Coronavirus Pandemic Information- Local and Worldwide

yosemitesam1 · 24-11-2020 9:45pm

Deleted User wrote: »

More fodder for my ruminations today. I had a physio appointment and they were asking would I get the vaccination, so we had that conversation about it being rushed and had Govt's let companies off the hook in case anything goes wrong in terms of side effects.

They told me they were seeing lots of "long covid" side effects. Where 10-30% of people contracting covid are experiencing shoulder and chest problems (in particular to a physio) and many other internal organ issues also.

Damned if ya do...

In reality long covid is thought to occur in less than 2% of infections but when you look at the list of symptoms of long covid. The question has to be how much of long covid symptoms are actually caused by restrictions on people's lives.

Similar symptoms can also occur after non covid infections...

yosemitesam1 · 24-11-2020 9:49pm

_Brian wrote: »

Yea.
So you think you’ve figured our tie complexity of public health that the actual public health professionals haven’t. Will you share your qualifications and research papers and then maybe we can take your public health claims seriously, otherwise I think it’s best listen to the professionals.

Why not actually consider the point instead of attacking me?

Have studied epidemiology and pests/disease in quite a bit of detail. Was offered a PhD with teagasc but academia didn't appeal to me so I went out on my own but all that is irrelevant to this thread

_Brian · 24-11-2020 11:26pm

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Why not actually consider the point instead of attacking me?

Have studied epidemiology and pests/disease in quite a bit of detail. Was offered a PhD with teagasc but academia didn't appeal to me so I went out on my own but all that is irrelevant to this thread

I’m not specifically attacking anyone.
I appreciate your if the belief you’ve cracked some nugget of public health that all the actual experts seem to have missed.

Public health strategy works by people playing their part and not second guessing decisions and going off on a solo.

The idea to just let people get the flu to gain immunity is as bizarre as letting everyone get covid to gain immunity.

Yes your preventing people who it wouldn’t affect get it. But that’s missing the point. By getting immunisation your into really high numbers we create a buffer of vaccinated people so the virus can’t travel to people not vaccinated, I’m sure I don’t need to explain herd immunity to you.

Letting thing s just run their course isn’t a public health strategy, it’s denial of science and demonstrating a lack of respect to those you will kill along the way, America’s handling of covid is a prime example.

I know you feel nephet has steered us wrong and you know better, but in all likelihood you don’t and everyone should really listen to the professionals rather than stuff on the internet published by got knows who with god knows what hidden agenda.

paddysdream · 25-11-2020 12:00am

Not directed at anyone in particular but experts have been wrong a fair bit in the last few years.
This total and absolute faith in experts is what has led to a lot of difficulties.
All those expert bankers and economist's about 2007 those expert pollsters in US 4 years ago, David Camerons experts in 2016.
In farming you have the experts who ran the greenfield site
Far as i can see the definition of an expert as one who brings his lunch in a briefcase has never run truer

_Brian · 25-11-2020 12:08am

paddysdream wrote: »

Not directed at anyone in particular but experts have been wrong a fair bit in the last few years.
This total and absolute faith in experts is what has led to a lot of difficulties.
All those expert bankers and economist's about 2007 those expert pollsters in US 4 years ago, David Camerons experts in 2016.
In farming you have the experts who ran the greenfield site
Far as i can see the definition of an expert as one who brings his lunch in a briefcase has never run truer

Public health has eliminated polio, Tb, and a host of other nasties that killed and destroyed the lives of countless Irish citizens. The flu vaccine saves countless from sickness and death every year. We thankfully have lived to see the first tranche of vaccines rolling out in schools to prevent cancers.

No vaccine is 100% safe, none. But regardless vaccination is how covid will be controlled.

Vaccination programs are a central pillar to public health and their effectiveness has been proven over and over across the world.

paddysdream · 25-11-2020 12:35am

Not meaning experts as re vaccination but rather the blind faith in the public pronouncements of a group of 40 "experts"
Remind me of vets who cant hack it in practice and migrate to fulltime dept positions.Easy to spot when they call around.

Studying something for years doesnt make you an expert on a subject,just means you have studied it for years

yosemitesam1 · 25-11-2020 10:08am

_Brian wrote: »

I’m not specifically attacking anyone.
I appreciate your if the belief you’ve cracked some nugget of public health that all the actual experts seem to have missed.

Public health strategy works by people playing their part and not second guessing decisions and going off on a solo.

