Corona virus in waterford

Hijpo

OhToBeByTheSea wrote: »

How do you know this?

Are you going to try and convince us that social distancing, wearing masks, washing hands and avoiding social events actually doesn't work and that the biggest risk of catching covid is solely down to the fact I don't stay within 5k of my house? Because that's what it boils down to if your going to go down that road.

spookwoman

Hijpo wrote: »

Are you going to try and convince us that social distancing, wearing masks, washing hands and avoiding social events actually doesn't work and that the biggest risk of catching covid is solely down to the fact I don't stay within 5k of my house? Because that's what it boils down to if your going to go down that road.

social distancing, wearing masks, washing hands and avoiding social events is never going to work 100%. In work there will be a risk of getting it because there is a chance of someone may not be washing their hands etc. You also cannot guarantee they are following restrictions either and if they are not that increases the risk even more. Just look the the recent outbreaks for that.
You also don't know what your family are up to either and they would be in the same boat as you if they work.
Don't need to be Einstein to figure out more contacts, more risk, more travel more risk. You also don't know if area's you are traveling to are hot spots, if they are, more risk. Place 15km away might have an outbreak at least if the following the guidelines and stay in their 5km limit more chance of it staying in the area.
The reason why the want people to stay with in 5km is it's easier to track and track and if there is an outbreak more chance of finding out where it originated from.

The only way to be 0% risk is live in a hermetically sealed environment with controlled exchange of gases and everything disinfected and whatever else that will 100% make sure there is no covid on a surface.

smellyoldboot

I have been practicing social disturbancing before even CoVid was cool and it's been working very well.

killbillvol2

Hijpo wrote: »

I am not asymptomatic because i do not have covid, i know i do not and did not have covid because i am taking the necessary precautions to protect myself which is mask and hand washing, social distancing and more importantly no gatherings. I believe there is a huge difference between what i am doing and blatantly getting on a luas to sing and shout without a mask to antagonize others for example. From my own perspective, its not a case of "they are doing it why dont i", the government simply has not encouraged me to change my behavior. So, i will not "double down" this time around, i will continue to do what i have done for the last nine months, which has been 100% successful so far.



So, do you understand that was not the logic that was used when deducing 50 teenagers getting smashed at a house party without ANY regard for protecting themselves should be refused hospital admission, i said that the comparison to people in prison was stupid. Refusing hospital admission people who act like this would help with what Spookwoman said above ie "working their ar*es off in hospitals dealing with covid patients and the extra work" and im all for it.



Don't get suckered in by people plucking what they want out of posts. Someone eating burgers isn't going to infect their neighbor with fat and heart disease. I don't think they need to restrict McDonalds however they did restrict smoking because of the effects of second hand smoke for example. The point i was making was that if people are asked to social distance then 50 of them cram into a house then there needs to be consequences for that. This is the second time it has happened and now we are seeing more cases being reported in schools.


Yes i did, and i stand by those comments.

You are being extremely disingenuous to the situation. This was not 8 close friends out the back, it was 50 people (being a teenager means nothing) in house and they are not big houses. 50 people....

I see that I correctly assumed that you don't have a grasp of logic.

Hijpo

spookwoman wrote: »

social distancing, wearing masks, washing hands and avoiding social events is never going to work 100%. In work there will be a risk of getting it because there is a chance of someone may not be washing their hands etc. You also cannot guarantee they are following restrictions either and if they are not that increases the risk even more. Just look the the recent outbreaks for that.

So the main things we are supposed to be doing for the last 9 months, the things that kept our transmission rates in single figures for so long are not as effective as we think they are? Keep in mind that this was while we did not have a 5km restriction etc
I dont trust people to stick to the restrictions, that is why i social distance.

spookwoman wrote: »

You also don't know what your family are up to either and they would be in the same boat as you if they work.

