Relaxation of Restrictions, Part XI Read OP For Mod Warnings

Boggles · 09-06-2021 06:39PM

MOH wrote: »

The vast majority of our cases were identified as community transmission because the man in charge of epidemiological modelling dismissed proper contact tracing as an "academic exercise", and we didn't do any. We have zero idea how those cases occurred. Given that telling the public they didn't have a clue what was happening wasn't politically acceptable, picking something that sounded plausible was their only option.

Of course we do.

Indoor environments where masks were not worn.

Where else?

hynesie08 · 09-06-2021 06:41PM

GT89 wrote: »

They were closed to the general public though

But the rules never changed, a hotel has always been able to provide food and drink if they opened.

hynesie08 · 09-06-2021 06:42PM

normanoffside wrote: »

It's now 10 days since Tony posted about his concern over the outdoor drinking scenes on Sth William street and all the usual suspects predicted big spikes.

Now we have had two days in a row of numbers under 300, todays case numbers are the lowest in 2021.

Such as?

normanoffside · 09-06-2021 06:47PM

hynesie08 wrote: »

Such as?

A few examples from the replies to that tweet.

https://twitter.com/Empress22223/status/1398741415606296576

https://twitter.com/MiriamShinners/status/1398741630023262208

https://twitter.com/vmoloney/status/1398741996190191616

https://twitter.com/ChristinaDub79/status/1398729787074568195

GeorgeBailey · 09-06-2021 06:56PM

normanoffside wrote: »

A few examples from the replies to that tweet.

https://twitter.com/Empress22223/status/1398741415606296576

https://twitter.com/MiriamShinners/status/1398741630023262208

https://twitter.com/vmoloney/status/1398741996190191616

https://twitter.com/ChristinaDub79/status/1398729787074568195

Are they the usual suspects? They're all new to me. Even the ISAG crowd were saying they didn't really have a problem with the outdoor meetups.

hynesie08 · 09-06-2021 06:58PM

normanoffside wrote: »

A few examples from the replies to that tweet.

https://twitter.com/Empress22223/status/1398741415606296576

https://twitter.com/MiriamShinners/status/1398741630023262208

https://twitter.com/vmoloney/status/1398741996190191616

https://twitter.com/ChristinaDub79/status/1398729787074568195

"Usual suspects" = joined in March or has less than 300 followers, wow......

Boggles · 09-06-2021 07:08PM

Okay own up, who on here is "Christina D"?

charlie14 · 09-06-2021 07:17PM

GT89 wrote: »

But it's true there is no reasonable explanation to allow hotels to open their indoor dining and bar areas and leave normal pubs and restauants outdoor only.

Hotel indoor dining and bar areas at present can only serve hotel residents. That has been the case throughout.
They are now allowed to serve residents that are not there for essential business reasons at this stage of reopening based on vaccination levels, where the maximum number availing of their services is known at any given time, unlike general indoor dining and pubs.
As all hotels now take credit card details upon registering, should there be a problem, unlike restaurants and pubs contact tracing could be very easily done..

_Kaiser_ · 09-06-2021 07:19PM

normanoffside wrote: »

A few examples from the replies to that tweet.

https://twitter.com/Empress22223/status/1398741415606296576

https://twitter.com/MiriamShinners/status/1398741630023262208

https://twitter.com/vmoloney/status/1398741996190191616

https://twitter.com/ChristinaDub79/status/1398729787074568195

The combination of smug pontificating, unwarranted fear and hysteria, and pure begrudgery in those tweets is genuinely disturbing.

It's also clear why they're keeping it up too. They've lost the ability to live normal lives and engage in normal social interaction, so it's in their interest that this goes on as long as possible.

I'm not being at all smart or funny with this post either. That right there is the damage to people's mental health from Tony's ongoing finger wagging and doom mongering. I genuinely hope he finds himself in front of a tribunal when this is all over.

moonage · 09-06-2021 07:21PM

User1998 wrote: »

Extremely irritating
Uncomfortable
Look absolutely ridiculous
False sense of security
Can’t hear anyone speak
Bad for deaf people
Can barely make out facial expressions
Completely against human nature
No one wears them correctly
No one washes hands before wearing one
Still loads of cases despite mask wearing
Only been worn because its law
Extremely bad for the environment
Littered all over shop car parks

etc etc ..

Good news: the legislation on mandatory face coverings expired today, 9th of June!

It doesn't seem to be reported on the mainstream propaganda channels.

_Kaiser_ · 09-06-2021 07:22PM

moonage wrote: »

Good news: the legislation on mandatory face coverings expired today, 9th of June!

It doesn't seem to be reported on the mainstream propaganda channels.

Isn't that waiting for Michael D to sign, or did he reject it?