The idea to just let people get the flu to gain immunity is as bizarre as letting everyone get covid to gain immunity.

Yes your preventing people who it wouldn’t affect get it. But that’s missing the point. By getting immunisation your into really high numbers we create a buffer of vaccinated people so the virus can’t travel to people not vaccinated, I’m sure I don’t need to explain herd immunity to you.

Letting thing s just run their course isn’t a public health strategy, it’s denial of science and demonstrating a lack of respect to those you will kill along the way, America’s handling of covid is a prime example.

I know you feel nephet has steered us wrong and you know better, but in all likelihood you don’t and everyone should really listen to the professionals rather than stuff on the internet published by got knows who with god knows what hidden agenda.

Consider though.
You vaccinate a much higher proportion of the population against flu than is currently vaccinated.
Who is going to spread the strains of flu in the vaccine? Very few people. So what you end up with is more selection pressure for the strains not in the vaccine to predominate.
So what will end up happening is that you will end up with a strain of flu that the vaccine does not protect against as we can't vaccinate against all strains.

Scale the above back to only the vulnerable getting vaccinated and you give the strains of flu in the vaccine the best chance of becoming the dominant strains which means that those vulnerable people will have the best possible chance against it.

In reality we're somewhere in between those two extremes and probably get results somewhere between the two with a lot of randomness thrown in that will give years where the vulnerable are protected very well and years when they're given no protection at all.
There is also the factor of natural Vs vaccine immunity access the population. Natural immunity is longer lasting and broader acting. So even though the general population won't have anywhere near full immunity against a fresh strain. They do have the potential to slow spread by being less susceptible to infection and/or shedding lower levels of virus. This occurs without increasing selection pressure for non vaccine strains.
Compare that to someone who has been receiving the vaccine long-term. They will have less long-term broad acting immunity. But because they've been vaccinated, they actually act to encourage further the non vaccine strains.
What you end up doing by over vaccinating against flu is destabilising things over the medium to long-term. Yes you'll get good years with near perfect results but you're also going to encourage many more bad years.

You can see broadly similar strategies to managing worm resistance, GM insect resistance etc. There has to be some element of encouragement for the easily controlled strains to survive or else they will just circumvent your active ingredient, vaccine or whatever other control method you use

_Brian · 25-11-2020 10:29am

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Consider though.
You vaccinate a much higher proportion of the population against flu than is currently vaccinated.
Who is going to spread the strains of flu in the vaccine? Very few people. So what you end up with is more selection pressure for the strains not in the vaccine to predominate.
So what will end up happening is that you will end up with a strain of flu that the vaccine does not protect against as we can't vaccinate against all strains.

Scale the above back to only the vulnerable getting vaccinated and you give the strains of flu in the vaccine the best chance of becoming the dominant strains which means that those vulnerable people will have the best possible chance against it.

In reality we're somewhere in between those two extremes and probably get results somewhere between the two with a lot of randomness thrown in that will give years where the vulnerable are protected very well and years when they're given no protection at all.
There is also the factor of natural Vs vaccine immunity access the population. Natural immunity is longer lasting and broader acting. So even though the general population won't have anywhere near full immunity against a fresh strain. They do have the potential to slow spread by being less susceptible to infection and/or shedding lower levels of virus. This occurs without increasing selection pressure for non vaccine strains.
Compare that to someone who has been receiving the vaccine long-term. They will have less long-term broad acting immunity. But because they've been vaccinated, they actually act to encourage further the non vaccine strains.
What you end up doing by over vaccinating against flu is destabilising things over the medium to long-term. Yes you'll get good years with near perfect results but you're also going to encourage many more bad years.

You can see broadly similar strategies to managing worm resistance, GM insect resistance etc. There has to be some element of encouragement for the easily controlled strains to survive or else they will just circumvent your active ingredient, vaccine or whatever other control method you use

With the likes of the annual flu vaccine we protect the vulnerable only, we don’t aim for herd immunity so strains of flu getting out of hand isn’t a problem. Occasionally a strain of flu will be prevalent that’s not covered in that years vaccine but that is rare.

Covid is different and my understanding is we will start with the most vulnerable and then everyone else to move towards herd immunity. Reason being the impact and deaths from covid are significantly more serious.

