Covid 19 Part XXIV-37,063 ROI (1,801 deaths) 12,886 NI (582 deaths) (02/10) Read OP

stephenjmcd

fritzelly wrote: »

Germany declares Dublin a Covid risk zone, must be tested. hearing on NT

"Germany is to declare Dublin a Covid-19 risk area today, requiring anyone arriving from the Irish capital to take a free Covid-19 test.

Berlin defines a risk area as anywhere with a new infection rate above 50 per 100,000 of population in the last seven days.

From Thursday, all arrivals from Dublin to Germany are required to take a test either on arrival or within 10 days. They must self-isolate until they receive a negative test result. Anyone who can produce a negative test result from the Irish authorities - no older than 48 hours - is exempted from another test and isolation, but are encouraged to take a second test on arrival in Germany."

political analyst

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0923/1166912-covid19-committee-coronavirus/

Speaking at the Oireachtas Special Committee on Covid-19 Response, Prof McConkey said that physical distancing is needed to "crush the curve into the ground".

He also said it will be impossible to prevent the re-entry of the virus into nursing homes unless it is controlled in the community.

A Swedish expert told the committee that controlled spread of the coronavirus should be allowed among people aged under 60.

In his opening statement, Dr Johan Giesecke, former chief epidemiologist in Sweden, said Ireland should concentrate on the old and frail with frequent testing of staff and residents in care homes.

He told politicians that we should wait at least a year to start comparing countries' Covid-19 strategies.

Dr Giesecke also warned that the epidemic is only at the beginning.

He advised against building a strategy on the imminent advent of a vaccine because we might have to wait for it and it may not be very effective in those who need it most.

Chairman of the Covid-19 committee Michael McNamara said the committee is hearing the views of other countries including Sweden today.

He said this is important so as not to risk being insular in Ireland's response to the virus.

Microbiologist Professor Kirsten Schaffer said virus outbreaks in nursing homes need to be looked at closely to understand why transmission is still happening.

She said if gowns, gloves and masks are used, it should be able to control transmission in nursing homes to a certain level.

She was responding to Sinn Féin TD Rose Conway Walsh, who asked if Ireland can avoid a second wave of Covid-19 in nursing homes.

The details I've highlighted in the quotes prove an effort can be made to achieve herd immunity without putting the lives of the vulnerable (including the elderly) in danger.

is_that_so

stephenjmcd wrote: »

"Germany is to declare Dublin a Covid-19 risk area today, requiring anyone arriving from the Irish capital to take a free Covid-19 test.

Berlin defines a risk area as anywhere with a new infection rate above 50 per 100,000 of population in the last seven days.

From Thursday, all arrivals from Dublin to Germany are required to take a test either on arrival or within 10 days. They must self-isolate until they receive a negative test result. Anyone who can produce a negative test result from the Irish authorities - no older than 48 hours - is exempted from another test and isolation, but are encouraged to take a second test on arrival in Germany."

I assume that means any flights, not a check on whether you're from Cavan or Leitrim?

Assetbacked

Assetbacked wrote: »

Getting to zero covid is necessarily a failure as it either involves closing off all borders indefinitely or the whole world pursuing this approach - neither will happen. McConkey & Co ignore this and their opinions are still underlined by the aim of getting to zero covid. Therefore, they must necessarily be disregarded. They are tinfoil-hat wearing nonces.

In terms of my own assessment, as an armchair pundit like yourself, I have looked at our epidemiology reports (https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/casesinireland/epidemiologyofcovid-19inireland/ ) pretty frequently the last few months and would highlight the following statistics on covid in Ireland;

• 93% of deaths are over the age of 65 (despite only making up 25% of all cases).
• 94% of covid deaths had clinical underlying conditions.
• Hospitalisation rates for covid cases have been declining across all age groups (https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=114377666&postcount=2601)
• Post-lockdown in mid-May 2020 to date has given around 230 deaths. Based on this sample (1/3 of a year) we are projected to hit 680 deaths "with" covid in the year to May 2021.

Seems to me that getting to zero COVID, like NZ, is a huge gamble on the efficacy and full availability of a vaccine in 2021. If that effective vaccine is not delivered in H1 2021 and rolled out fully in H2 (and there are plenty of virologists and epidemiologists who are sceptical) then the zero COVID strategy will have been a monumental failure. If we have a vaccine by Christmas it will have been an astonishing success

No zero COVID proponents are acknowledging that gamble.

ACitizenErased

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Surely it averages out over 6 weeks?

In the start of those 6 weeks you might have cases thrown in from the 2 weeks before that, too.

ACitizenErased

Hospital numbers as of 8am:
90 (-4)
16 in ICU (no change)

caveat emptor

I suspect we are being told let it rip due to some out of pocket short term rental investors.
Twas a booming market that made it hard to find affordable long term accommodation.
Banks need to be made whole on those loans.
Only one thing for it let it rip.

Good article out in NY times.

https://twitter.com/PMacoscair/status/1308433288298627072?s=20

https://twitter.com/RobCross247/status/1241325290565111808?s=20

JDD

93% of deaths are over the age of 65 (despite only making up 25% of all cases).
94% of covid deaths had clinical underlying conditions.
Hospitalisation rates for covid cases have been declining across all age groups (https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...ostcount=2601)
Post-lockdown in mid-May 2020 to date has given around 230 deaths. Based on this sample (1/3 of a year) we are projected to hit 680 deaths "with" covid in the year to May 2021.

Yes, covid deaths are disproportionately over 65s.

Underlying conditions does not mean fatal or terminal conditions. I don't have figures on this, but I expect underlying conditions means heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease etc. Perhaps in a small amount of cases it means dementia or cancer. The vast majority of us will develop "underlying conditions" once we hit 70+ and in the vast majority of cases, those underlying conditions can be managed medically until you reach an age where something more serious kills you.

So saying that 94% of deaths were to people with underlying conditions seems to be to be implying that those people would have died this year, or in pretty close proximity to their death with Covid, either from this underlying condition or something else, when there is no indication that that is the case. You could be diagnosed with heart disease at 70 and happily live with it for 20 years. Likewise for diabetes or kidney disease.

I take hospitalisation rates with a pinch of salt. We have absolutely no idea how many people were infected with covid in Feb/Mar/Apr, as the criteria for getting a test was so tight. It may be that hospitalisation rates now are the "true" hospitalisation rates i.e. as a proportion of overall infections, and therefore there is no indication that the virus is weakening or there has been a miracle breakthrough in treatments which is leading to less hospitalisations.

Yes, mid-May to now has given us 230 deaths. But remember, cafes and restaurants and hairdressers didn't open until the end of June. People didn't really start meeting in numbers until end July/August. It took time for the wariness from the lockdown to wear off. And schools and colleges were still closed. I don't think 230 is the right figure to extrapolate.

That all makes me sound like someone who is advocating for lockdowns or restrictions. I'm not. I think we will have to accept a number of deaths in order to ensure that a large amount of people's livelihoods are not permanently ruined. But we have to be realistic about who will die (in the vast majority of cases, not people that would have died anyway) and how many will die (more than 680 from May to May, that's for sure), or when those figures come out they will surprise people and we will end up back in lockdown again.

caveat emptor

No mention of long term morbidity caused by covid.

That could really make a mess of the health system and the wealth of the country.

https://twitter.com/Maryrankin55/status/1308719603728646145?s=20

Assetbacked

Properties listed for rent on Daft have increased 260% since March, just before lockdown began. This maybe belongs in the positives thread!

is_that_so

political analyst wrote: »

The details I've highlighted in the quotes prove an effort can be made to achieve herd immunity without putting the lives of the vulnerable (including the elderly) in danger.

Herd immunity is pie in the sky, there is not shred of evidence of it anywhere nor a realistic hope that it will occur.


Anecdotal data coming up! Spoke to someone who works in a nursing home, don't know where. They arranged to get the residents out into the sun on one of the nice days recently because they were sad and depressed they couldn't see their families. That I imagine is replicated up and down the country. Lives can be put in danger in other ways by "protecting" people.