Beechwoodspark · 09-06-2021 07:25PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The combination of smug pontificating, unwarranted fear and hysteria, and pure begrudgery in those tweets is genuinely disturbing.

It's also clear why they're keeping it up too. They've lost the ability to live normal lives and engage in normal social interaction, so it's in their interest that this goes on as long as possible.

I'm not being at all smart or funny with this post either. That right there is the damage to people's mental health from Tony's ongoing finger wagging and doom mongering. I genuinely hope he finds himself in front of a tribunal when this is all over.

Kaiser - humbly and respect where it’s due but your post is ott

Somewhere in the middle is where the truth is

Me personally, hell, I’m watching the daily figures like a damn hawk

I’m HOPING against hope that we can trust the system this time but man, I am no way naive about this situation

Be times I would love to say “pandemic over, done and dusted folks” then....

I switch on the international news and see that damn virus ragin’ thru Asia Africa and South America

How many mutations have there been the last few months?

Kaiser I hope and reverently want this cluster fcuk over with....

Believe me I do...

I just don’t fully buy into the “it’s all over folks” narrative quiet yet

moonage · 09-06-2021 07:32PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Isn't that waiting for Michael D to sign, or did he reject it?

It's Stephen Donnelly who would sign it.

It would normally be signed several days before the next extention, unless they've forgetten about it.

normanoffside · 09-06-2021 07:32PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The combination of smug pontificating, unwarranted fear and hysteria, and pure begrudgery in those tweets is genuinely disturbing.

It's also clear why they're keeping it up too. They've lost the ability to live normal lives and engage in normal social interaction, so it's in their interest that this goes on as long as possible.

I'm not being at all smart or funny with this post either. That right there is the damage to people's mental health from Tony's ongoing finger wagging and doom mongering. I genuinely hope he finds himself in front of a tribunal when this is all over.

The more worrying thing in the grand scale is that the Gards jumped to the sound of his (unscientific) tune and began clearing the streets the next day in the Guise of 'Public Health'
That all directly led to the confrontations the next weekend as result of overzealous policing and all the wrong elements of youth turning up looking for a bit of trouble.

He has caused a mess in society and none of it is bases on public health.

Beechwoodspark · 09-06-2021 07:35PM

normanoffside wrote: »

The more worrying thing in the grand scale is that the Gards jumped to the sound of his (unscientific) tune and began clearing the streets the next day in the Guise of 'Public Health'
That all directly led to the confrontations the next weekend as result of overzealous policing and all the wrong elements of youth turning up looking for a bit of trouble.

He has caused a mess in society and none of it is bases on public health.

Sorry now but the “big virus with a little name” (kudos to Prince) caused a mess in society - not the CMO

normanoffside · 09-06-2021 07:51PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Sorry now but the “big virus with a little name” (kudos to Prince) caused a mess in society - not the CMO

Yeah but his incorrect and unscientific approach to it is also causing problems.
He is not the solution, at times he is part of the problem.

How he can't get simple concepts like that people should be encouraged to socialise outdoors or his continued misunderstanding of antigen testing is simply mind boggling at this stage.

the kelt · 09-06-2021 08:03PM

Boggles wrote: »

Okay own up, who on here is "Christina D"?

If they started editing all their tweets I could give a good guess!

charlie14 · 09-06-2021 08:40PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The combination of smug pontificating, unwarranted fear and hysteria, and pure begrudgery in those tweets is genuinely disturbing.

It's also clear why they're keeping it up too. They've lost the ability to live normal lives and engage in normal social interaction, so it's in their interest that this goes on as long as possible.

I'm not being at all smart or funny with this post either. That right there is the damage to people's mental health from Tony's ongoing finger wagging and doom mongering. I genuinely hope he finds himself in front of a tribunal when this is all over.

I imagine quite a few countries will hold inquiries into the handling of this pandemic.
Unfortunately I cannot see a representative of the open up everything right now brigade from the outset giving evidence to one. Findings on that proposal would be interesting.

09-06-2021 09:47PM

MOH wrote: »

20 day doubling is not negligible, but no such thing happened after indoor dining opened. It will probably not shock anyone that yet again that's an outright lie.

When indoor hospitality reopened at the end of June cases were about 16 per day. There was no downward trend, there was a straight horizontal line.
3 weeks later, there was still a stable horizontal line with about 18-20 cases per day.
But in the meantime the number of tests being conducted had increased 250% which accounts for the additional cases - the positive rate actually dropped in the interim, and continued to do so.

There was a spike in the 7-day positive rate around the August bank holiday, after which there was a steady decrease for the remainder of August, except for another blip at the end.