You can slice and dice things many ways. But the professionals are tasked with constructing a strategy for the whole country to Get the best result for public health overall. It’s not the only way we could move but it’s the one that’s chosen for the nation to follow. They need and deserve our support because of the only strategy we have is undermined and not engaged with we will all loose in the long run. Your either a member of a society or your not, you won’t like every decision but that doesn’t mean you don’t follow them.

minerleague · 25-11-2020 10:47am

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Consider though.
You vaccinate a much higher proportion of the population against flu than is currently vaccinated.
Who is going to spread the strains of flu in the vaccine? Very few people. So what you end up with is more selection pressure for the strains not in the vaccine to predominate.
So what will end up happening is that you will end up with a strain of flu that the vaccine does not protect against as we can't vaccinate against all strains.

Scale the above back to only the vulnerable getting vaccinated and you give the strains of flu in the vaccine the best chance of becoming the dominant strains which means that those vulnerable people will have the best possible chance against it.

In reality we're somewhere in between those two extremes and probably get results somewhere between the two with a lot of randomness thrown in that will give years where the vulnerable are protected very well and years when they're given no protection at all.
There is also the factor of natural Vs vaccine immunity access the population. Natural immunity is longer lasting and broader acting. So even though the general population won't have anywhere near full immunity against a fresh strain. They do have the potential to slow spread by being less susceptible to infection and/or shedding lower levels of virus. This occurs without increasing selection pressure for non vaccine strains.
Compare that to someone who has been receiving the vaccine long-term. They will have less long-term broad acting immunity. But because they've been vaccinated, they actually act to encourage further the non vaccine strains.
What you end up doing by over vaccinating against flu is destabilising things over the medium to long-term. Yes you'll get good years with near perfect results but you're also going to encourage many more bad years.

You can see broadly similar strategies to managing worm resistance, GM insect resistance etc. There has to be some element of encouragement for the easily controlled strains to survive or else they will just circumvent your active ingredient, vaccine or whatever other control method you use

No expertise in science here but this last paragraph aligns with what i believe. We are trying to beat bacteria / virus / worms (cattle )but all we seem to do is encourage ever more resistent varieties. ( Overuse is a problem but I think would happen anyway).
As for experts, a lot of progress has been made in the past by people questioning experts of the day and trying something new.
Didnt experts tell pregnant women to take talidomide (spelling?) in the 70s?

yosemitesam1 · 25-11-2020 11:21am

_Brian wrote: »

Yea it’s a community effort to minimise the volume of flu circulating. That’s what being a member of society is about, not always thinking what’s in this for me but rather if we all play our part it’s better for everyone.

Covid vaccine will rely similarly on people being responsible citizens and getting the % immunised home high enough to provide decent cover for all.

_Brian wrote: »

With the likes of the annual flu vaccine we protect the vulnerable only, we don’t aim for herd immunity so strains of flu getting out of hand isn’t a problem. Occasionally a strain of flu will be prevalent that’s not covered in that years vaccine but that is rare.

Covid is different and my understanding is we will start with the most vulnerable and then everyone else to move towards herd immunity. Reason being the impact and deaths from covid are significantly more serious.

You can slice and dice things many ways. But the professionals are tasked with constructing a strategy for the whole country to Get the best result for public health overall. It’s not the only way we could move but it’s the one that’s chosen for the nation to follow. They need and deserve our support because if the only strategy we have is undermined and not engaged with we will all loose in the long run. Your either a member of a society or your not, you won’t like every decision but that doesn’t mean you don’t follow them.

Those posts seem to contradict eachother about the flu vaccine, maybe we're not talking about the same thing?

Ultimately though every strategy has to be questioned hard. If you put anyone on a pedestal above questioning, all you will end up with is incompetence and poor decisions.
With private business having such an influence on health policy and many health "experts" actually having quite a narrow education with little real world experience, it is especially important to question everything.

wrangler · 25-11-2020 12:15pm

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Those posts seem to contradict eachother about the flu vaccine, maybe we're not talking about the same thing?

Ultimately though every strategy has to be questioned hard. If you put anyone on a pedestal above questioning, all you will end up with is incompetence and poor decisions.
With private business having such an influence on health policy and many health "experts" actually having quite a narrow education with little real world experience, it is especially important to question everything.

