on the spread of the disease- they only pass it on to 0.7% of their own household contacts (1 in 142)

I posted this comprehensive study last week here which shows that:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774102

Study wrote:

To study the transmissibility of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 index cases, eFigure 8 in the Supplement summarizes 27 studies19-21,23-26,30,32-34,44,45,47,50,52-54,56,59-61,63,64,68,69,72 reporting household secondary attack rates from symptomatic index cases and 4 studies26,43,44,52 from asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases. Estimated mean household secondary attack rate from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) was significantly higher than from asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%; P < .001), although there were few studies in the latter group. These findings are consistent with other household studies28,70 reporting asymptomatic index cases as having limited role in household transmission.

CalamariFritti · 11-04-2021 05:22PM

Graham wrote: »

Struggling to understand why anyone would be against identifying asymptomatic carriers.

I would have believed that had it happened this time last year or even 6 months ago. At this stage it just smells of boosting the case numbers to curb public pressure on the ultra conservative reopening.

Lumen · 11-04-2021 05:23PM

But asymptomatic includes presymptomatic, so you can pick up people who haven't yet shown symptoms, preventing them from spreading in the period before symptoms start.

arccosh · 11-04-2021 05:25PM

mille100piedi wrote: »

was the SPARS Pandemic Scenario written in 2017 a strategic thought provoker study too?

https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/pubs_archive/pubs-pdfs/2017/spars-pandemic-scenario.pdf

So where's the link between this and airports closing from zero carbon climate change, that your other document was about?

Graham · 11-04-2021 05:25PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I would have believed that had it happened this time last year or even 6 months ago. At this stage it just smells of prepping up the case numbers to curb public pressure on the ultra conservative reopening.

That makes zero sense.

If you want restrictions lifted faster, identifying cases before they go on to spread further can only be a good thing.

normanoffside · 11-04-2021 05:30PM

Graham wrote: »

That makes zero sense.

If you want restrictions lifted faster, identifying cases before they go on to spread further can only be a good thing.

I see you are still ignoring the proof that they don't spread the infection.

seamusk84 · 11-04-2021 05:32PM

Graham wrote: »

Reported here:

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0330/1207069-covid-ireland-update/

That is not a “plan” in the slightest definition of the word. It’s completely arbitrary, gives no sense of clarity and I don’t mean dates: I mean the actual various stages of restriction lifting.

Like when can we meet in our gardens? Jeeze even something that simple, at what stage does that occur. Bloody hell this is just unreal at this stage.

Graham · 11-04-2021 05:33PM

normanoffside wrote: »

I see you are still ignoring the proof that they don't spread the infection.

I see your ignoring the fact that presymptomatic carriers are also identified.

Again, why would anyone not want to identify as many people with the virus as possible? There's just no logic to it.

CalamariFritti · 11-04-2021 05:33PM

Graham wrote: »

That makes zero sense.

If you want restrictions lifted faster, identifying cases before they go on to spread further can only be a good thing.

It would if we had a rational and reasonable approach to covid. But in our world of the George Lee's and permanent NPHET concerns higher case numbers only mean one thing. Scary scary scary, we must slow down, def'ny not speed up.

You may not agree with my interpretation of it, but its hardly implausible.

Graham · 11-04-2021 05:34PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

It would if we had a rational and reasonable approach to covid. But in our world of the George Lee's and permanent NPHET concerns higher case numbers only mean one thing. Scary scary scary, we must slow down, def'ny not speed up.

You may not agree with it but its hardly implausible.

Doesn't explain why we should not try and identify people with the virus.

GooglePlus · 11-04-2021 05:35PM

normanoffside wrote: »

I see you are still ignoring the proof that they don't spread the infection.

As someone has already pointed out, asymptomatic can also include those yet to show symptoms yet, potential future spreaders. Even that aside, if someone who is asymptomatic doesn't spread (that is still very much up in the air by the way), identifying them allows us to build a better picture of how this virus works, provide more accurate mortality rates, it's just good data collection.