And then schools opened, and that was the end of that.
Every measure started an uphill trend that continued until the end of October, just before level 5 kicked in.

You can lie about the figures all you want, but they're publicly available and quite easy to see.

Positive rate when hospitality opened: 0.5
Positive rate three weeks later: 0.2
Peak around August bank holiday: 1.8
When schools opened: 1.2 (eight weeks after hospitality opened)
Three weeks after that: 2.3 (there's your 20 day doubling - due to school, not hospitality)
Peak seven weeks after school open: 7.3

Thanks for posting link to data that shows exactly what I said it shows.

Your selection of positive rate as reflective of incidence rates is bizarre. Criteria for testing was the same throughout the period in question so case numbers are the measure.

So next time you try to accuse someone of lying, actually have something to back up your accusation

gozunda · 09-06-2021 09:48PM

MOH wrote: »

Of course it's possible. Most people start showing symptoms after 4/5 days. Assume a couple of days after that to get a test and for the results to filter through to the official figures, and you'll start seeing the effects of a change about a week later. If your using a 14-day average as your metric for comparison, you'll have a full set of "post" data about 3 weeks after the change.
That's if there isn't any other major change in the same period, which there wasn't after hospitality reopened. Which is irrelevant anyway, since there wasn't any major increase anyway.
Also, your claim didn't stop our Minister for Health calling the EY report "unambiguous evidence" that pubs outside Dublin being open for two weeks was major covid contributor. Despite the report itself citing numerous other potential contributing factors.
We certainly don't know that, can you link to sources please? They don't match the figures on the Covid data portal.
Besides, that's also another blatant manipulation of figures.- First off, indoor dining opened at the end of June, so including cases during June is just a deliberate attempt to boost the increase.
- Secondly, you're deliberately attempting to frame that as a large increase. That increase, over the 3-month period you're using for some reason, works out at just 40 cases per day.
- Third, you're completely ignoring the massive increase in the number of tests conducted, and thus deliberately comparing apples with oranges. In the first week of June there were 18,000 tests. In the last week of August there were 62,000 tests. Comparing raw case numbers between the start and end of a long period, when you're doing over three times as many tests at the end, isn't a valid measure of anything. You've no idea how many additional cases you would have found at the start if you'd done the same number of tests. Comparing what percentage of people tested positive is the only realistic way of comparing the two. And the positive rate was lower at the end of August than the start of June.The vast majority of our cases were identified as community transmission because the man in charge of epidemiological modelling dismissed proper contact tracing as an "academic exercise", and we didn't do any. We have zero idea how those cases occurred. Given that telling the public they didn't have a clue what was happening wasn't politically acceptable, picking something that sounded plausible was their only option.I'll admit, I'm surprised, it sounded plausible to me. But the figures just don't bear it out. Yet that doesn't stop cheerleaders for the government total mismanagement of the pandemic from deliberately distorting the data to try to prove otherwise.

Pity you didn't actually understand what was written or at least read it properly - but rather bizarrely went off on an very long winded rant liberaly peppered with your own assumptions.

Btw case numbers taken from daily release of figures from gov.ie eg. 1st June. See:
https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/6131b-statement-from-the-national-public-health-emergency-team-monday-1-june/. And no not 'framed as a large increase" btw.

That said you've disagreed with my comment on transmission and then go on to say more or less the exact same thing a couple of paragraphs down. Really could not be bothered going line for line through that mountain of verbage. But no matter.

09-06-2021 09:54PM

GT89 wrote: »

But it's true there is no reasonable explanation to allow hotels to open their indoor dining and bar areas and leave normal pubs and restauants outdoor only.

Once again.

Risk/ priority. Once hotels are allowed open to guests, they need a place to eat, therefore hotel restaurants become a higher priority than non hotel even though risk is the same. You can argue about whether hotels should be allowed open to non essential guests ahead of other activities if you like, but in fact they never closed for essential guests

09-06-2021 09:55PM

Reading this thread is like probing a sore tooth, I know I shouldn't do it, but I can't help myself.

It's fascinating to see how much time and energy people are willing to spend on here going back and forth when none of it will change anything.

09-06-2021 09:55PM

normanoffside wrote: »

A few examples from the replies to that tweet.

https://twitter.com/Empress22223/status/1398741415606296576

https://twitter.com/MiriamShinners/status/1398741630023262208

https://twitter.com/vmoloney/status/1398741996190191616

https://twitter.com/ChristinaDub79/status/1398729787074568195

Why eternally seek out the extremes to be offended by?

gozunda · 09-06-2021 10:01PM

Foxtrol wrote: »

But you are actually more than suggesting an extreme, you're lauding the results of the Irish approach that has been and continues to be one of the most extreme in western nations. Ireland is the other extreme to Florida in how it has dealt with reopening.

