Relaxation of Restrictions, Part V - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

mcburns07

hmmm wrote: »

Deaths can take up to 3 months to be registered, it's up to the family. It's not a useful indicator of current trends. People can also unfortunately spend a long time in ICU before passing away.

Hopefully those 5 people can pull through.

firemansam4

hmmm wrote:

Deaths can take up to 3 months to be registered, it's up to the family. It's not a useful indicator of current trends. People can also unfortunately spend a long time in ICU before passing away.

Is that really the case with covid cases though?
If you look at the statistics from the start of the pandemic there was about a 2/3 week gap from when the surge in cases started to when deaths started rising at a much higher rate.
What has changed from then to now?

normanoffside

snowcat wrote: »

Im a volunteer with an association linked to the National Ambulance Servive. Just been to a meeting. We have approx 15 people die daily in Ireland from Sudden Cardiac Arrest. We can now not administer CPR on a critically ill patient unless we are fully kitted in PPE due to Covid Regs. This could take us up to 5 minutes to don equipment. Many hundreds will die every year that could have been saved with prompt CPR. Many voluntary organisations will close as they cannot afford the cost of the PPE. This is possibly many more deaths than will die from Covid this year.

Pardon my French but that's a fvcking disgrace

manniot2

mcburns07 wrote: »

Hopefully those 5 people can pull through.

Only 2 in there now according to RTÉ.ie.

2.

3xh

hmmm wrote: »

Deaths can take up to 3 months to be registered, it's up to the family. It's not a useful indicator of current trends. People can also unfortunately spend a long time in ICU before passing away.

Hah! Typical, hmmm. Yeah deaths can take a while to filter through. Yet they increased nicely and exponentially right on cue through April just as cases and rhetoric were ramping up, you know, 2weeks after the equivalent contraction cases rose. You’re not saying those deaths that were reported on an ever increasing scale in April were actually from Jan-Feb time?!

I am aware of deaths that were announced in late May/early June actually occurring in early April but they were one off sporadic announcements. If anything, those ‘late’ announced deaths only elongated the death rate into a period where there were effectively no deaths. It was unnecessarily confusing to the public, making it sound like deaths were continuing a rate higher than reality into the summer.

And people like you and others used the word ‘agenda’ against me the past few days.
Never, not once, did NPHET nor the media make clear that although they’re reporting ‘X deaths today (Back in late May/early June), Y deaths happened way back during the initial surge’

Lies, damned lies and statistics, hmmm.

manniot2

Lundstram wrote: »

That’ll be me in a bar in Lisbon this time next week. Escaping Kildare like someone on the run.

Enjoy!

U lucky bollox. I’d murder a pint without some **** looking over my shoulder with a stopwatch.

hmmm

firemansam4 wrote: »

Is that really the case with covid cases though?
If you look at the statistics from the start of the pandemic there was about a 2/3 week gap from when the surge in cases started to when deaths started rising at a much higher rate.
What has changed from then to now?

I'm saying that "number of deaths" is an unreliable statistic for measuring how well we are doing with the virus, particularly now we are at low levels. The deaths could have occurred last week, or they could have occurred months ago - and they could be from patients who have been in hospital for a long time.

Hospitalisations are a much better indicator of what is happening now, and I've said that from the start. Those stats are almost realtime (as long as a hospital doesn't screw up and not report the correct figures).

The number of cases is also an unreliable indicator. The media keep reporting it, when we know we are probably missing most infections.

snowcat

hmmm wrote: »

I'm not aware of what the ambulance service are saying, but just so I'm clear on what you are expecting - do you expect paramedics to come to the assistance of people without them wearing PPE?

I cannot comment on full time NAS. I am a volunteer. If a patient cannot be assessed for symptoms. ie Cardiac Arrest. We have to assume Covid positive and don full PPE. Reducing survival rate for a patient exponentially.

hmmm

3xh wrote: »

Lies, damned lies and statistics, hmmm.

I've been consistent since the start (before you were here) that the number of deaths is a lagging indicator.

From a post of mine back in April when everyone thought things were getting worse because deaths were going in the opposite direction - "Unfortunately things can be getting better even while deaths are increasing."

And that was correct, things were improving.

hmmm

snowcat wrote: »

I cannot comment on full time NAS. I am a volunteer. If a patient cannot be assessed for symptoms. ie Cardiac Arrest. We have to assume Covid positive and don full PPE. Reducing survival rate for a patient exponentially.

Again I don't know what exactly you've been told, but I would think it was unfair if an expectation was given that volunteers should rush in to assist a casualty without putting on PPE. There shouldn't be a choice on this, or some people would feel pressure to do so even if they were reluctant. First-responders do a great job, but we can't expect them to put themselves/their families at risk.

I understand the potential impact, it's a difficult time for everyone trying to find the right balance.

Thierry12

hmmm wrote: »

I'm not aware of what the ambulance service are saying, but just so I'm clear on what you are expecting - do you expect paramedics to come to the assistance of people without them wearing PPE?

Are you on the wind up here or what hmmm?

He's talking about CPR buddy, its pretty clear

Do you expect lifeguards and the like to wear hazmat gear now?

walus

hmmm wrote: »

I'm saying that "number of deaths" is an unreliable statistic for measuring how well we are doing with the virus, particularly now we are at low levels. The deaths could have occurred last week, or they could have occurred months ago - and they could be from patients who have been in hospital for a long time.

Hospitalisations are a much better indicator of what is happening now, and I've said that from the start. Those stats are almost realtime (as long as a hospital doesn't screw up and not report the correct figures).

The number of cases is also an unreliable indicator. The media keep reporting it, when we know we are probably missing most infections.

Here you go: https://youtu.be/nHqz-Wk3hus that is how practitioners measure the virus. He says admissions are down. Should we not believe in what he says?

snowcat

hmmm wrote: »

Again I don't know what exactly you've been told, but I would think it was unfair if an expectation was given that volunteers should rush in to assist a casualty without putting on PPE. There shouldn't be a choice on this, or some people would feel pressure to do so even if they were reluctant. First-responders do a great job, but we can't expect them to put themselves/their families at risk.

I understand the potential impact, it's a difficult time for everyone trying to find the right balance.

As volunteers we have the absolute right to not get involved. It is at our complete discretion to get involved. I choose my priorities. I find it ridiculous that one of my community could be dying from a cardiac arrest and i have to spend 5 minutes donning ppe against a virus that has no discernible effect while my neighbour dies of a recoverable Cardiac Arrest,

hmmm

walus wrote: »

Here you go: https://youtu.be/nHqz-Wk3hus that is how practitioners measure the virus. He says admissions are down. Should we not believe in what he says?

I'm not sure that interview says what you are hoping it is saying, have you watched it fully? He says the pandemic is under control because of the actions we took, but we need to continue with the basic hygiene measures and social distancing.

I'm not sure if I agree with him that it won't come back in anger, but I fully agree that we have to keep this under control.

3xh

hmmm wrote: »

I've been consistent since the start (before you were here) that the number of deaths is a lagging indicator.

From a post of mine back in April when everyone thought things were getting worse because deaths were going in the opposite direction - "Unfortunately things can be getting better even while deaths are increasing."

And that was correct, things were improving.

Yes, but the public is told it’s lagging by about 2 weeks.

The surge in April lagged the Italian rugby fans singing and dancing in temple bar, remember? And Irish people coming back from northern Italy skiing trips around mid-term.

We were told mass ‘protestors’ on the streets will cause a surge in two weeks. Unless they were BLM supporters.