The family members i meet are all responsible adults. I have every confidence in there actions for instance they wont host a session or other moronic stuff like that.

spookwoman wrote: »

Don't need to be Einstein to figure out more contacts, more risk, more travel more risk. You also don't know if area's you are traveling to are hot spots, if they are, more risk. Place 15km away might have an outbreak at least if the following the guidelines and stay in their 5km limit more chance of it staying in the area.
The reason why the want people to stay with in 5km is it's easier to track and track and if there is an outbreak more chance of finding out where it originated from.

Complete strangers live within 5km of you, use the same shops you use etc but if masks and washing hands still opens you up to the risk of catching it and with the likes of shops etc track and trace is impossible so the 5km is not as effective as some would like think it is. They can find the outbreak? and if they did what will they do with that information? they wont share it with the public so no one knows where not to go anyway. All completely pointless.

In my mind locking myself in a house and refusing to see anyone until christmas is absurd when intercounty GAA matches are still ploughing on. If locking yourself away puts your mind at ease thats perfectly fine also. I take the necessary measures to make sure i dont contract covid.

Hijpo

killbillvol2 wrote: »

I see that I correctly assumed that you don't have a grasp of logic.

I take it by resorting to a lame one liner you had nothing insightful to post.
cool.

Micky Bluenips

Hijpo wrote: »

Are you going to try and convince us that social distancing, wearing masks, washing hands and avoiding social events actually doesn't work and that the biggest risk of catching covid is solely down to the fact I don't stay within 5k of my house? Because that's what it boils down to if your going to go down that road.

They reduce the chances not make it 100% certain not to catch it. Can you honestly say in nine months you haven't once not accidentally followed the guidelines. Iv been very careful but I can't say I'm 100% certain that I haven't forgot to wash my hands, or done a shop and there's no hand sanitizer on way out and didn't contaminate myself before I got home to wash hands.

Hijpo

Micky Bluenips wrote: »

They reduce the chances not make it 100% certain not to catch it. Can you honestly say in nine months you haven't once not accidentally followed the guidelines. Iv been very careful but I can't say I'm 100% certain that I haven't forgot to wash my hands, or done a shop and there's no hand sanitizer on way out and didn't contaminate myself before I got home to wash hands.

Yes, they reduce the chances, significantly enough that without level 5 our cases were single figures sometimes 0. I have hand sanitizer in my car and always use the sanitizer when entering and exiting shops as well as washing when I get home. It should have always been an automatic task. Social distancing significantly reduces the possibility of an asymptomatic person infecting me. The time lines of testing, results and contact tracing are very quick. Anyone who is tested gets results the next day, when the results are out the close contacts are identified and scheduled for testing asap. While this happens every possible infection is isolated.
Just to add that an entry in september on the Lancet medical journal states that even though the virus can survive on inanimate surfaces, attempts to cultivate the virus from those surfaces were not successful.

What are the main sources of transmission lately?

spookwoman

Hijpo wrote: »

Yes, they reduce the chances, significantly enough that without level 5 our cases were single figures sometimes 0

There is a reason why they don't follow day by day numbers and most follow a 7 / 14 day rolling total because the testing and numbers are erratic. Our number have been going up since level 3 lockdown. It's why level 5 was implemented because numbers were increasing nationwide. The 7 day rolling number was starting to go down 2 weeks ago but but have been slowly going back up again to 130 over 7 days cases as of yesterday. I haven't included todays as the briefing number can change for the official count on gov.ie the next day.

Hijpo wrote: »

Yes, they reduce the chances, significantly enough that without level 5 our cases were single figures sometimes 0. I have hand sanitizer in my car and always use the sanitizer when entering and exiting shops as well as washing when I get home. It should have always been an automatic task.

We are not robots we make mistake and slip up you cannot say you have never done that.

Hijpo wrote: »

Social distancing significantly reduces the possibility of an asymptomatic person infecting me.

Doesn't not matter if asymptomatic or symptomatic they still shed the virus.

Hijpo wrote: »

The time lines of testing, results and contact tracing are very quick. Anyone who is tested gets results the next day, when the results are out the close contacts are identified and scheduled for testing asap. While this happens every possible infection is isolated.

