Relaxation of Restrictions, Part XI Read OP For Mod Warnings

Boggles · 10-06-2021 09:36AM

paddyisreal wrote: »

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

Complete false. We have been using them for months. Probably worth taking a spoonful of your own misguided advice so.

Also AFAIK you are the only one dining in Bookies.

Good for you.

10-06-2021 09:43AM

paddyisreal wrote: »

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

I love the way there is a desire to personalise individuals frustration so that they can give a face to vent against. When in fact these are all group decisions based largely on consensus within NPHET as a whole taking the advice of the relevant experts within the likes of HIQA, NIAC, NVRL etc etc. Tony being the figurehead and probably the individual who makes the final decision where consensus can not be established is the obvious choice of the intellectually lazy for this bogeyman role, however it doesn't work that way. Tony may in fact disagree personally with individual actions recommended by NPHET but the group consensus arrived as a different decision. As the figurehead he represents the decisions of NPHET as a whole and not just his own individual views.

seamus · 10-06-2021 09:48AM

paddyisreal wrote: »

Tony houlihan does not want antigen testing

This is not correct. NPHET have strong concerns about self-administered antigen tests, because the margin for error is so high that they're effectively useless as a diagnostic tool.

It all boils down to the scenario where someone has a bit of a sniffle, takes an antigen test, gets a false negative because they made a balls of it, and head off to meet a load of people and spread the infection. Which is exactly the purpose for which people buy these tests.

NPHET (and Holohan's) stance is;

Buy these if you want for your own curiosity, but don't rely on the result to tell you that you don't have Covid. No matter what the result of the antigen test, you must still stick to the guidelines, minimise indoor mixing, social distance and wear a mask. If you have symptoms, get a PCR test. If you rely on an antigen test only as proof that you don't have covid, then you're making a mistake.

That's it. That's the bottom line. And I don't see how anyone with any cop on can disagree with it.

They may provide a little extra reassurance in select circumstances, and when done by a qualified person. But over the counter, they're little better than a curio. A poster will come along soon enough to claim that pharmacies have been selling them over the counter for months, with no proof except, "I seen them".
They're only being sold over the counter in recent weeks, which is why there's noise being made about it now.

Stormyteacup · 10-06-2021 09:52AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I love the way there is a desire to personalise individuals frustration so that they can give a face to vent against. When in fact these are all group decisions based largely on consensus within NPHET as a whole taking the advice of the relevant experts within the likes of HIQA, NIAC, NVRL etc etc. Tony being the figurehead and probably the individual who makes the final decision where consensus can not be established is the obvious choice of the intellectually lazy for this bogeyman role, however it doesn't work that way. Tony may in fact disagree personally with individual actions recommended by NPHET but the group consensus arrived as a different decision. As the figurehead he represents the decisions of NPHET as a whole and not just his own individual views.

Should be the way it works but I strongly doubt it. A read of the NPHET minutes (none published since 28th April for some reason) shows he is very much leading the decisions and steering the conversations.

If he is just someone who relays the consensus of a group we would not have had level 5 restrictions imposed last October.

Boggles · 10-06-2021 09:58AM

Stormyteacup wrote: »

Should be the way it works but I strongly doubt it. A read of the NPHET minutes (none published since 28th April for some reason) shows he is very much leading the decisions and steering the conversations.
.

It's the chairs job to structure any meeting. I thought that would be obvious.

But please by all means give examples of how he is "leading the decisions" or maybe an explanation of what that actually means.

Boggles · 10-06-2021 09:58AM

seamus wrote: »

This is not correct. NPHET have strong concerns about self-administered antigen tests

Same as the report he cited, but clearly didn't read.

10-06-2021 10:00AM

Stormyteacup wrote: »

Should be the way it works but I strongly doubt it. A read of the NPHET minutes (none published since 28th April for some reason) shows he is very much leading the decisions and steering the conversations.

If he is just someone who relays the consensus of a group we would not have had level 5 restrictions imposed last October.

Have you actually ever attended a minuted meeting? It is not a record of the conversation but summary of matters discussed, conclusions, actions and decisions. The chair within the meeting will never be recorded as having dissented to the group consensus. The chair leads the discussion and remarks attributed to the chair will represent acknowledgement of the agreement reached on that topic.

Micky 32 · 10-06-2021 10:00AM

Stormyteacup wrote: »

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.

This is grim to me.

Things aren’t all that grim regarding international travel, no mention of 90%+ herd immunity here:

“”US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson are expected to agree to work to open up travel between the two countries "as soon as possible," the British government has said in a statement.