Assetbacked

JDD wrote: »

Yes, covid deaths are disproportionately over 65s.

Underlying conditions does not mean fatal or terminal conditions. I don't have figures on this, but I expect underlying conditions means heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease etc. Perhaps in a small amount of cases it means dementia or cancer. The vast majority of us will develop "underlying conditions" once we hit 70+ and in the vast majority of cases, those underlying conditions can be managed medically until you reach an age where something more serious kills you.

So saying that 94% of deaths were to people with underlying conditions seems to be to be implying that those people would have died this year, or in pretty close proximity to their death with Covid, either from this underlying condition or something else, when there is no indication that that is the case. You could be diagnosed with heart disease at 70 and happily live with it for 20 years. Likewise for diabetes or kidney disease.

I take hospitalisation rates with a pinch of salt. We have absolutely no idea how many people were infected with covid in Feb/Mar/Apr, as the criteria for getting a test was so tight. It may be that hospitalisation rates now are the "true" hospitalisation rates i.e. as a proportion of overall infections, and therefore there is no indication that the virus is weakening or there has been a miracle breakthrough in treatments which is leading to less hospitalisations.

Yes, mid-May to now has given us 230 deaths. But remember, cafes and restaurants and hairdressers didn't open until the end of June. People didn't really start meeting in numbers until end July/August. It took time for the wariness from the lockdown to wear off. And schools and colleges were still closed. I don't think 230 is the right figure to extrapolate.

That all makes me sound like someone who is advocating for lockdowns or restrictions. I'm not. I think we will have to accept a number of deaths in order to ensure that a large amount of people's livelihoods are not permanently ruined. But we have to be realistic about who will die (in the vast majority of cases, not people that would have died anyway) and how many will die (more than 680 from May to May, that's for sure), or when those figures come out they will surprise people and we will end up back in lockdown again.

Fair enough but there is no data you have offered to go against it. Just reasonable statements.

spookwoman

Thread going the way of last night of someone telling people how to do their jobs.

ACitizenErased

spookwoman wrote: »

Thread going the way of last night of someone telling people how to do their jobs.

And who would that be? Do share

eagle eye

ACitizenErased wrote:

You're not getting what I'm saying. You can't just take average increase per week when you don't have the actual cases per week, you're going off reported case figures.

My week runs from Friday to Thursday.

ACitizenErased

eagle eye wrote: »

My week runs from Friday to Thursday.

So you haven't accounted for the regular occurrence of cases from Thursday being backlogged into the weekend's figures?

Happydays2020

Any idea of beers today?

is_that_so

caveat emptor wrote: »

I suspect we are being told let it rip due to some out of pocket short term rental investors.
Twas a booming market that made it hard to find affordable long term accommodation.
Banks need to be made whole on those loans.
Only one thing for it let it rip.

Good article out in NY times.

https://twitter.com/PMacoscair/status/1308433288298627072?s=20

https://twitter.com/RobCross247/status/1241325290565111808?s=20

Short term rentals, like AirBnB, is one area where a complete reset would be very good. They will be part of the accommodation sector for quite some time to come but it may give authorities a chance to redefine what that role should be.

JDD

Assetbacked wrote: »

Fair enough but there is no data you have offered to go against it. Just reasonable statements.

I'm not a mathematician, so I can't present alternative figures. It's just my general feelings when people mention "underlying conditions", or try to compare stats now with the stats from Mar/Apr.

is_that_so

Happydays2020 wrote: »

Any idea of beers today?

I think the brewer has retired! Watch out for the swab data on this thread, it can give an indicator.

Gadgetman496

is_that_so wrote: »

I think the brewer has retired! Watch out for the swab data on the thread, it can give an indicator.

I think the brewer was SD

DevilsHaircut

The apparent 'stabilisation' in Dublin's 14-day/100k numbers is due to the unusually low (outlier, if you will) number of cases on 8 September (50).

It is not indicative of the trend.

