Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - HiMucker

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 136
1
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: June 02, 2020, 10:20:58 AM »
Thousands in Dublin marching yesterday which got the go ahead from the government.
Hundreds upon hundreds of youngsters gathering at beaches beauty spots yesterday in the north.
Now this is the reason that we need to get kids back to school and people back to work. To many people lying around doing nothing. A local park near me was bunged yesterday.
And suppose Iím contradicting myself here but the chances of getting Covid outside is as follows
2 metres = 1.3%
1 metre = 2.6%
No social distancing = 13%

Where did you get these figures?

2
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 17, 2020, 09:26:07 PM »
I agree. Just pointing out his error. I think Smurfy must be doing the stats for the Russians as well. Their published Covid-19 death figures are farcical and unbelievable
Yes does any believe Russia with 281,752 cases only has 2,631 deaths.

Yet if you look at the Russian overall (including non-covid) death toll compared to the 5 year average, its miles above.

Hard for Vlad to hide that.


[from someone who thought he'd make a good hard decision to get involved early and nip it in the bud... but didn't do a thing beyond closing borders. While that's a good start, you need belt and braces for this.]
What's it at? Do you have a link by any chance?
Have to say I thought Russia would have faired well. I thought dictatorships in general would have faired better as it was easier to take decisive action. Only one person had to be convinced. Look at UAE. One in ten people tested. Locked the place down straight away. I am by no means advocating for dictatorships btw lol.

3
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 17, 2020, 08:55:59 PM »
In the Bundesliga on tv at moment, players on field crashing into each other with no masks. Subs on bench, sit 2 meters apart but all have to wear masks. I think this shows the truth about masks, a gimmick to make us feel safe rather than be safe.
This is typical of this discussion board. Your coming out with this because of the view you had on people who wore masks at the start, that they were depriving front line NHS workers of masks. Which wasnt actually the case, but I understand why the government didn't want to tell people to wear them until they had their supply chain sorted. Your doubling down now. The evidence is irrefutable that they prevent  spread. Posters have tried to explain to you why that is, but you have chose to ignore that rather than admit you may have got it wrong. Your saying that it is a gimmick while at the same time I bet you cough in to your sleeve or elbow and away from people? Do you not see the contradiction there?

I have been consistent on this and the advise coming from the experts in this country was also consistent up until last week. Masks have a place, for front line workers and on busy subways etc. However they also give people a false sense of security causing them to relax social distancing. I don't recall the Irish government once mentioning Mask supply chain as a reason not wear them. You will see masks being fidgeted with and adjusted. Tell me if they are so key a protector why are so many health care workers getting infected? I suppose yuo believe that temp checks at airports will be an effective means to stop infection across borders too.

We have brought this virus back and flattened the curve and this was achieved without Masks or temp checks. What is happening now is politicians are moving away from data based science to lets convince everyone its safe to start going back to normal. Maybe they need to do that but I'd rather they would be honest about it instead of convincing fools that a mask will protect them.

Can you return to my previous post, do you think there is any point German players sitting on the subs bench 2m apart should be wearing masks. If you think it is sensible maybe you could explain why. If you think it is not sensible maybe you could hazard a guess at why they were asked to wear them?
I do think it is sensible. I think it's a relatively  low expense  precaution  to help prevent spread. I take your point that the players in the pitch do not have the same precautions, but the work place is a needs must in many ways. Same as my own workplace . I'll leave it to others to judge whether the Bundesliga should be back playing, but that decision ultimately had buy in from all the relevant stake holders.
Btw the way you haven't answered my question on the coughing in to the elbow/sleeve. If you deem this necessary why would a mask not be a sufficient step above that?

OK. The company I work is American, we are in the process of having inflicted on us compolsory mask wearing because some people in corporate (I might add, with zero factory experience) have decided this is what we will do. We are not alone, seems the way all the big US multinationals are going. We rolled out a pilot and here are the findings of it.
from the people wearing them...
- Masks are uncomfortable, have to keep fidgeting with them.
- Masks make us itch, have to reach under and scratch.
- We took them off as they were too hot
- We took them off as moisture was building up under them.