Why would the HSE, NPHET, the government, want to "prop up" numbers. What does that acheive, please answer me that.

GooglePlus · 11-04-2021 05:37PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

It would if we had a rational and reasonable approach to covid. But in our world of the George Lee's and permanent NPHET concerns higher case numbers only mean one thing. Scary scary scary, we must slow down, def'ny not speed up.

You may not agree with my interpretation of it, but its hardly implausible.

Tell me why they would want to do this?

CalamariFritti · 11-04-2021 05:39PM

Graham wrote: »

Doesn't explain why we should not try and identify people with the virus.

Shotgun fire testing never made any sense whatsoever.

The only thing that ever made sense was representative testing. Something we avoided like the plague and still do.

One wonders why. Cos to me thats the only way of finding the actual incidence and the actual IFR and the actual hospitalisation rate etc etc.

CalamariFritti · 11-04-2021 05:40PM

GooglePlus wrote: »

Tell me why they would want to do this?

Maybe just read my last two posts again? I said it there. I repeat it for you. To avoid anything that suggests to the public that we should be easing quicker. We all know they consider themselves captains of public behaviour control.

Btw I am not saying that's what they are doing. I dont know what they are doing. I'm not privy to their meetings and any of us can only speculate. I'm just saying at this point in the show it smells of that.

PintOfView · 11-04-2021 05:42PM

normanoffside wrote: »

I see you are still ignoring the proof that they don't spread the infection.

See --> https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774707
This article from Jan 2021 says
"the model presented here estimated that more than half of transmission comes from asymptomatic individuals. In the absence of effective and widespread use of therapeutics or vaccines that can shorten or eliminate infectivity, successful control of SARS-CoV-2 cannot rely solely on identifying and isolating symptomatic cases"

So are you sure about your proof that asymptomatic individuals don't spread covid?

Graham · 11-04-2021 05:44PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Maybe just read my last two posts again? I said it there. I repeat it for you. To avoid anything that suggests to the public that we should be easing quicker. We all know they consider themselves captains of public behaviour.

Yeah, that makes even less sense.

I'm going to file that under conspiracy theory.

GooglePlus · 11-04-2021 05:52PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Maybe just read my last two posts again? I said it there. I repeat it for you. To avoid anything that suggests to the public that we should be easing quicker. We all know they consider themselves captains of public behaviour control.

Btw I am not saying that's what they are doing. I dont know what they are doing. I'm not privy to their meetings and any of us can only speculate. I'm just saying at this point in the show it smells of that.

Well on your speculation, I can understand why they might want to take caution when it comes to giving the public an inch, because we will take a mile. The fatigue has truly taken hold and any mention of easing will be seen as a do what you want message by many. I do think that they're still doing what they feel is best for us and our health system. We're not far long from the other side of this ****e, and they're probably just trying to save lives until the end.

CalamariFritti · 11-04-2021 05:54PM

Graham wrote: »

Yeah, that makes even less sense.

I'm going to file that under conspiracy theory.

The kill all argument when people run out of arguments.

Maybe it is maybe it isn't. But NPHET have history on such nonsense praying for bad weather on bank holiday weekends and showing us worry-o-meters I would not put it past them for this to be a consideration.

normanoffside · 11-04-2021 05:56PM

Graham wrote: »

I see your ignoring the fact that presymptomatic carriers are also identified.

Again, why would anyone not want to identify as many people with the virus as possible? There's just no logic to it.

Yeah presymptomatic and Asymptomatic carriers combined pass it on to 1 in 142 people that they live with.
The Studies mention both.

Symptomatic people pass it on 25 times more frequently, they are the ones that need to be identified in order to stop disease spread but you are not allowed to go to these test centres if you have symptoms.

Therefore the walk in centres only purpose is case mining.

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

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part X Read OP For Mod Warnings