And if you give people a reason to opt out whether true or not, they will opt out. Most people are selfish and only care about themselves when it comes down to it.
Next thing you'll here is yosemitesams' children isn't bothering their backsides getting the vaccine so why should ours, and before you know it your school is closed due to covid testing due to flu.
No questioning by you or anyone else is going to be listened to so you might as well suck it up and do as you're asked

greysides · 27-11-2020 2:13am

How Iceland hammered COVID with science.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03284-3

_Brian · 27-11-2020 8:45am

greysides wrote: »

How Iceland hammered COVID with science.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03284-3

An enviable position position, small population, good facilities to test and trace, no land border with a nation not taking it as seriously as they should.

endainoz · 27-11-2020 2:11pm

_Brian wrote: »

An enviable position position, small population, good facilities to test and trace, no land border with a nation not taking it as seriously as they should.

An interesting article all the same, the different scientific approach is fascinating.

Yes the land border is of course a serious issue, we are about to open pubs and non essential retail again yet there is nothing stopping anyone from the north to go to a border county for Christmas shopping. The "all island approach" never took off the ground.

It would be still worth looking into the idea of mass testing but it would need to be a joint approach of UK and Ireland for it to work. But the tories have little value in human life so I can't see it happening.

yosemitesam1 · 28-11-2020 9:25am

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/public-health-doctors-overwhelmingly-back-strike-action-over-pay-and-contracts-1.4421560%3fmode=amp

At least the poor public health doctors might benefit from covid. An extra 30-80k a year would be a nice bonus while the economy disintegrates

wrangler · 28-11-2020 11:49am

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/public-health-doctors-overwhelmingly-back-strike-action-over-pay-and-contracts-1.4421560%3fmode=amp

At least the poor public health doctors might benefit from covid. An extra 30-80k a year would be a nice bonus while the economy disintegrates

I see that the government is backing out of their promise to leave the pension age at 66, apparently this is to be reconsidered and announced inthe summer.
This'll be another examples of civil servants with their gilt edge pensions taking it from us commoners.
Someone on here referred to it as ''pulling up the ladder'' ..... thought it was a great term.
Civil servants get the bonuses the peasants take the cuts.

Water John · 28-11-2020 6:07pm

Good point Wrangler. What I found dealing in another life with both Govn't and LAs was, once an objective was decided upon, no matter what happened or how many years went by, it was always at the top of the file and given any chance that policy was implemented.
Like charging for water, (which I agree with BTW), don't ever think it's shelved permanently.
Increasing the pension age is, part of policy, and is only temporarily postponed.

_Brian · 01-12-2020 10:22am

As L5 ends at last It will be interesting to see how well we can keep numbers under control.

There’s considerable feeling among folk I’ve been talking to over lately few days that Jan6th will see another L5 lockdown, that’s not an nice thought.

Reggie. · 01-12-2020 10:30am

_Brian wrote: »

As L5 ends at last It will be interesting to see how well we can keep numbers under control.

There’s considerable feeling among folk I’ve been talking to over lately few days that Jan6th will see another L5 lockdown, that’s not an nice thought.

Sure that was said months ago

whelan2 · 01-12-2020 10:34am

Tbh the most recent lockdown wasn't too severe. There was a bit of normality about it. Just passed by my mother heading to mass for the first time in 6 weeks

wrangler · 01-12-2020 10:49am

Water John wrote: »

Good point Wrangler. What I found dealing in another life with both Govn't and LAs was, once an objective was decided upon, no matter what happened or how many years went by, it was always at the top of the file and given any chance that policy was implemented.
Like charging for water, (which I agree with BTW), don't ever think it's shelved permanently.
Increasing the pension age is, part of policy, and is only temporarily postponed.

OH is 66 in 2021 so will be peeved if it changes, but she has her public service pension anyway.

yosemitesam1 · 01-12-2020 12:44pm

_Brian wrote: »

As L5 ends at last It will be interesting to see how well we can keep numbers under control.

There’s considerable feeling among folk I’ve been talking to over lately few days that Jan6th will see another L5 lockdown, that’s not an nice thought.

I think it's pretty much a given, unless changes are made to testing. As a small to moderate rise will lead to test numbers being ramped up by 20+% over a short period of time giving the illusion of a much faster rise than actually is going on.
We still have no way of knowing what the test results actually represent

greysides · 01-12-2020 2:43pm

wrangler wrote: »

OH is 66 in 2021 so will be peeved if it changes, but she has her public service pension anyway.

Public service..?

dzer2 · 01-12-2020 2:45pm

greysides wrote: »

Public service..?