US and UK airline officials said they did not expect Washington to lift restrictions until around 4 July at the earliest.””

Also our government have said you can travel without any testing/ isolation from places like the USA if you’re fully vaccinated after July 19th.

paddyisreal · 10-06-2021 10:19AM

seamus wrote: »

This is not correct. NPHET have strong concerns about self-administered antigen tests, because the margin for error is so high that they're effectively useless as a diagnostic tool.

It all boils down to the scenario where someone has a bit of a sniffle, takes an antigen test, gets a false negative because they made a balls of it, and head off to meet a load of people and spread the infection. Which is exactly the purpose for which people buy these tests.

NPHET (and Holohan's) stance is;

Buy these if you want for your own curiosity, but don't rely on the result to tell you that you don't have Covid. No matter what the result of the antigen test, you must still stick to the guidelines, minimise indoor mixing, social distance and wear a mask. If you have symptoms, get a PCR test. If you rely on an antigen test only as proof that you don't have covid, then you're making a mistake.

That's it. That's the bottom line. And I don't see how anyone with any cop on can disagree with it.

They may provide a little extra reassurance in select circumstances, and when done by a qualified person. But over the counter, they're little better than a curio. A poster will come along soon enough to claim that pharmacies have been selling them over the counter for months, with no proof except, "I seen them".
They're only being sold over the counter in recent weeks, which is why there's noise being made about it now.

No nphet are against antigen testing altogether...

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40310060.html

Also , read the report I would rather take the verdict of 4 professors paddy mallon, mary horgan, Kinston mills and mark ferguson who advise the immediate introduction of it than a couple of doctors of nphet and the snake oil man himself Philip nolan

paddyisreal · 10-06-2021 10:27AM

Boggles wrote: »

Same as the report he cited, but clearly didn't read.

THe report I cited recommended the immediate introduction of antigen testing across a lot of sectors and was majority approved by 4 professors who know what they are talking about. The 2 against were doctors, 1 sitting on nphet.
No where in the report does it mention nphet having concerns about self administering the test so you clearly never read it.....
I did, light reading at lunch in the bookies.

Klonker · 10-06-2021 10:28AM

seamus wrote: »

This is not correct. NPHET have strong concerns about self-administered antigen tests, because the margin for error is so high that they're effectively useless as a diagnostic tool.

It all boils down to the scenario where someone has a bit of a sniffle, takes an antigen test, gets a false negative because they made a balls of it, and head off to meet a load of people and spread the infection. Which is exactly the purpose for which people buy these tests.

NPHET (and Holohan's) stance is;

Buy these if you want for your own curiosity, but don't rely on the result to tell you that you don't have Covid. No matter what the result of the antigen test, you must still stick to the guidelines, minimise indoor mixing, social distance and wear a mask. If you have symptoms, get a PCR test. If you rely on an antigen test only as proof that you don't have covid, then you're making a mistake.

That's it. That's the bottom line. And I don't see how anyone with any cop on can disagree with it.

They may provide a little extra reassurance in select circumstances, and when done by a qualified person. But over the counter, they're little better than a curio. A poster will come along soon enough to claim that pharmacies have been selling them over the counter for months, with no proof except, "I seen them".
They're only being sold over the counter in recent weeks, which is why there's noise being made about it now.

Forget about the self administered tests (which seem to. Be working well for other countries but anyway). What about for international travel? These will not be self administered yet Ireland won't accept them for entry and by the sounds of things won't even when we eventually sign up for the green cert though the messaging from government on this has been so confusing it's hard know what will be required from who for international travel.

Graham · 10-06-2021 10:34AM

Klonker wrote: »

when we eventually sign up for the green cert though the messaging from government on this has been so confusing it's hard know what will be required from who for international travel.

It's as if there's been no official announcement on the final requirements yet.

Boggles · 10-06-2021 10:37AM

paddyisreal wrote: »

No where in the report does it mention nphet having concerns about self administering the test so you clearly never read it.....

I never claimed the report said that.

The report repeats several times proper training in self administration is required.

i.e. not grabbing one in Circle K, fúcking it up and heading off to a party.

But the narrative you have painted for yourself that NPHET are completely against antigen testings is completely false.

Stormyteacup · 10-06-2021 10:39AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Have you actually ever attended a minuted meeting? It is not a record of the conversation but summary of matters discussed, conclusions, actions and decisions. The chair within the meeting will never be recorded as having dissented to the group consensus. The chair leads the discussion and remarks attributed to the chair will represent acknowledgement of the agreement reached on that topic.