The following metrics and turnaround times refer to the 7 day date range from 3rd – 9 th of November. https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/newsfeatures/covid19-updates/covid-19-testing-and-contact-tracing-update-12-november-2020.pdf
Turnaround
• Swab to lab result for community and acute settings is 1.1 days.
• All contact tracing is completed within 0.8 days (median) – including all complex cases.
• Over 95% of people received their result in 48 hours or less from swabbing appointment, 75% in 36 hours or less.
• In the last seven days, we have delivered a median turnaround time from referral to communication of not detected
result in community settings of 1.6 days.
• In the last seven days, we have delivered a median turnaround time from referral to communication of a detected result
in community settings of 2.2 days (includes contact tracing)
• It is important to note that approximately 96.1% of all tests that are processed are not detected and in the last 7 days,
approximately 3.9% of all tests were detected. Process and system improvements are being made continuously to meet
increasing capacity requirements, to improve data quality and optimise turnaround times.

Hijpo wrote: »

Just to add that an entry in september on the Lancet medical journal states that even though the virus can survive on inanimate surfaces, attempts to cultivate the virus from those surfaces were not successful.

What are the main sources of transmission lately?

31.7% Community, 65.40% Close Contact with confirmed case, 1.4% Travel abroad, 1.5% they don't know how people got infected.
As of sat 14th.
There was an increase of 313 outbreaks in private houses, 14 in workplace, 11 unknown, 26 other *Other outbreak location includes community, extended family, hotel, public house, retail outlet, travel related and all other locations.
1 nursing home, 2 residential institute, 2 hospital, 33 community hospital long stay unit.

More detailed breakdown here https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/covid-19outbreaksclustersinireland/COVID-19%20Weekly%20Outbreak%20Highlights_Web_Week462020_17112020_v.1.0.pdf

Hijpo

spookwoman wrote: »

There is a reason why they don't follow day by day numbers and most follow a 7 / 14 day rolling total because the testing and numbers are erratic. Our number have been going up since level 3 lockdown. It's why level 5 was implemented because numbers were increasing nationwide. The 7 day rolling number was starting to go down 2 weeks ago but but have been slowly going back up again to 130 over 7 days cases as of yesterday. I haven't included todays as the briefing number can change for the official count on gov.ie the next day.


We are not robots we make mistake and slip up you cannot say you have never done that.


Doesn't not matter if asymptomatic or symptomatic they still shed the virus.


The following metrics and turnaround times refer to the 7 day date range from 3rd – 9 th of November. https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/newsfeatures/covid19-updates/covid-19-testing-and-contact-tracing-update-12-november-2020.pdf
Turnaround
• Swab to lab result for community and acute settings is 1.1 days.
• All contact tracing is completed within 0.8 days (median) – including all complex cases.
• Over 95% of people received their result in 48 hours or less from swabbing appointment, 75% in 36 hours or less.
• In the last seven days, we have delivered a median turnaround time from referral to communication of not detected
result in community settings of 1.6 days.
• In the last seven days, we have delivered a median turnaround time from referral to communication of a detected result
in community settings of 2.2 days (includes contact tracing)
• It is important to note that approximately 96.1% of all tests that are processed are not detected and in the last 7 days,
approximately 3.9% of all tests were detected. Process and system improvements are being made continuously to meet
increasing capacity requirements, to improve data quality and optimise turnaround times.





31.7% Community, 65.40% Close Contact with confirmed case, 1.4% Travel abroad, 1.5% they don't know how people got infected.
As of sat 14th.
There was an increase of 313 outbreaks in private houses, 14 in workplace, 11 unknown, 26 other *Other outbreak location includes community, extended family, hotel, public house, retail outlet, travel related and all other locations.
1 nursing home, 2 residential institute, 2 hospital, 33 community hospital long stay unit.

More detailed breakdown here https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/covid-19outbreaksclustersinireland/COVID-19%20Weekly%20Outbreak%20Highlights_Web_Week462020_17112020_v.1.0.pdf

We know what drove the numbers up, it wasn't because we were not in level 5 lockdown, it spaces quite a bit smaller than 5km.

