Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…301302304306307…342

Comments

  • #9092
    Avon8
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 565 ✭✭✭Avon8


    Santan wrote: »
    Is there any opposition parties even voicing any concern to any of this or has all power just been effectively been passed to nphet without question. Is there even a single independent that is going against these ridiculous delays.

    No it was far too easy to jump in bed with the ISAG zealots back in January when cases were high and score easy points on the back of people's fear. Either that or they actually believed the dodgy science that this cult produced and wanted to implement an idea that had widely been rejected by the rest of Europe.

    Either way it's fully depressing that we have numpties in government with no backbone to go against NPHET and charlatans in opposition who would jump on them if they did. I can't vote for Michael McNamara in the next election so I probably won't be voting at all


  • #9093
    MOR316
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Surely there's no one left that can be defending this...

    Travel will be very interesting...Imagine going against EU policy. Madness


  • #9094
    Gael23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,147 ✭✭✭✭Gael23


    Dublin airport will be busy


  • #9095
    jakiah
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 469 ✭✭jakiah


    Gael23 wrote: »
    Dublin airport will be busy
    The country will empty


  • #9096
    namloc1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,444 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    Santan wrote: »
    Is there any opposition parties even voicing any concern to any of this or has all power just been effectively been passed to nphet without question. Is there even a single independent that is going against these ridiculous delays.

    Sinn Féin want more so presume they are fully on board with any delays.


  • Advertisement
  • #9097
    M_Murphy57
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 725 ✭✭✭M_Murphy57


    Still no leaks about pushing out. Multiple papers reporting that we have no money and (separately) how great Az is (lol). The mirror are running the headline "fresh hope" ie that we won't push out (though details in the story are less positive)

    Independent headlines yesterday were about the inevitability of a delay , but today they are nowhere to be seen, they've gone with "nerves of steel needed" instead.

    I live in hope.


  • #9098
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,690 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    M_Murphy57 wrote: »
    Still no leaks about pushing out. Multiple papers reporting that we have no money and (separately) how great Az is (lol). The mirror are running the headline "fresh hope" ie that we won't push out (though details in the story are less positive)

    Independent headlines yesterday were about the inevitability of a delay , but today they are nowhere to be seen, they've gone with "nerves of steel needed" instead.

    I live in hope.

    You're some optimist


  • #9099
    Zebra3
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,097 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Looking more and more the case the NPHET will only become history when the state is bankrupt.


  • #9100
    Dr. Bre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,839 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    jakiah wrote: »
    The country will empty

    Some won’t come back


  • #9101
    prunudo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,070 ✭✭✭prunudo


    In other news Niac are recommending AZ and Jansen for under 40s with a 4 week interval between first and second dose. You'd be forgiven for thinking they're making it up as they go along.


  • Advertisement
  • #9102
    RGS
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 787 ✭✭✭RGS


    prunudo wrote: »
    In other news Niac are recommending AZ and Jansen for under 40s with a 4 week interval between first and second dose. You'd be forgiven for thinking they're making it up as they go along.

    Never. They are following the science.


  • #9103
    aziz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 754 ✭✭✭aziz


    prunudo wrote: »
    In other news Niac are recommending AZ and Jansen for under 40s with a 4 week interval between first and second dose. You'd be forgiven for thinking they're making it up as they go along.

    You don’t have to think it,
    They are making it up as they go along


  • #9104
    prunudo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,070 ✭✭✭prunudo


    RGS wrote: »
    Never. They are following the science.

    Just not the same science as they do in Copenhagen or Bucharest.


  • #9105
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    RGS wrote: »
    Never. They are following the science.

    I've always loathed that phrase.

    Science tells you the facts, not what ought to be done with those facts.

    There are all manner of potential interpretations and actions, which should be done by politicians who must consider all society and economic factors, and not by NPHET who have only a one dimensional interpretation of how to act.

    Scientists who use the phrase "following the science...", as if there is only one possible interpretation, are actually being very much anti-scientific in their conclusions.


  • #9106
    M_Murphy57
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 725 ✭✭✭M_Murphy57


    prunudo wrote: »
    In other news Niac are recommending AZ and Jansen for under 40s with a 4 week interval between first and second dose. You'd be forgiven for thinking they're making it up as they go along.

    So its only dangerous for people aged between 41 and 49 then?!


  • #9107
    prunudo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,070 ✭✭✭prunudo


    M_Murphy57 wrote: »
    So its only dangerous for people aged between 41 and 49 then?!

    Can't remember, was it also not advised for the 50-59s too.


  • #9108
    M_Murphy57
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 725 ✭✭✭M_Murphy57


    prunudo wrote: »
    Can't remember, was it also not advised for the 50-59s too.

    At least some of them got j&j


  • #9109
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,690 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1409593538791325698?s=19

    So 50 at a wedding for hours is fine?

    But going for a meal indoors with people you live with is not?


  • #9110
    stargazer 68
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,188 ✭✭✭stargazer 68


    Stheno wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1409593538791325698?s=19

    So 50 at a wedding for hours is fine?

    But going for a meal indoors with people you live with is not?

    It's just a sweetener to keep people quiet!


  • #9111
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,690 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    stargazer 68 wrote: »
    It's just a sweetener to keep people quiet!

    Its completely illogical


  • Advertisement
  • #9112
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Stheno wrote: »
    Its completely illogical

    You're being too diplomatic.

    It's absolutely stupid.


  • #9113
    Relax brah
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 805 ✭✭✭Relax brah


    Wtf do they mean by “sobering?”


  • #9114
    km79
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 48,424 ✭✭✭✭km79


    Relax brah wrote: »
    Wtf do they mean by “sobering?”

    We won’t be able to go for a drink so we will all be sober






  • #9115
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Stheno wrote: »
    Its completely illogical

    You will respect and obey the science!


  • #9116
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    You will respect and obey the science!

    Starting to come across more like pseudoscience, at this stage.


  • #9117
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,690 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    You will respect and obey the science!

    Bull tbh


  • #9118
    Gael23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,147 ✭✭✭✭Gael23


    We’re they ever not going to give pessimistic projections


  • #9119
    namloc1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,444 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    Stheno wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1409593538791325698?s=19

    So 50 at a wedding for hours is fine?

    But going for a meal indoors with people you live with is not?

    And people at a wedding more likely to interact and not keep their distance as they know each other. But it's all about the science.


  • #9120
    namloc1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,444 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    NPHETs projections are always a load of bollix. Remember this beauty from the end of March? Yet everything they say is taken as gospel by the government each time.

    .


  • Advertisement
  • #9121
    GeorgeBailey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭GeorgeBailey


    If people could kindly not kick up a fuss if weddings are allowed to go up to 50 guests that would be swell. I've been out of work since March last year and would very much appreciate getting to work through the summer at least (before the inevitable winter "abundance of caution").

    Many thanks.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement