Covid 19 Part XX-26,644 in ROI (1,772 deaths) 6,064 in NI (556 deaths) (08/08)Read OP

owlbethere

Onesea wrote: »

The men who tested positive on the building site never knew they were ill. They would have continued on working no bother on them. So it's a serious illness which doesn't effect you, and there is a good chance you never knew you had or have it.Clown world.
The hospitals should be at full steam ahead keeping the country running.

It was linked here yesterday about the role of viral load in the virus. If someone is exposed to the virus and receives a low viral load, chances are their illness can be mild and asymptomatic.


If we all went back to the way life was before and neglected the importance of social distancing and hygiene measures on cough and sneeze etiquette, we would probably be looking at a different picture and many people experiencing more of a severe illness.

hmmm

US2 wrote: »

unless your old and frail or have serious underlying conditions this disease its harmless. Obviously there is the odd exception, same as the flu. The longer this goes on the more obvious that is. Hardly anyone being hospitalised with this.

Wrong. Completely wrong and dangerous.

US2

US2 wrote: »

Varadkar tweeted it. People who never even had a test were put down as death with covid. People who died of other illnesses were put down as covid. This is a known fact in most countries now.

It wasn't purposefully exaggerated. Do you know anything about the reporting of deaths in the presence of a notifiable disease?
In truth what the excess death data has shown us is that our success in containing the disease were better than we thought. Even so, in the best case we have a death rate or IFR in excess of 0.5%. For Flu its less than 0.1%.

Not as serious as first feared, but a hell of an impact nonetheless

Boggles

US2 wrote: »

unless your old and frail or have serious underlying conditions this disease its harmless. Obviously there is the odd exception, same as the flu. The longer this goes on the more obvious that is. Hardly anyone being hospitalised with this.

When was the last time 8 health care workers died of the flu in 3 months?

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

When was the last time 8 health care workers died of the flu in 3 months?

They must have had underlying conditions Boggles, and therefore don't count according to some

ACitizenErased

hmmm wrote: »

Wrong. Completely wrong and dangerous.

It appears the looneys are out spouting nonsense today

caveat emptor

Non solum non ambulabit wrote: »

You are using test numbers to present your argument. I am saying that test numbers are flawed. If you want to say Ireland is doing poor v USA you have to use a consistent measure. It excess deaths will do that for you.

That is my only point.

Ok great. Then we won't bother looking at the daily tests today.
It's the number one talked about topic on this thread.
With daily running commentary.
Higher lower , who knows?

Glad we don't have to worry about them anymore. What will people talk about?

Thanks

caveat emptor

caveat emptor wrote: »

Ok great. Then we won't bother looking at the daily tests today.
It's the number one talked about topic on this thread.
With daily running commentary.
Higher lower , who knows?

Glad we don't have to worry about them anymore. What will people talk about?

Thanks

This discussion is ongoing since march. If your testing criteria is consistent day to day numbers are representative, even if you are missing cases. When testing regimes are vastly different daily case numbers are vastly different. It does appear most western countries at least are on a similar path re testing now so country to country comparisons of case rates are likely valid. In march however it was directional only as testing was all over the place.

GooglePlus

US2 wrote: »

unless your old and frail or have serious underlying conditions this disease its harmless. Obviously there is the odd exception, same as the flu. The longer this goes on the more obvious that is. Hardly anyone being hospitalised with this.

There's hardly anyone being hospitalised because we have the case levels low thanks to the measures we've all taken.

If you're using boards.ie, I'm assuming you have access to the world wide web. Use the thing.

caveat emptor

Deleted User wrote: »

This discussion is ongoing since march. If your testing criteria is consistent day to day numbers are representative, even if you are missing cases. When testing regimes are vastly different daily case numbers are vastly different. It does appear most western countries at least are on a similar path re testing now so country to country comparisons of case rates are likely valid. In march however it was directional only as testing was all over the place.

Yeah I agree with most of that.

There is a pattern on here though.

Daily cases number is high.....

• It must be a conspiracy
• Those tests are German?
• It's the weekend effect
• We are testing too much!
• people are hypochondriacs

Daily case number lower....

• great job guys
• Ireland is the best
• It's just going away by itself
• We'll be back to normal in no time
• Doom mongers are wrong
• Up (random county) 5 days without a case

Seamai

ZX7R wrote: »

I was out and about yesterday tying up a few things before my family and I depart these shores.
I was quite happily surprised by the numbers of people wearing masks there has definitely been a huge uptake in the wearing of them.
It was great to see.

I was in Mahon Point S.C in Cork this morning and I'd say between 90 and 95% were wearing masks which I was glad to see.

TomSweeney

This thread, it's either nothing to worry about, it's only a flu .... or it's the end of the world, bubonic plague x1000000 ....

Pulsating Star

One of the diaspora writing in the New York Times. Informing those stateside about the reality of travel to Ireland, possible welcome and return travel issues.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/23/opinion/passport-coronavirus-travel.html?referringSource=articleShare

Jim_Hodge

Seamai wrote: »

I was in Mahon Point S.C in Cork this morning and I'd say between 90 and 95% were wearing masks which I was glad to see.