You don't want to talk about outdoor dining because there is simply no credible justification for the extreme Irish approach that was taken to it, though a few posts ago there was claims the Irish climate was a justification

Nope. :rolleyes: there's no 'lauding". Its simply fact that Ireland has one of the lowest case and death rates when you list our nearest European neighbours. And that includes countries with what you would describe as having 'extreme' levels of restrictions including the UK and Germany.

But no 'weather' was not given as a "justification" by me - though if I remember correctly you made a claim that because our weather is very windy - that should automatically make it safer.. They're many factors which make comparing countries difficult - never mind trying to compare countires with cherry picked individual US states. And yet you're still at it. And to that - I think we can park any such comparison as you agreed previously.

As to the throw in about "outdoor dining" its irrelevant to the comment because it has absolutely nothing to do with what was been discussed. If you want to discuss that- then by all means do so somewhere else. Thanks

Stormyteacup · 09-06-2021 10:57PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

By achieving the target for herd immunity, you dont just protect those in whom the vaccine is effective, you also protect hose who cannot be vaccinated and those in whom the vaccine has not been effective, who will disproportionately be the most vulnerable to any infection. That's why achieving the level required for "herd immunity" is important

Yes understood how herd immunity works. The concern is what happens when we don’t vaccinate 90%. There’s some rational thinking in the article re detecting and controlling outbreaks as natural immunity builds to add to vaccination immunity, leading hopefully to herd immunity eventually.

It seems we will have one of the highest uptakes in the EU at least - which is a good thing, despite the reasons for it. But it won’t be 90%.

So while we are aiming for herd protection, which will take years, what shape do restrictions take? Should we not now be thinking about treatments such as monoclonal antibodies or others as prophylactics for those at most high risk and for those who can’t be vaccinated, along with effective tracing methods for control, including antigen testing where useful. And thereby doing away with restrictions for the vast majority of the population.

This nonsense has to end with vaccination rollout complete. ISAG are hellbent on achieving herd immunity ASAP and eliminating Covid in this country - and then protecting that immunity by restricting international movement until the world has immunity, which is years away.

Even if we did achieve 90% over 10s vaccinated, all that would achieve is the ability to exist like NZ for a long time - isolated from all countries that haven’t reached herd immunity.

This is grim to me.

bear1 · 09-06-2021 11:42PM

You gotta love that not wearing a seatbelt is now comparable to not wearing a mask to some users.
Jesus Christ.

PhoneMain · 10-06-2021 07:38AM

bear1 wrote: »

You gotta love that not wearing a seatbelt is now comparable to not wearing a mask to some users.
Jesus Christ.

They're both risk mitigation factors. Seatbelts decrease risk of injury in a car collision. Masks decrease risk of transmission.
I was being facetious but the way. You know, to get a reaction. And ye have shown that perfectly.
I love the way theres a cohort of society that see masks as being a tool of the establishment, hence the opposition to them. That was illustrated by some of the reactions on here and this ridiculous campaign on twitter to do away with a simple, HARMLESS, infection control measure.

paddyisreal · 10-06-2021 07:55AM

Paul moynagh on newstalk now basically saying he can't understand Dr Tony and his stance on antigen tests. Makes you wonder if Tony really has a clue tbh

Boggles · 10-06-2021 08:45AM

paddyisreal wrote: »

Paul moynagh on newstalk now basically saying he can't understand Dr Tony and his stance on antigen tests. Makes you wonder if Tony really has a clue tbh

It's not "Dr Tony's" stance though is it?

It's NPHET's based on advice from HIQA.

I doubt Paul can't understand the stance, because it quite clear, he just disagrees with it, which is fair enough.

Maybe if you are going to claim the CMO is clueless, might be a good idea to have a grasp of what NPHET's stance actually is and who informs them.

paddyisreal · 10-06-2021 09:21AM

Boggles wrote: »

It's not "Dr Tony's" stance though is it?

It's NPHET's based on advice from HIQA.

I doubt Paul can't understand the stance, because it quite clear, he just disagrees with it, which is fair enough.

Maybe if you are going to claim the CMO is clueless, might be a good idea to have a grasp of what NPHET's stance actually is and who informs them.

Yawn, do a little research before ye get on your high nphet are great blah blah blah. Go and read the Ferguson report.

Tony houlihan does not want antigen testing so yes he doesn't have a clue when the chief scientific advisor sees them as beneficial. He has been all over the media about the evils of them for the last while, you must if fell asleep in the bookies having your lunch and missed it

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/holohan-expresses-concerns-about-antigen-testing-to-donnelly-1.4562441

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

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part XI Read OP For Mod Warnings