Covid 19 Part XXXV-956,720 ROI (5,952 deaths) 452,946 NI (3,002 deaths) (08/01) Read OP

Because of different definitions of incidental.

I realise the following will be interpreted as a defence of Tony and so get me on a list for when the revolution comes, but I'm more interested in ideas than personalities, so...

Tony seems to be using a measure related to the impact on running of the hospitals. If a patient is COVID positive and infectious they have to be "managed" differently (segregated) from the COVID negative or non-infectious (e.g. recovering) patients.

This additional management burden has been described on these forums by people working in hospitals.

Is this a reasonable measure to choose? Don't know, depends. As I've written before, I care about the evolving risk of hospitalisation and death as a means of calibrating restrictions, not complications in health service operating practices, so my choice of "incidental" would be everyone who isn't being primarily treated for COVID.

But I'm not Tony or Paul.

I'll call bullshit on that one.

You've one hell of an extended family btw! One in hand for each story you've got.

5 days, and take 3 antigen tests each spaced 2 days apart.

https://www2.hse.ie/conditions/covid19/contact-tracing/close-contact/

Your not supposed to go for a PCR test if your not symptomatic.

yip the net 2 weeks are crucial

Unless you're over 39.

The new rules are a bit of a mess. People in general are not going to get a PCR without a positive antigen.

As Wolf says though, we're going to see those percentages skyrocket over the next few days.

S/ he stated that s/he went for a private test. In order to get a test privately you cannot be symptomatic

That's not correct is it? If you have positive antigen they recommend pcr.

It would be an absolute travesty if the abiding memory of this thing is Tony flapping, rather than the government dithering, flip-flopping and hiding behind NPHET. We elect politicians to lead, and we must hold them to account.

Put it this way: if you were to stand outside someone's home with a placard, who would it be? Tony Holohan or Micheál Martin? If your answer is Tony then the politicians have triumphed in their deflection.

According to a few on here the government is perfectly entitled to stay hidden away, shur what’s to say anyway?

Like the captain of a sinking ship, just drink champagne in the cabin. It’s fcuked anyway, no point.

Ya have to wonder at the absolute certainty with which people make wild assertions.

He should find a better synonym. /s

You know as well as I do that it is not black and white and there is the court of public opinion whipped up by the media.

I understand what you are saying but Tony H and NPHET have not played to normal advisor roles and at times they have put Government in an impossible position.

Senior Government Ministers hearing about leaked recommendations while sitting in the Dail and then having to bring in legislation for supports with next to no notice is not normal.

Looking at this objectively but obviously my opinion:

• Both Government and NPHET have got more right than wrong.
• Mistakes were made particularly in the early days with nursing homes but there were many unknowns and uncertainties then (far more so than now).
• The vaccination programme after a slow start is one of the best performing in the world - Brian MacCraith was definitely the right choice to chair the task force and hopefully he can be persuaded to have a role in the health service reform in the future.
• Our health service actually has performed very well and we showed agility in leveraging private sector capacity (perhaps an opportunity lost in not trying to outright buy it).
• Our mortality rate is not as high as many of our peers. Although it will be awhile before we can properly measure excess deaths.
• The Governance structures for NPHET are not fit for purpose - it is nearly two years in a emergency mode and some of the carry on really is not acceptable. I have no doubt this will be looked at.
• Some of the advices given were at the time and even more so now a bit daft (masks and antigen tests). There is also an element of morality judgements from NPHET in relation to certain sectors/behaviours. Does not affect me personally but it does scream nanny state.
• Supports given to people and businesses have been extraordinary (but also very costly).

Logical, but your preferred definition of incidental is the measure used in UK reporting. Who is right or wrong doesn’t matter all that much - if a patient is drawing extra resources due to Covid then it’s a factor to be taken into account.

However it’s a further demonstration of arrogance and patronisation- anyone can read and understand data emerging from other countries but our officials refuse to clarify like-for-like incidental hospitalisations in case the wee people lose the run of themselves.

How about they transparently share the admittance and treatment information they have, while explaining there is still an extra burden on healthcare even if the primary treatment is not for the virus. Their low and dismissive opinion of our population is completely at odds with a supposedly progressive democratic society.