Yes. I don’t think the chair of NPHET dissents to group consensus anyway - the minutes read as though he sometimes steers parts of the meetings.

Such as when he brought Sam McConkeys Zero-Covid mad musings to a meeting. Minutes recorded;

‘The Chair brought correspondence from a Consultant of Infectious Diseases to the attention of the NPHET for its consideration in terms of an eradication approach and indicated that input from the NPHET would be welcomed in replying. (Permission to share to NPHET was granted by the author). It was noted that the component parts of the approach outlined are aligned with priorities already identified by NPHET.’

Antigen testing reluctance being an example. The only reason I can come up with for their reluctance is that they are of no use in a zero-covid approach - which they aren’t.

Boggles · 10-06-2021 10:41AM

Klonker wrote: »

Forget about the self administered tests (which seem to. Be working well for other countries but anyway). What about for international travel? These will not be self administered yet Ireland won't accept them for entry and by the sounds of things won't even when we eventually sign up for the green cert though the messaging from government on this has been so confusing it's hard know what will be required from who for international travel.

It's worth noting with some merit, the benefit of rapid testing is not just speed but timing.

The Professor from Harvard invited to speak yesterday wants the tests an hour before you board the plane and he wants fully vaccinated people to be tested also.

Now that is mighty advice from a lab in Harvard.

Practically speaking I'm not so sure.

Klonker · 10-06-2021 10:48AM

Graham wrote: »

It's as if there's been no official announcement on the final requirements yet.

Any link there to Ireland's official announcement apart from its joining on 19th July?

Stormyteacup · 10-06-2021 10:50AM

Graham wrote: »

It's as if there's been no official announcement on the final requirements yet.

And if they announce they will accept a negative antigen test for entry do you not think that would be a confusing announcement on final requirements for travel, having sown mistrust in their legitimacy?

Largely agree they are for use in certain circumstances and could be misused for some personal purposes. But how secure will people feel with international travellers arriving with a ‘snake oil’ negative test? That’s the message they’ve communicated to people, whether it’s their stance or not.

Klonker · 10-06-2021 10:52AM

Boggles wrote: »

It's worth noting with some merit, the benefit of rapid testing is not just speed but timing.

The Professor from Harvard invited to speak yesterday wants the tests an hour before you board the plane and he wants fully vaccinated people to be tested also.

Now that is mighty advice from a lab in Harvard.

Practically speaking I'm not so sure.

An hour before flying would be ideal in a perfect world but yeah it's hard to see that working, it could be chaos in the airports running but 24 hours to flying could work. It's not ideal but a PCR test 72 hours beforehand is hardly ideal either.

Boggles · 10-06-2021 11:30AM

Klonker wrote: »

An hour before flying would be ideal in a perfect world but yeah it's hard to see that working

It would and it wouldn't.

What if you failed the test, does the party you are travelling with who would in most instances be close contacts get to travel too?

What if the subsequent PCR test deemed you negative?

Nothing ideal or perfect in a once in generation pandemic.

Right now vaccinated is the way to go.

10-06-2021 11:46AM

Boggles wrote: »

I never claimed the report said that.

The report repeats several times proper training in self administration is required.

i.e. not grabbing one in Circle K, fúcking it up and heading off to a party.

But the narrative you have painted for yourself that NPHET are completely against antigen testings is completely false.

What Tony and many on here don't seem to grasp is that the person in Circle K is going to the party anyway, the antigen test isn't going to increase their likelihood of going, but it giving them a positive result will reduce their likelihood of going.

Graham · 10-06-2021 11:50AM

Klonker wrote: »

Any link there to Ireland's official announcement apart from its joining on 19th July?

Not that I'm aware of which was my point.

You're claiming confusion over the requirements that haven't been announced.

Del Griffith · 10-06-2021 11:53AM

AdamD wrote: »

What Tony and many on here don't seem to grasp is that the person in Circle K is going to the party anyway, the antigen test isn't going to increase their likelihood of going, but it giving them a positive result will reduce their likelihood of going.

Exactly, there's a (false) assumption that many are not just ignoring the rules by this point anyway.

Not testing at all (current situation) or testing negative on antigen are exactly the same outcome - go to the party.

Positive on antigen (even a false positive) - don't go, and organise a PCR to confirm.

So with antigen as an option, there is a chance of catching a positive and halting spread. Without it there is no chance and the gathering will happen anyway.

Boggles · 10-06-2021 11:54AM

AdamD wrote: »

What Tony and many on here don't seem to grasp is that the person in Circle K is going to the party anyway, the antigen test isn't going to increase their likelihood of going, but it giving them a positive result will reduce their likelihood of going.

It increases the likelihood of a false sense of security.

Which was the point NPHET made, but seems to have been construed into Tony hates antigen.

normanoffside · 10-06-2021 12:05PM

Del Griffith wrote: »

Exactly, there's a (false) assumption that many are not just ignoring the rules by this point anyway.

Not testing at all (current situation) or testing negative on antigen are exactly the same outcome - go to the party.

Positive on antigen (even a false positive) - don't go, and organise a PCR to confirm.

So with antigen as an option, there is a chance of catching a positive and halting spread. Without it there is no chance and the gathering will happen anyway.

Very few people are following all the rules at this stage and yet the cases are dropping (Vaccination combined with Summer).

The Fact that NPHET don't grasp this fact is astonishing.

Anybody even buying an Antigen test is clearly conscientious, encouraging them to be a little more safe should be a good thing.
The people who have been going to the parties all along will continue to do so and won't be investing in antigen tests anyway.

Klonker · 10-06-2021 12:15PM

Graham wrote: »

Not that I'm aware of which was my point.

You're claiming confusion over the requirements that haven't been announced.

So the fact no official announcement has been made apart from its starting here from the 19th July is not confusing? Government officials coming out with statements that we won't accept antigen tests but the EU are saying antigen tests will be accepted isn't confusing? Is the EU giving funding for testing yet our government saying they won't subsidise tests not confusing?

Other countries have already implemented the green cert and we don't even know how it's going to work here yet.

Klonker · 10-06-2021 12:24PM

Boggles wrote: »

It would and it wouldn't.

What if you failed the test, does the party you are travelling with who would in most instances be close contacts get to travel too?

What if the subsequent PCR test deemed you negative?

Nothing ideal or perfect in a once in generation pandemic.

Right now vaccinated is the way to go.

Yeah, thankfully we've huge uptake rates in the vaccines so far. We still don't know if Ireland will request tests from vaccinated passengers arriving here but hopefully it won't be needed in the short term at least. Gets confusing again in future when vaccines start to wain off, do we get updated certs when we get booster shots? No ideal answers as you said.

Boggles · 10-06-2021 12:37PM

normanoffside wrote: »

Very few people are following all the rules at this stage and yet the cases are dropping (Vaccination combined with Summer).

The Fact that NPHET don't grasp this fact is astonishing.

You think NPHET are not aware of the fact that vaccines are playing an incredible role?

So all that advice based around easing in tandem with vaccination was what exactly?

Certainly couldn't be the inability to grasp that fact, could it? Considering you know it's their advice.

10-06-2021 12:44PM

Stormyteacup wrote: »

Yes. I don’t think the chair of NPHET dissents to group consensus anyway - the minutes read as though he sometimes steers parts of the meetings.

Such as when he brought Sam McConkeys Zero-Covid mad musings to a meeting. Minutes recorded;

‘The Chair brought correspondence from a Consultant of Infectious Diseases to the attention of the NPHET for its consideration in terms of an eradication approach and indicated that input from the NPHET would be welcomed in replying. (Permission to share to NPHET was granted by the author). It was noted that the component parts of the approach outlined are aligned with priorities already identified by NPHET.’

Antigen testing reluctance being an example. The only reason I can come up with for their reluctance is that they are of no use in a zero-covid approach - which they aren’t.

What of McConkeys approach was actually adopted by NPHET? A professor of epidemiology publicly released at proposal putting pressure on NPHET to consider, which the minutes record with the equivalent of "duly noted and ignored"

Graham · 10-06-2021 12:52PM

Klonker wrote: »

So the fact no official announcement has been made apart from its starting here from the 19th July is not confusing?

While I can't speak for others, I don't find a starting date particularly difficult to interpret.

YMMV

Obviously we'll know more once an announcement is made.

Marcusm · 10-06-2021 01:06PM

Klonker wrote: »

An hour before flying would be ideal in a perfect world but yeah it's hard to see that working, it could be chaos in the airports running but 24 hours to flying could work. It's not ideal but a PCR test 72 hours beforehand is hardly ideal either.

THat's what portugal was set up to do with uk tourists - turn up at airport, get swabbed, walk to check in desk receive result while walking/queueing. When the change from green to amber, an increase in passenger numbers (larger planes, more flights) let to queues but there still wasn't chaos.

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

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part XI Read OP For Mod Warnings