Now now, hunting with the dogs and running with the hiare

wrangler · 01-12-2020 2:45pm

greysides wrote: »

Public service..?

It wouldn't be polite to send it back

_Brian · 01-12-2020 4:42pm

greysides wrote: »

Public service..?

The very ones someone always slating as useless, incompetent and lazy. 😂😂
Seamus O’Rourke couldn’t script it better.

Water John · 01-12-2020 5:46pm

I'd say Wrangler will be put into stocks in the town square.
Now if the 'public servant' had been a teacher or such in times past then being married to a farmer meant she didn't pay income tax, like my NS teachers.

alps · 01-12-2020 5:57pm

Water John wrote: »

I'd say Wrangler will be put into stocks in the town square.
Now if the 'public servant' had been a teacher or such in times past then being married to a farmer meant she didn't pay income tax, like my NS teachers.

What? Seems like payback time now...

yosemitesam1 · 01-12-2020 6:25pm

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4037

_Brian · 01-12-2020 6:35pm

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

I think it's pretty much a given, unless changes are made to testing. As a small to moderate rise will lead to test numbers being ramped up by 20+% over a short period of time giving the illusion of a much faster rise than actually is going on.
We still have no way of knowing what the test results actually represent

In fairness testing is a response to people showing symptoms amd close contacts rather than your idea that testing is damped up to artificially increase covid numbers.

More people presenting with symptoms would be a result of more covid.

This tin foil hat **** is tiresome in the extreme.

paddysdream · 01-12-2020 6:43pm

Water John wrote: »

I'd say Wrangler will be put into stocks in the town square.
Now if the 'public servant' had been a teacher or such in times past then being married to a farmer meant she didn't pay income tax, like my NS teachers.

Very much off topic but where on Earth did you get that notion?
PAYE is in Ireland 60 years at this stage.

yosemitesam1 · 01-12-2020 7:11pm

_Brian wrote: »

In fairness testing is a response to people showing symptoms amd close contacts rather than your idea that testing is damped up to artificially increase covid numbers.

I don't think it's artificially ramped up, more it's a built in fault of the testing structure that leads to positives lagging behind reality when the first increases occur and then rapidly catching up to whatever percentage of actual covid in the population that it maxes out at (which is much less than 100%).
The problem is when we are in that catch-up phase, it appears as though there's exponential growth which leads to doomsday models and lockdown when it is not necessarily the case.

theaceofspies · 01-12-2020 9:15pm

paddysdream wrote: »

Very much off topic but where on Earth did you get that notion?
PAYE is in Ireland 60 years at this stage.

Everyone except the village idiot since circa 1980 has learned that the go-to GAA man believed that if you were 'true' club man that you would be rewarded with a job as a bank official, teacher, or a Garda for example. The rest could take their chances as a bar man or **** and take a boat outside of Eire.

Not many took up the bar man job. Most of those that did take that bar job are probably regretting it now more than ever.

Life changes slowly in Ireland despite what people think.

ruwithme · 01-12-2020 9:34pm

If it wasn't Christmas in 24 days time,tony hooligan would still have us in level 5,maybe even higher.his expectations of 50 to 100 positive covid daily cases by the 2nd of December were unrealistic.

Enjoy the next few weeks folks,as i fear Tony with the help of the media (more than people being irresponsible)will have us notched back up the levels. he's clearly a determined man when he gets a notion,and will get his way with weak politicians.

paddysdream · 01-12-2020 9:34pm

theaceofspies wrote: »

Everyone except the village idiot since circa 1980 has learned that the go-to GAA man believed that if you were 'true' club man that you would be rewarded with a job as a bank official, teacher, or a Garda for example. The rest could take their chances as a bar man or **** and take a boat outside of Eire.

Not many took up the bar man job. Most of those that did take that bar job are probably regretting it now more than ever.

Life changes slowly in Ireland despite what people think.

?

greysides · 01-12-2020 10:07pm

Mod:Let's get the ship back on course, lads.

_Brian · 01-12-2020 10:22pm

I don’t get that people think Tony amd NEPHET have some hard on for having the country locked up. What do people think they gain from that ??

I think it’s more a case people don’t understand that NEPHET are tasked with advising what measures are required to best contain the virus. They aren’t tasked with social, emotional or business issues, just virus control. So it’s obvious their advice is going to be on the tighter side of restrictions because without a vaccine that’s how it’s controlled.

