About 5 people out of 40m or whatever have been reinfected
4 Likes
Have they re tested everyone who was infected? How do they now positive tests now didnât previously have it? Either way you didnât understand the question, how is here immunity possible if any re-infection is.
This seems like a very odd sentiment. You donât strike me as someone who would stay quiet if there was any aspect of government policy/actions youâd disagree with.
1 Like
I had read that point about households before, thanks, which is instructive.
A cool considered take on Sweden as a model:
Here is a Swedish nativeâs perspective;
I cannot, at the moment, find the article that mentioned 12 times less population density to the UK, a sliver that stuck in my head. But the merest bit of googling delivers 11 times less (275 á 25).
No Government has made a good job of this in fairness.
The UK national statistics office estimated in August that there were fourteen times more cases than the reported numbers.
1 Like
The NPHET lads reckon we only missed x 3
Weâre nearly there so!
Well, yes, very true â and understandable in part.
But only in part. The Irish Government has failed most woefully in not communicating to people under 40 the desirability of not getting this virus. There should have been an intense targeted ad campaign over the summer in this regard. An analogy would be the one against heroin in the 1980s, which was seen as highly effective.
Of course, lads who go on with the âItâs only a codâ and âItâs only the fluâ schtick are very much part of the problem.
5 Likes
Whatâs the numbers today
- No deaths.
1 Like
No deathâŚOIUTF
1 Like
Malarkey a good addition to the debate here. Rattling a few cages and his general point that itâs not as simple a solution as some lads here believe is obviously valid. Tim riggins post a little while ago was excellent though. Long enough but well written and to the point and doesnât use big words for the sake of it.
4 Likes
Lots of death. Just none from Covid.
Maybe itâs got a mention already, donât have the time to read back. Dr Leo on the news there saying that retailers who are opening up under the guise of selling essential items are not acting fairly or adhering to the spirit of the law.
Not much spirit or fairness in it if your livelihood has been all but wiped out.
4 Likes
Why? The government is there to govern, not Gemma OâDoherty et al. That sentiment, roughly, is my meaning. The government can be voted out. A crank is a crank forever.
I am naturally cautious and therefore out of temperament as well as out of conviction I think it is right for the government to be cautious, to save people from themselves, to set driving speed limits, to restrict alcohol levels for drivers, to enforce seatbelts, to vaccinate children where appropriate, to enforce an indoor smoking ban, and so forth.
Other people differ, as is their right. But I have no intrinsic objection to the ânanny stateâ.
Which is not to say I think a Level 5 lockdown was a good idea per se. I do not (and am affected as regards work). But I give, for now, the benefit of doubt, out of caution.
1 Like
What exactly did this advertising campaign in the 80s achieve?
1 Like
I heard a snippet of Cillian DeGascun on the radio there but didnât hear it all.
Is there an issue now with the volumes of false negatives?
The view was that the campaign took away any subversive âglamourâ from heroin and made it anathema to significant sections of the young population at that time. Which is not to omit for a moment how heroin ravaged parts of Dublin in particular.
Know of two cases personally which got very dubious results that were most likely false positives. I know of one group of healthcare workers who lived/worked together who needed to be tested due to one of them testing positive. 5 of them went to one test centre and all tested positive, 4 of them were tested by a different service and all came back negative.
3 Likes