Fact is, the public was told by the media deaths rise 2 weeks after the transmission case is highlighted first. And they also deliberately conflated the issue of someone dying with Covid and someone dying because of Covid.

normanoffside

snowcat wrote: »

As volunteers we have the absolute right to not get involved. It is at our complete discretion to get involved. I choose my priorities. I find it ridiculous that one of my community could be dying from a cardiac arrest and i have to spend 5 minutes donning ppe against a virus that has no discernible effect while my neighbour dies of a recoverable Cardiac Arrest,

Is there not a 'good samaritan' rule towards CPR that can take precdence over this nonsense?

snowcat

normanoffside wrote: »

Is there not a 'good samaritan' rule towards CPR that can take precdence over this nonsense?

There is but it does no cover Covid.

hmmm

snowcat wrote: »

As volunteers we have the absolute right to not get involved. It is at our complete discretion to get involved. I choose my priorities. I find it ridiculous that one of my community could be dying from a cardiac arrest and i have to spend 5 minutes donning ppe against a virus that has no discernible effect while my neighbour dies of a recoverable Cardiac Arrest,

I don't disagree, but I'd ask a question. You are obviously comfortable that the risk is low and you are willing to take the risk, but would that put pressure on your other colleagues to also not wear PPE? If you were a manager or someone in charge, wouldn't you want to create minimum standards so that no-one in the team would feel pressure not to wear PPE?

I have knowledge of another group of volunteer first-responders, and they have also been very clear that everyone on the team has to fully kit up in PPE before going to an incident, both to protect the individual and their team. Some of them would also happily not wear the PPE if it was an individual choice.

walus

hmmm wrote: »

I'm not sure that interview says what you are hoping it is saying, have you watched it fully? He says the pandemic is under control because of the actions we took, but we need to continue with the basic hygiene measures and social distancing.

I'm not sure if I agree with him that it won't come back in anger, but I fully agree that we have to keep this under control.

Correct, and that where we are in terms of dealing with the virus shows not in the number of cases or Ro number but In a level of hospital admissions and ICU cases.

setanta1984

hmmm wrote: »

Again I don't know what exactly you've been told, but I would think it was unfair if an expectation was given that volunteers should rush in to assist a casualty without putting on PPE. There shouldn't be a choice on this, or some people would feel pressure to do so even if they were reluctant. First-responders do a great job, but we can't expect them to put themselves/their families at risk.

I understand the potential impact, it's a difficult time for everyone trying to find the right balance.

Jesus christ - if anything summed up the complete and utter insanity of the last 6 months, and they way some people have completely lost all sense of perspective - f**k that person lying there dying in front of our eyes, all that matters is that someone else doesn't potentially get exposed to the virus. No deaths matter unless its from the virus, everything else, and in this example literal life and death, is secondary to the VIRUS. Shameful.

snowcat

hmmm wrote: »

I don't disagree, but I'd ask a question. You are obviously comfortable that the risk is low and you are willing to take the risk, but would that put pressure on your other colleagues to also not wear PPE? If you were a manager or someone in charge, wouldn't you want to create minimum standards so that no-one in the team would feel pressure not to wear PPE?

I have knowledge of another group of volunteer first-responders, and they have also been very clear that everyone on the team has to fully kit up in PPE before going to an incident, both to protect the individual and their team. Some of them would also happily not wear the PPE if it was an individual choice.

Our team has decided to fully implement the (mandatory) NAS procedures and I will fully comply with them. We want to save lives and we assume everything we do contributes to that. I do not agree personally that the Covid guidelines are saving lives but absolutely will comply with them.

normanoffside

hmmm wrote: »

I don't disagree, but I'd ask a question. You are obviously comfortable that the risk is low and you are willing to take the risk, but would that put pressure on your other colleagues to also not wear PPE? If you were a manager or someone in charge, wouldn't you want to create minimum standards so that no-one in the team would feel pressure not to wear PPE?

I have knowledge of another group of volunteer first-responders, and they have also been very clear that everyone on the team has to fully kit up in PPE before going to an incident, both to protect the individual and their team. Some of them would also happily not wear the PPE if it was an individual choice.

Hold on a second, you are making no sense...