The advise we are given is social distance to 2m from people. A WHO study showed that physical distancing of <1 m was reported to result in a transmission risk of 12.8%, compared with 2.6% at distances ≥1 m.

I did not slip up, I see absolutely no reason why someone could forget to wash their hands.

People do shed the virus yes, but the risk of transmission is down to your actions and my actions have reduced the likelihood of me contracting covid 19.

So up to the 10th they had quick turn around times and are implementing improvements. That's fantastic. The only delay is track and trace which is understandable.

65% were a close contact of a confirmed case and large outbreaks in private houses, so more than likely socialising in a house setting which I have been distancing myself from and 31% community transmission. 31% community transmission, in other words they couldn't be linked to a known infection, like someone drinking take away pints in cork ends up with covid but cant say who the contact was for example.

Thanks for the link.

BBM77

Put things in a bit of perspective lads. There has not been one death in Waterford from COVID-19.

https://www.wlrfm.com/2020/11/19/icu-upgrade-at-uhw/

You are going to drive yourselves mad obsessing over rates and mortality from COVID-19.

The Continental Op

BBM77 wrote: »

Put things in a bit of perspective lads. There has not been one death in Waterford from COVID-19.

https://www.wlrfm.com/2020/11/19/icu-upgrade-at-uhw/

You are going to drive yourselves mad obsessing over rates and mortality from COVID-19.

NO. That article says there have been no deaths in ICU not no deaths in Waterford.

sportsfan90

BBM77 wrote: »

Put things in a bit of perspective lads. There has not been one death in Waterford from COVID-19.

https://www.wlrfm.com/2020/11/19/icu-upgrade-at-uhw/

You are going to drive yourselves mad obsessing over rates and mortality from COVID-19.

Considering we’ve gone just beyond the 2,000 deaths mark, it would be mind boggling if not one of them was in Waterford.

The article states that nobody died of it in the hospital, so maybe people died at home from it and were subsequently found to have had covid at time of death? Or am I missing something??

Wanderer78

BBM77 wrote: »

Put things in a bit of perspective lads. There has not been one death in Waterford from COVID-19.

https://www.wlrfm.com/2020/11/19/icu-upgrade-at-uhw/

You are going to drive yourselves mad obsessing over rates and mortality from COVID-19.

so were those individuals in other hospitals in the region, or just didnt make it to icu?

this is the most significant global evident, possible since ww2, and since we live in the age of communication, its fairly obvious, most humans will in fact behave as such!

Wanderer78

sportsfan90 wrote: »

Considering we’ve gone just beyond the 2,000 deaths mark, it would be mind boggling if not one of them was in Waterford.

The article states that nobody died of it in the hospital, so maybe people died at home from it and were subsequently found to have had covid at time of death? Or am I missing something??

nope you re not missing anything, you are correct, the article only states nobody has died in the icu unit in uhw, which is an amazing achievement in itself

BBM77

The Continental Op wrote: »

NO. That article says there have been no deaths in ICU not no deaths in Waterford.

Don't you think there should be deaths in ICU? Considering the restrictions we are all suffering under that you'd expect there would be people who are dying now in ICU?

The reality is cases does not mean hospitalisations. This article just proves what many said at the start of this lockdown. That this lockdown is unnecessary.

Suppose I will be called a COVID denier, I don’t care about people or don’t want a functioning health service because I don’t follow the panic.

Flow Motion

The Continental Op wrote: »

NO. That article says there have been no deaths in ICU not no deaths in Waterford.

Personally I hope nobody from the locatity has died. Not being ghoulish or morbid but it would be interesting to know the number of deaths in Waterford from Covid. What are we @ now in terms of case numbers... about 950?

Wanderer78

BBM77 wrote: »

Don't you think there should be deaths in ICU? Considering the restrictions we are all suffering under that you'd expect there would be people who are dying now in ICU?

The reality is cases does not mean hospitalisations. This article just proves what many said at the start of this lockdown. That this lockdown is unnecessary.