The observations of management were that initially people started encroaching into the 2m social distance zone as they felt a degree of extra protection. This in spite of us telling them over and over again that social distancing must be maintained with the mask.

So the feedback from the people wearing them means that with a mask, people are bringing their hands into contact with a zone protecting droplet more frequently than if they werent wearing on at all. You dont get that sneezing into your elbow.

Up until last week the expert advise to the Irish government said the same.

Here is what the WHO says (ie a group solely interested in public health)

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks


  • If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19.
    Wear a mask if you are coughing or sneezing.
    Masks are effective only when used in combination with frequent hand-cleaning with alcohol-based hand rub or soap and water.
    If you wear a mask, then you must know how to use it and dispose of it properly.

So they have a place obviously but that place is not every Tom, Dick and Harry wearing one when they walk their dog.
Itchy, I fully agree with you. There will be certain work place environments that the use of masks  will not be practical. If it's a case that it causes people to breach social distancing then I would agree it would seem impractical. My own work would be the same with noise of machines on the floor. The 2m is already tough without adding a mask to hinder hearing someone even more. The advantages and disadvantages for each workplace would need to be weighed up. I would suggest from my own experience that some of the cheaper ones are extremely uncomfortable if you have to wear all day. But you can get very good n95 masks, that I have used all day with little issues. Check out MSC supplies if your having issues and don't mind paying a wee bit more for a bit of comfort for yourself.  I am by no means arguing that using masks is a panacea. I'm merely saying it would be practical for the general public to use them when out shopping etc and that the evidence would suggest that it greatly prohibits the spread of the virus.

4
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 17, 2020, 08:20:44 PM »
Smurf is right while everyone else is wrong.
He's getting his facts straight from Karen.

I donít understand this. Itís a discussion board. What would you suggest he do? Agree with everyone? If you donít like or even understand the concept then you can leave.

Discussion involves at least a minimal attempt to entertain and dissect the merits of all arguments put forward. There is little evidence of that from Smurfy and a few like minded types on this thread over the last few months.

Instead, their approach seems to have been to avoid any genuine deliberation on ideas or information, in favour of a scattergun volley of misunderstood and misrepresented stats and titbits gleaned from a multitude of less than reliable sources.

It's all in very bad faith, and very like the climate change or anti-vaxxer 'debate'. Ignore discussion of core issues, because the evidence is overwhelmingly against them in this area, and instead throw out tangential trivia until you hit on something that can not be immediately explained. The failure to immediately explain away this usually inconsequential detail is then used as justification to rubbish the entire body of understanding of an issue, and a weird sort of victory is claimed.

The recent mentions of COVID-19 case incidence in Georgia, or of cancer death rates are both prime examples. Misunderstood, misrepresented, and tangential (or just completely irrelevant) to what was being discussed.
Spot on, and succinctly put

5
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 16, 2020, 10:35:53 PM »
What about Georgia in America? Cases gone down in 3 weeks? Everyone telling them including myself it was mad
I don't mean to be rude but your a f**king a idiot

6
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 16, 2020, 10:21:12 PM »
In the Bundesliga on tv at moment, players on field crashing into each other with no masks. Subs on bench, sit 2 meters apart but all have to wear masks. I think this shows the truth about masks, a gimmick to make us feel safe rather than be safe.
This is typical of this discussion board. Your coming out with this because of the view you had on people who wore masks at the start, that they were depriving front line NHS workers of masks. Which wasnt actually the case, but I understand why the government didn't want to tell people to wear them until they had their supply chain sorted. Your doubling down now. The evidence is irrefutable that they prevent  spread. Posters have tried to explain to you why that is, but you have chose to ignore that rather than admit you may have got it wrong. Your saying that it is a gimmick while at the same time I bet you cough in to your sleeve or elbow and away from people? Do you not see the contradiction there?

I have been consistent on this and the advise coming from the experts in this country was also consistent up until last week. Masks have a place, for front line workers and on busy subways etc. However they also give people a false sense of security causing them to relax social distancing. I don't recall the Irish government once mentioning Mask supply chain as a reason not wear them. You will see masks being fidgeted with and adjusted. Tell me if they are so key a protector why are so many health care workers getting infected? I suppose yuo believe that temp checks at airports will be an effective means to stop infection across borders too.

We have brought this virus back and flattened the curve and this was achieved without Masks or temp checks. What is happening now is politicians are moving away from data based science to lets convince everyone its safe to start going back to normal. Maybe they need to do that but I'd rather they would be honest about it instead of convincing fools that a mask will protect them.

Can you return to my previous post, do you think there is any point German players sitting on the subs bench 2m apart should be wearing masks. If you think it is sensible maybe you could explain why. If you think it is not sensible maybe you could hazard a guess at why they were asked to wear them?
I do think it is sensible. I think it's a relatively  low expense  precaution  to help prevent spread. I take your point that the players in the pitch do not have the same precautions, but the work place is a needs must in many ways. Same as my own workplace . I'll leave it to others to judge whether the Bundesliga should be back playing, but that decision ultimately had buy in from all the relevant stake holders.
Btw the way you haven't answered my question on the coughing in to the elbow/sleeve. If you deem this necessary why would a mask not be a sufficient step above that?

7
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 16, 2020, 05:06:13 PM »
In the Bundesliga on tv at moment, players on field crashing into each other with no masks. Subs on bench, sit 2 meters apart but all have to wear masks. I think this shows the truth about masks, a gimmick to make us feel safe rather than be safe.
This is typical of this discussion board. Your coming out with this because of the view you had on people who wore masks at the start, that they were depriving front line NHS workers of masks. Which wasnt actually the case, but I understand why the government didn't want to tell people to wear them until they had their supply chain sorted. Your doubling down now. The evidence is irrefutable that they prevent  spread. Posters have tried to explain to you why that is, but you have chose to ignore that rather than admit you may have got it wrong. Your saying that it is a gimmick while at the same time I bet you cough in to your sleeve or elbow and away from people? Do you not see the contradiction there?

8
We all know about Muff, but how many others are there?
There is a place not far from Muff, called Cockhill, its actually near Grainnes Gap. They have a decent wee football club called Cockhill Celtic.

9
GAA Discussion / Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« on: May 14, 2020, 04:49:46 PM »
This is great and all, but it just won't work in the real world. The 'shielding' strategy will never be airtight enough that you can afford to have a huge proportion of the population running around unchecked. The best way to keep death tolls down is to keep infections down across the entire population. Unless you don't really care about death tolls, because it's mostly just old and fat people dying and they don't matter.

If this was true, entire countries would shut down annually for the duration of the flu season.

Except that COVID-19 is much more infectious and has a much greater mortality rate than seasonal flu. This info has been available for weeks, keep up.

So your argument is about rates. At what mortality rates are you happy to see GAA games  and activities take place during the flu season?
This flu comparison stuff is really doing my head in. It is completely disingenuous. Though I know it happens to plenty of people especially elderly and vulnerable, I don't know of anyone that has been hospitalized or died of flu in my lifetime. I live in a place that has compared reasonably well in comparison to other places in Ireland and the UK during this pandemic, and in a very short space of time I know several people who have died, even more that have been hospitalized and plenty more who have been very very sick. Some of these people, including those who died, and hospitalized, were fit healthy adults ranging from in their 30s to 50s. It is nothing like the flu. It actually scares me how many people need to see this on their doorstep before they believe the severity of the whole thing.

No such comparison was made though. A question was asked.