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1308449879883239424


Correction: It's more that the 180 cases on 7 Sept have dropped off. But the 14k number for Dublin will increase tomorrow.

antodeco

Assetbacked wrote: »

Properties listed for rent on Daft have increased 260% since March, just before lockdown began. This maybe belongs in the positives thread!

Yup, but landlords still increasing rents!

ACitizenErased

DevilsHaircut wrote: »

The apparent 'stabilisation' in Dublin's 14-day/100k numbers is due to the unusually low (outlier, if you will) number of cases on 8 September (50).

It is not indicative of the trend.

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1308449879883239424

You could throw Sep 20th in with that too, quite low and outlier as you said, skewing the average

GooglePlus

GooglePlus wrote: »

Just be aware that the recommended daily intake level is 400-800iu per day but this isn't enough to maintain good levels of vitamin D and certainly not enough if you are deficient.

I recently got mine tested by the GP and I was at 56 nmo/l. According to the test, this was seen as sufficient as is anything between 30-125 nmo/l, but this is outdated.

According to Rhonda Patrick, a biochemist doing some really in depth research into the effects of Vitamin D on the body, 75 nmo/l is adequate, 72.5 - 50 nmo/l is inadequate and anything below 50 is deficient.

So even though I'm being told my levels are sufficient, I am actually bordering a deficiency.

She would recommend 4000-5000iu per day to build levels and likes to make clear that it is extremely difficult to raise levels to the point where they cause a toxic effect.

You should look her up and listen to some of her podcasts. She's one of the most intelligent people my ears have ever had the privilege to listen to.

The safe upper limit per day is regarded as being around 4,000iu, however up to 10,000 generally will cause no issue. Anyone on such high doses would be advised to have levels tested regularly however. Vitamin D is not water soluble no it is not easy for the body to get rid of excess, so while there is margin for increased intake, its not limitless.

The evidence for Vitamin D in relation to covid in particular is limited however. It does help the immune system in general, and gonig into deficieny is not good for your overall health and in fighting infection. The evidence on Covid in particular seems a bit circumstantial however. Some of the risk factors associated with Covid are also associated with Vitamin D deficiency - such as obesity and old age.

ceadaoin.

is_that_so wrote: »

Herd immunity is pie in the sky, there is not shred of evidence of it anywhere nor a realistic hope that it will occur.


Anecdotal data coming up! Spoke to someone who works in a nursing home, don't know where. They arranged to get the residents out into the sun on one of the nice days recently because they were sad and depressed they couldn't see their families. That I imagine is replicated up and down the country. Lives can be put in danger in other ways by "protecting" people.

The US has over 15,000 more alzheimer deaths than usual this year. Routine and visits from family is very important to keep these patients happy and as healthy as possible even with their condition. Very sad.

Wolf359f

ACitizenErased wrote: »

You would assume that some reporters surely get the figures early? I'm surprised there's less leaks tbh unless they're under NDAs/Blackouts.

I'd say they have trusted sources, but if they were to report on numbers early, it would be irresponsible.
We've seen with our beer Baron, figures do change over the day, just by 1 or 2 all the same

Wolf359f

froog wrote: »

Just reflects how good testing is. UK have been bad for a while.

The UK have had a 33% hospitalisation rate, their testing was that bad at the start (only testing in hospitals)

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

Herd immunity is pie in the sky, there is not shred of evidence of it anywhere nor a realistic hope that it will occur.


Anecdotal data coming up! Spoke to someone who works in a nursing home, don't know where. They arranged to get the residents out into the sun on one of the nice days recently because they were sad and depressed they couldn't see their families. That I imagine is replicated up and down the country. Lives can be put in danger in other ways by "protecting" people.

"Herd Immunity" or more accurately the parallel increase in inherent immunity of the population and weakening of the virus through natural selection resultiing in the virus becoming endemic as part of the annual flu season is what did for Spanish Flu, Russian Flu, Hong Kong Flu etc. etc etc.

We either achieve this through natural or vaccine induced immunity, preferably vaccine, be we cant wait forever

ACitizenErased

ACitizenErased wrote: »

So you haven't accounted for the regular occurrence of cases from Thursday being backlogged into the weekend's figures?

The impact will be normalised by taken an average measure over a number of weeks

GooglePlus

Widdensushi wrote: »

200iu is the daily nrv value. Whilst more might be better in a very dark winter if you weren't getting out, surely the amounts you are recommending are overkill for healthy people who have been spending time outside all summer

Not at all, please have a look for yourself. I honestly wouldn't do it justice by trying to explain but take a look at Dr Rhonda Patrick's research and have a listen to her podcasts on Vitamin D. She sits with many other academics and they all come to agreement, following her research.

It's up there as one of the most important vitamins you can be taking, effecting the expression of near 1000 genes in the body.

Adequate levels reduce DNA damage and slows telomeres shortening (telomere length on our DNA is a true reflection of our bodies age and provides a better idea of how long you have left to live).

Please don't shut this down straight away, do yourself a favour and look her up.

hmmm

stephenjmcd wrote: »

"Germany is to declare Dublin a Covid-19 risk area today, requiring anyone arriving from the Irish capital to take a free Covid-19 test."

I have a cunning plan to get us some more testing capacity....

GooglePlus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The safe upper limit per day is regarded as being around 4,000iu, however up to 10,000 generally will cause no issue. Anyone on such high doses would be advised to have levels tested regularly however. Vitamin D is not water soluble no it is not easy for the body to get rid of excess, so while there is margin for increased intake, its not limitless.

The evidence for Vitamin D in relation to covid in particular is limited however. It does help the immune system in general, and gonig into deficieny is not good for your overall health and in fighting infection. The evidence on Covid in particular seems a bit circumstantial however. Some of the risk factors associated with Covid are also associated with Vitamin D deficiency - such as obesity and old age.

Yeah her advice was originally 4000iu per day and she changed that to 5000iu recently after she noticed her own base levels dropping on the 4000iu dose. 5000 seems to be her sweet spot and she is as healthy as they come.

Everyone is different so getting a test is a must but just remember that old medicine will tell you you're not deficient when you could in fact be, as was the case with me.

funnydoggy

hmmm wrote: »

I have a cunning plan to get us some more testing capacity....

As cunning as a fox who’s just been appointed Professor of Cunning at Oxford University?

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

The debate in UK medical and Academic circles is not just Gupta vs the rest however and is being discussed in the BMJ no less.

https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3702.full

An argument is lost when you resort to cheap insults over facts

It's not being discussed, it's being reported on by the BMJ.

Not once when asked has she stated how to identify the vulnerable and how to shield them for her let it rip approach, which has now been changed to "controlled" but doesn't make it any less stupid.

She was asked again last night and instead of answering decided to channel a dead Irish writer.

An absolute scutter merchant who is basing her "ideas" largely on her ego and not science.

seamus

314 positive swabs out of 12520 swabs. 2.51% positivity

Still looking stable

Probably ~ 250-300 cases announced today.

Benimar

314 positive swabs on 12,520 tests - 2.51% positivity rate

s1ippy

podgeandrodge wrote: »

The HPSC said "the outbreaks are associated with school children and or school staff" but it said the "transmission of Covid-19 within the school has not necessarily been established".


It seems to be more with schools that they try harder to say it wasn't necessarily the cause. Don't hear them talk about a restaurant in those terms.

When you freak people out about restaurants a lot of people will lose their jobs whereas if you freak them out about schools, people with children can't work. I reckon the latter are probably the larger number of people.

Claire Byrne was talking to a smug Irish expat living as though everything is back to normal, in China, right now. He described how they were all very worried about covid at the start and took every extreme measure necessary to stamp it out; everyone who needed a test got one, they traced every contact, nobody left the house never mind having parties, school was online etc. Everyone had the app which monitors your location and notifies you if you need a test. Even now they scan the app to make sure you're healthy before admittance to shops, restaurants etc.

Big surprise a totalitarian regime with a penchant for creating perfect conditions for viral spread at any moment are doing fine. I'm not sure what we're supposed to do with that information.

El Weirdo

caveat emptor wrote: »

No mention of long term morbidity caused by covid.