The government amd elected politicians have the task of combining Nephet advice with other needs and so we see what’s implemented being different to what nephet advise.

I don’t see that as a power struggle, it’s a case of taking advice from professionals amd than implementing that in a way that politicians think will work considering ALL aspects and not just virus containment.

It’s an odd system that the government have set nephet up to give separate press briefing to government briefings. Personally I like it like that. I’d rather hear things straight from scientific professionals than Stephen Donnelly’s interpretation of what he thinks I should hear.

dh1985 · 01-12-2020 11:04pm

_Brian wrote: »

I don’t get that people think Tony amd NEPHET have some hard on for having the country locked up. What do people think they gain from that ??

I think it’s more a case people don’t understand that NEPHET are tasked with advising what measures are required to best contain the virus. They aren’t tasked with social, emotional or business issues, just virus control. So it’s obvious their advice is going to be on the tighter side of restrictions because without a vaccine that’s how it’s controlled.

The government amd elected politicians have the task of combining Nephet advice with other needs and so we see what’s implemented being different to what nephet advise.

I don’t see that as a power struggle, it’s a case of taking advice from professionals amd than implementing that in a way that politicians think will work considering ALL aspects and not just virus containment.

It’s an odd system that the government have set nephet up to give separate press briefing to government briefings. Personally I like it like that. I’d rather hear things straight from scientific professionals than Stephen Donnelly’s interpretation of what he thinks I should hear.

There is no harm in questioning their policies. There not infallible. Tony holohan was the same man that publicly said there would only be an odd case on the island last february/march. These are also the people involved with running our hospitals where there is large outbreaks continuously shutting down other essential services like cancer diagnosis and treatment. The people of Ireland have done what has been asked of them in the most part and have sacrificed lots. Tony was quick coming out a week or two ago pointing to funerals as a cause of cases but no word mentioned to the naas or limerick hospital outbreaks and the lack or pre admission testing in a number of hospitals.
Found of finger pointing unless it's on their own watch.
And it's not what they gain from it more what ordinary Joe's.are sacrificing. There pay is guaranteed. The girls and guys working in Penney's not so fortunate

Albert Johnson · 01-12-2020 11:20pm

ruwithme wrote: »

If it wasn't Christmas in 24 days time,tony hooligan would still have us in level 5,maybe even higher.his expectations of 50 to 100 positive covid daily cases by the 2nd of December were unrealistic.

Enjoy the next few weeks folks,as i fear Tony with the help of the media (more than people being irresponsible)will have us notched back up the levels. he's clearly a determined man when he gets a notion,and will get his way with weak politicians.

I think it was a mistake to give NPHET the chance to independently voice there recommendations as is currently happening. There an advisory committee to officials, no private business would allow them to make recommendations to anyone outside of those tasked with decision making. By letting Tony and co publicly voice there own ideas the government have lost the ability to make decisions based on anything other than NPHET findings. We're now reaching a stage where I'm wondering is it the elected officials or the so called expert's that are making the daily decisions. I blame a lack of leadership at the start and I always thought that Holohan was being set up as a scapegoat to be used if the earliest doomsday predictions came to pass.

I have little faith in most of those in charge atm but Holohans professional record isn't without blemish either although all seems to be forgotten in recent months. I'm no fan of Donnelly among others but looking at this situation solely from a medical practitioners point of view will be our undoing imo. How can you try to legislate for all factors when one group have independent public briefings every day from which to lobby there version of events. The fact that the death rate skyrocketed on the first day post lockdown is also convenient imo, that will pave the way nicely for the topic of more restrictions in the new year.

Water John · 01-12-2020 11:34pm

We can see in the UK and US what happened when it was politicised.

vincenzolorenzo · 02-12-2020 10:57am

_Brian wrote: »

I don’t get that people think Tony amd NEPHET have some hard on for having the country locked up. What do people think they gain from that ??

I think it’s more a case people don’t understand that NEPHET are tasked with advising what measures are required to best contain the virus. They aren’t tasked with social, emotional or business issues, just virus control. So it’s obvious their advice is going to be on the tighter side of restrictions because without a vaccine that’s how it’s controlled.

.....

It’s an odd system that the government have set nephet up to give separate press briefing to government briefings. Personally I like it like that. I’d rather hear things straight from scientific professionals than Stephen Donnelly’s interpretation of what he thinks I should hear.

You've answered your own question. Nphet are looking at one aspect of the virus only, i.e. minimise the incident rate, and it is not their job to look at the bigger picture. If we all stayed at home like April and everywhere was closed we'd have no virus but the country would be bankrupt and we'd have tens of thousands of kids receiving no education. Not realistic.

Taoiseach Tony has a live TV broadcast every day and is the most powerful man in the country, not the lads we elected last February. Nphet's job is supposed to be to advise the government, and IMO the daily broadcast is overstepping the mark

_Brian · 02-12-2020 11:03am

vincenzolorenzo wrote: »

You've answered your own question. Nphet are looking at one aspect of the virus only, i.e. minimise the incident rate, and it is not their job to look at the bigger picture. If we all stayed at home like April and everywhere was closed we'd have no virus but the country would be bankrupt and we'd have tens of thousands of kids receiving no education. Not realistic.

Taoiseach Tony has a live TV broadcast every day and is the most powerful man in the country, not the lads we elected last February. Nphet's job is supposed to be to advise the government, and IMO the daily broadcast is overstepping the mark

It’s just an information briefing.
Would you rather get information only Stephen Donnelly feels you need??

This post is a prime example of not understanding what an adviser does. The public briefings were set up by the government.

I listen to science amd science professionals, politicians ALWAYS have an angle to spin on something.

Gillespy · 02-12-2020 1:13pm

Listen to the science translates to listen to the science that I agree with.

The angle is the bigger picture. Little tyrants like Tony need to be reminded who is in charge.

yosemitesam1 · 02-12-2020 1:31pm

_Brian wrote: »

It’s just an information briefing.
Would you rather get information only Stephen Donnelly feels you need??

This post is a prime example of not understanding what an adviser does. The public briefings were set up by the government.

I listen to science amd science professionals, politicians ALWAYS have an angle to spin on something.

Everyone has their own angle to spin. There's an awful lot of parasites masquerading as academics. But nphet doesn't even have many (if any) that could really pass as scientists. It's almost entirely HSE/civil service staff

Edit to say that people would much rather if raw data and the the models in use were published in their entirety

Water John · 03-12-2020 11:27pm

Biden says, on inaugeration day he will ask all Americans to mask for 100 days.

longgonesilver · 03-12-2020 11:59pm

Thats going to be far too late unfortunatly.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-40130774.html

https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-40139525.html

yosemitesam1 · 05-12-2020 10:12am

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/pfizer-chairman-not-clear-people-spread-covid-19-after-vaccine-2020-12%3famp

After cashing in on his Pfizer stock last month the CEO admits they don't know if the vaccine will prevent people spreading covid.
If it can't do that, there's no point in vaccinating a large amount of the population. It remains to be seen also does it protect against severe illness

Reggie. · 05-12-2020 10:56am

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/pfizer-chairman-not-clear-people-spread-covid-19-after-vaccine-2020-12%3famp

After cashing in on his Pfizer stock last month the CEO admits they don't know if the vaccine will prevent people spreading covid.
If it can't do that, there's no point in vaccinating a large amount of the population. It remains to be seen also does it protect against severe illness

Shock horror there. What did they think would be the story after rushing the development

_Brian · 05-12-2020 11:27am

Soooo taking the vaccine is better protection than waiting for other people to take it and hoping your protected.

Sorta makes sense right.

Taking the vaccine doesn’t stop you spreading it round by poor hand hygiene etc.

endainoz · 05-12-2020 11:44am

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/pfizer-chairman-not-clear-people-spread-covid-19-after-vaccine-2020-12%3famp

After cashing in on his Pfizer stock last month the CEO admits they don't know if the vaccine will prevent people spreading covid.
If it can't do that, there's no point in vaccinating a large amount of the population. It remains to be seen also does it protect against severe illness

I don't see an issue with the stock thing that you keep bringing up, it was a perfectly acceptable business decision, nothing underhanded about it.

The vaccine won't work if it's not given to a large number of the population, this can be eradicated if the take up is high enough. As Brian said people could still be carriers, the virus can stay on a surface for a certain period of time.

I saw a doctor speak about this before and the way to look as it would be to imagine a "swiss cheese" type scenario. One slice would represent the vaccine, anti vaxxers would be some holes in that slice. The next slice would be hand hygiene, the next would be social distancing etc. You get the idea; the vaccine is not a silver bullet, it needs to be used in conjunction with other methods.

Coronavirus Pandemic Information- Local and Worldwide

Comments