Let's say on the very upper limit of possibility that 1% of the Irish population has covid (In reality more like 0.0001%)

And then the chances of dying if you catch it from someone is 1% (again very much overestimating as it is likely less than 0.1% for most people)

Then assuming that if you give CPR to an infected patient you will 100% contract the virus (again it's nowhere near that figure but anyway...)

Then on the very upper limits of possibility there is one chance in 10,000 that you will die from giving CPR to a random person without PPE (more likely 1 in a million or more).

Given that the chances of saving someones life by giving immediate CPR are a hell of a lot more than 1 in 10,000 surely you cannot fail to see this is absolutely ridiculous?

hmmm

setanta1984 wrote: »

Jesus christ - if anything summed up the complete and utter insanity of the last 6 months, and they way some people have completely lost all sense of perspective - f**k that person lying there dying in front of our eyes, all that matters is that someone else doesn't potentially get exposed to the virus. No deaths matter unless its from the virus, everything else, and in this example literal life and death, is secondary to the VIRUS. Shameful.

There's a reason every workplace has safety standards, even if people like yourself are seemingly willing to throw themselves into a burning building without gear. We always ask first-responders to protect themselves first, then their team, then worry about the victim.

snowcat

hmmm wrote: »

There's a reason every workplace has safety standards, even if people like yourself are seemingly willing to throw themselves into a burning building without gear. We always ask first-responders to protect themselves first, then their team, then the victim. It's always always in that order.

Yes but if we are going in to a minor fire we dont stand off on the basis it might be a gas explosion. You have to risk assess

Possiblity of victim dying 50%
Possibility of them having Covid 1 in 50
Possibility of contracting Covid 1 in 200
Posiibility of Death from Covid 1 in 2000
Ill take those odds

And those figures are off the wall conservative odds

setanta1984

snowcat wrote: »

Yes but if we are going in to a minor fire we dont stand off on the basis it might be a gas explosion. You have to risk assess

Like I said, perspective. Completely lost in this country now.

greenfield21

After biden gets elected in November the narrative will change, coronavirus will be a distant memory, be patient

CruelSummer

manniot2 wrote: »

The NY Times article today on pcr tests really is incredible...anyway won’t register here, on we go with the farce.

Have you a link to it?

Penfailed

snowcat wrote: »

Im a volunteer with an association linked to the National Ambulance Servive. Just been to a meeting. We have approx 15 people die daily in Ireland from Sudden Cardiac Arrest. We can now not administer CPR on a critically ill patient unless we are fully kitted in PPE due to Covid Regs. This could take us up to 5 minutes to don equipment. Many hundreds will die every year that could have been saved with prompt CPR. Many voluntary organisations will close as they cannot afford the cost of the PPE. This is possibly many more deaths than will die from Covid this year.

Many first aiders are uncomfortable giving breaths when carrying out CPR and it's perfectly acceptable to carry out chest compressions without the need for breaths. You don't need to don full PPE to carry out chest compressions.
Would you expect firefighters to enter a burning building without PPE? Surely it would save time if they didn't have to put all that gear on.

mcburns07

Penfailed wrote: »

Many first aiders are uncomfortable giving breaths when carrying out CPR and it's perfectly acceptable to carry out chest compressions without the need for breaths. You don't need to don full PPE to carry out chest compressions.
Would you expect firefighters to enter a burning building without PPE? Surely it would save time if they didn't have to put all that gear on.

:pac: It's hardly comparable FFS. If a firefighter goes into a burning building with no PPE they are in all likelihood going to be in serious trouble. If a first aider gives CPR to someone the chances of them catching covid let alone being seriously ill or dying from it are miniscule.

Penfailed

snowcat wrote: »

As volunteers we have the absolute right to not get involved. It is at our complete discretion to get involved. I choose my priorities. I find it ridiculous that one of my community could be dying from a cardiac arrest and i have to spend 5 minutes donning ppe against a virus that has no discernible effect while my neighbour dies of a recoverable Cardiac Arrest,

It's up to you as a first aider to assess the risk. If you don't think that there is any risk, you've no need to don the full PPE.