Btw, I guarantee you know of people who have previously been hospitalized or died of flu. It is one of the biggest killers every year.
"If this was true, entire countries would shut down annually for the duration of the flu season" Really your not making any comparisons to flu?
Given that some governments made a complete balls of the thing comparing it to flu in early stages, you would think one would be careful even mentioning it on this subject. It has very little relevance apart from the similar method of transmission.

On your second point. You may be right, but a single person doesn't  spring to mind. Though Im certain, there wasn't a heap of them in the last 8 years never mind the last 8 weeks.

10
GAA Discussion / Re: GAA Response to Coronavirus
« on: May 14, 2020, 04:24:56 PM »
This is great and all, but it just won't work in the real world. The 'shielding' strategy will never be airtight enough that you can afford to have a huge proportion of the population running around unchecked. The best way to keep death tolls down is to keep infections down across the entire population. Unless you don't really care about death tolls, because it's mostly just old and fat people dying and they don't matter.

If this was true, entire countries would shut down annually for the duration of the flu season.

Except that COVID-19 is much more infectious and has a much greater mortality rate than seasonal flu. This info has been available for weeks, keep up.

So your argument is about rates. At what mortality rates are you happy to see GAA games  and activities take place during the flu season?
This flu comparison stuff is really doing my head in. It is completely disingenuous. Though I know it happens to plenty of people especially elderly and vulnerable, I don't know of anyone that has been hospitalized or died of flu in my lifetime. I live in a place that has compared reasonably well in comparison to other places in Ireland and the UK during this pandemic, and in a very short space of time I know several people who have died, even more that have been hospitalized and plenty more who have been very very sick. Some of these people, including those who died, and hospitalized, were fit healthy adults ranging from in their 30s to 50s. It is nothing like the flu. It actually scares me how many people need to see this on their doorstep before they believe the severity of the whole thing.

11
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 13, 2020, 11:00:42 AM »
McWilliams explains it better in fairness
Why are you putting so much stock in what McWilliams says? Has he not just passed a pile of exams to get where he is at? How do you decide what experts you should listen to and who not to listen to?

12
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 12, 2020, 10:28:56 AM »
That's a really interesting article mcdanger

13
General discussion / Re: Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.
« on: May 09, 2020, 02:21:34 PM »
Anybody see Varadkars rant yesterday? Embarrassing, badly let himself down, completely lost his cool.

14
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 08, 2020, 04:10:11 PM »
Trailer talking nonsense again. Says the virus isn't going away but we should somehow be all going back to work.
As ITG rightly says, workers are not obliged to go back to work, and should work from home if they're not an essential worker as per the government instructions. Cashflow problems of the business are not the fault of the employee, and if they get sacked from work because their selfish boss wants to disobey government instructions and bring them back to work, the employees would be well within their rights to take them to court.
If you can work from home that's fine. A lot of other businesses like manufacturing etc, that's not the case and as RK has pointed out there is no legal right for continuation of furlough if your work as made appropriate work place provisions and  you are required back in. That's not bosses being selfish now. A lot of people think employers are trying to prevent furlough, in reality most are trying to prevent redundancies.

15
General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus
« on: May 08, 2020, 12:35:10 PM »
If a company returns to work and has all the relevant social distancing and safety precautions in place an employee is compelled to return to work unless they have been issued with a shielding letter from their GP which says they must stay off work for 12 weeks. If an employee has work and refuses to go then they will be removed from the furlough scheme and the company may proceed down the route of disciplinary action for refusing to work.

The furlough scheme means the employer pays the 80% and this is claimed back through the government. If the company is open as usual then they are not entitled to claim furlough for anyone who does not have a shielded letter, if they are open but limited staffing then the company has options. If an employee is working even on a part time basis then they are not eligible for the furlough scheme.
Thanks RK, that's what I thought. Seems a lot of confusion round this in the general public even judging by the different posts on here.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 136