Suppose I will be called a COVID denier, I don’t care about people or don’t want a functioning health service because I don’t follow the panic.

its clearly obvious, our healthcare system has been struggling to deal with this virus, we simply didnt have the capacity to deal with a none lockdown policy, this is clearly obvious

BBM77

Wanderer78 wrote: »

its clearly obvious, our healthcare system has been struggling to deal with this virus, we simply didnt have the capacity to deal with a none lockdown policy, this is clearly obvious

Well they are not. There would be deaths and people dying who cannot get into ICU if they were. Why a lockdown in Waterford when they are clearly not struggling anymore than they ever are?

Wanderer78

BBM77 wrote: »

Well they are not. There would be deaths and people dying who cannot get into ICU if they were. Why a lockdown in Waterford when they are clearly not struggling anymore than they ever are?

funnily enough, people move around, and a hospital is a little bit more than just an icu unit!

BBM77

Wanderer78 wrote: »

funnily enough, people move around, and a hospital is a little bit more than just an icu unit!

So what is your point?

Wanderer78

BBM77 wrote: »

Don't you think there should be deaths in ICU? Considering the restrictions we are all suffering under that you'd expect there would be people who are dying now in ICU?

The reality is cases does not mean hospitalisations. This article just proves what many said at the start of this lockdown. That this lockdown is unnecessary.

Suppose I will be called a COVID denier, I don’t care about people or don’t want a functioning health service because I don’t follow the panic.

BBM77 wrote: »

So what is your point?

that i believe you are very wrong

Hijpo

Wanderer78 wrote: »

that i believe you are very wrong

That's not a point, that's an opinion.

Wanderer78

Hijpo wrote: »

That's not a point, that's an opinion.

are you looking for a full stop, or something?

...or maybe the fact we have had no icu deaths, is directly related to the lockdowns.....

Hijpo

Wanderer78 wrote: »

are you looking for a full stop, or something?

...or maybe the fact we have had no icu deaths, is directly related to the lockdowns.....

If you can show data driven evidence of that "fact", keep in mind you said ICU deaths are directly related to lockdowns, then you will have made a point. Simply saying "I believe you are wrong" is not a point.

Wanderer78

Hijpo wrote: »

If you can show data driven evidence of that "fact", keep in mind you said ICU deaths are directly related to lockdowns, then you will have made a point. Simply saying "I believe you are wrong" is not a point.

how does one even find data for such a thing? is it you are the one that seems to be struggling with the whole point/opinion issue? the only fact we have here is, there has been no deaths in icu in uhw

Harry Palmr

7 today

Hijpo

Wanderer78 wrote: »

how does one even find data for such a thing? is it you are the one that seems to be struggling with the whole point/opinion issue? the only fact we have here is, there has been no deaths in icu in uhw

Well that's your problem if you have no data to back it up, I thought someone bandying about "facts" would actually have those facts to back up the apparent point they were making.

You were asked what your point was when when you said this

funnily enough, people move around, and a hospital is a little bit more than just an icu unit!

Then you quote a completely different post and cast your opinion on it.

Its very scatty.

Wanderer78

Hijpo wrote: »

Well that's your problem if you have no data to back it up, I thought someone bandying about "facts" would actually have those facts to back up the apparent point they were making.

You were asked what your point was when when you said this


Then you quote a completely different post and cast your opinion on it.

Its very scatty.

jesus, this is one hell of a weird conversation, again the only fact is there has been no deaths in icu at uhw, and thats it!!!!

Hijpo

Hijpo wrote: »

If you can show data driven evidence of that "fact", keep in mind you said ICU deaths are directly related to lockdowns, then you will have made a point. Simply saying "I believe you are wrong" is not a point.

Surely the reason,theres no/low icu deaths is that they dont put elderly (those most likely to die) into icu....our median icu age in this crisis maxed out at 63


I know of 2 people from kk,who were icu in dublin with the virus (thankfully,both survived,a walk in the park,this virus is not)