The two extremes here. Was in Dunnes Stores and 100% wearing masks.

The petrol station/Spar shop has eight customers and none, bar myself, wore masks.

is_that_so

TomSweeney wrote: »

This thread, it's either nothing to worry about, it's only a flu .... or it's the end of the world, bubonic plague x1000000 ....

It'll be gone in a few weeks or it's never going away!

SimonTemplar

This may be a simplistic way of looking at it, but shouldn't we expect the numbers of flu cases in the winter to be lower than previous years because we now have masks, social distancing, working from home, etc.. which we didn't have during previous winters?

is_that_so

SimonTemplar wrote: »

This may be a simplistic way of looking at it, but shouldn't we expect the numbers of flu cases in the winter to be lower than previous years because we now have masks, social distancing, working from home, etc.. which we didn't have during previous winters?

That happened in the flu' season just gone and it ended early.

caveat emptor

SimonTemplar wrote: »

This may be a simplistic way of looking at it, but shouldn't we expect the numbers of flu cases in the winter to be lower than previous years because we now have masks, social distancing, working from home, etc.. which we didn't have during previous winters?

Kinda off thread but yeah maybe.
It might never even get here. It originates in China most years and they are locked down practically.

If they suddenly resume international travel and simultaneous suspend internal travel in September, then you know they are trolling the rest of the world.

fritzelly

It does not originate in China most years

ChelseaRentBoy

hmmm wrote: »

Wrong. Completely wrong and dangerous.

It doesn't matter how many facts you present to posters like the one you quoted they believe what they want to believe.

Onesea

owlbethere wrote: »

It was linked here yesterday about the role of viral load in the virus. If someone is exposed to the virus and receives a low viral load, chances are their illness can be mild and asymptomatic.


If we all went back to the way life was before and neglected the importance of social distancing and hygiene measures on cough and sneeze etiquette, we would probably be looking at a different picture and many people experiencing more of a severe illness.

The viral load topic has been brought up many times In recent months. It's all guess work

US2

ChelseaRentBoy wrote: »

It doesn't matter how many facts you present to posters like the one you quoted they believe what they want to believe.

Yes exactly. I look at facts and judge risk. Personal responsibility.

How many fit and healthy 27 year olds suffered seriously with this disease? Not enough for me to be scared .

My grandmother is 78. She's cocooned herself as much as possible.

ACitizenErased

LATEST TESTING UPDATE

Tests conducted last 24 hours: 4076
Tests conducted last 7 days: 51149
Positive Tests last 24 hours: 11
Positivity Rate last 7 days: 0.2%

The positivity rate has dropped back down to 0.2% after two weeks at 0.3%

ACitizenErased

ACitizenErased wrote: »

LATEST TESTING UPDATE

Tests conducted last 24 hours: 4076
Tests conducted last 7 days: 51149
Positive Tests last 24 hours: 11
Positivity Rate last 7 days: 0.2%

The positivity rate has dropped back down to 0.2% after two weeks at 0.3%

No room for a spike in today numbers based on the last few days testing then. In cases Play your cards right, I go 15 - Higher or lower?

catrat12

ACitizenErased wrote: »

LATEST TESTING UPDATE

Tests conducted last 24 hours: 4076
Tests conducted last 7 days: 51149
Positive Tests last 24 hours: 11
Positivity Rate last 7 days: 0.2%

The positivity rate has dropped back down to 0.2% after two weeks at 0.3%

I can see where the testing figures are but where do you see the positive test results in last 24hr

ACitizenErased

Deleted User wrote: »

No room for a spike in today numbers based on the last few days testing then. In cases Play your cards right, I go 15 - Higher or lower?

I'd say lower than 11. The positive tests were 18 yesterday and 17 reported so there's no backlog.

ACitizenErased

catrat12 wrote: »

I can see where the testing figures are but where do you see the positive test results in last 24hr

It was 29017 yesterday, it is now 29028. +11
I then note today's positive figure and compare tomorrow.

TomSweeney

SimonTemplar wrote: »

This may be a simplistic way of looking at it, but shouldn't we expect the numbers of flu cases in the winter to be lower than previous years because we now have masks, social distancing, working from home, etc.. which we didn't have during previous winters?

Yes and better hygiene social distancing etc ... I expect a lot less normal flu cases this winter, let's see ...

Onesea

TomSweeney wrote: »

Yes and better hygiene social distancing etc ... I expect a lot less normal flu cases this winter, let's see ...

I can't remember which nation reported this but apparently the same number of flu and pneumonia cases have been reported right through lockdown. I think it was in the uk

Non solum non ambulabit

caveat emptor wrote: »

Ok great. Then we won't bother looking at the daily tests today.
It's the number one talked about topic on this thread.
With daily running commentary.
Higher lower , who knows?

Glad we don't have to worry about them anymore. What will people talk about?

Thanks

Of course daily tests are relevant in Ireland. You are comparing Ireland to the USA based on testing.

I am saying you can't use that measure for comparison. If you want to make an argument that we are worse than the USA I am saying you will need a different comparitor. That is all.