Don't worry, I'm sure you won't let any of us forget.

hynesie08

seamus wrote: »

314 positive swabs out of 12520 swabs. 2.51% positivity

Still looking stable

Probably ~ 250-300 cases announced today.

Can anyone explain to me in layman's terms what the delay is between positive swabs and case numbers? Is it retesting of week positives? Tainted tests?

Oranage2

Benimar wrote: »

314 positive swabs on 12,520 tests - 2.51% positivity rate

Seems like a high enough positivity rate

seamus

hynesie08 wrote: »

Can anyone explain to me in layman's terms what the delay is between positive swabs and case numbers? Is it retesting of week positives? Tainted tests?

I believe it's to do with the chain of notification. Until the test result gets to a doctor, it's not known whether it's a new case or a retest. Then the doctor reports it to the HSE/HPSC after notifying the patient.

This is why sometimes there's a backlog of cases which were detected 3 days ago but not reported to the HPSC until today. A GP may receive a notification today, but not act on it until tomorrow lunchtime.

KrustyUCC

Benimar wrote: »

314 positive swabs on 12,520 tests - 2.51% positivity rate

Is the usual backlog gone as yesterday?

Oranage2

hynesie08 wrote: »

Can anyone explain to me in layman's terms what the delay is between positive swabs and case numbers? Is it retesting of week positives? Tainted tests?

They never gave out that information, people suspected that they grouped work places and clusters so a factory having tests all week, they'd not report the positive figures until all tests were back.

Now it seems all over the place.

Benimar

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Is the usual backlog gone as yesterday?

Genuinely hard to know.

The numbers used to align for ages - backlog builds up and full backlog cleared in one day.

This seemed to change from the beginning of last week as the full backlog wasn't being cleared. Some on here seem to suggest that positives will now be higher than announced as some HCWs have to be tested before returning to work and may still be positive - but obviously not a new case.

I've no reason to doubt this, but since 10th September there were 84 more positives than cases announced after yesterdays figures.

is_that_so

Oranage2 wrote: »

They never gave out that information, people suspected that they grouped work places and clusters so a factory having tests all week, they'd not report the positive figures until all tests were back.

Now it seems all over the place.

Which is why the 5, 7,14 day averages and cases per 100K are better measures of what's going on. Even Glynn is dismissive of the importance of the daily numbers. It doesn't stop him using them as a daily warning, though!

eagle eye

ACitizenErased wrote:

So you haven't accounted for the regular occurrence of cases from Thursday being backlogged into the weekend's figures?

Obviously they are included in the next week, so percentage for is week is up and the other is down.
As you can see conservative because an increase in a week with more cases is less significant than a decrease in a week with less cases.
So the only week where the increase could adversely affect the numbers in a negative light as regards lesser numbers is week 1 because the numbers have been rising since.

owlbethere

s1ippy wrote: »

When you freak people out about restaurants a lot of people will lose their jobs whereas if you freak them out about schools, people with children can't work. I reckon the latter are probably the larger number of people.

Claire Byrne was talking to a smug Irish expat living as though everything is back to normal, in China, right now. He described how they were all very worried about covid at the start and took every extreme measure necessary to stamp it out; everyone who needed a test got one, they traced every contact, nobody left the house never mind having parties, school was online etc. Everyone had the app which monitors your location and notifies you if you need a test. Even now they scan the app to make sure you're healthy before admittance to shops, restaurants etc.
Big surprise a totalitarian regime with a penchant for creating perfect conditions for viral spread at any moment are doing fine. I'm not sure what we're supposed to do with that information.

I remember in the early days of covid being identified in China and China getting some sh1t about it. I was also guilty of cursing them too. They turned things around and they really hammered down on the virus and stamped it out.

I would prefer that type of totalitarian regime here if it means that we could get back to some normaility soon enough. As it is, many of us are living on edge trying to avoid this virus in the hope of a vaccine coming through soon. We had far too much of lackadaisical approach and society divided.

spookwoman

testing numbers from 31/08/2020 to today

Oranage2

is_that_so wrote: »

Which is why the 5, 7,14 day averages and cases per 100K are better measures of what's going on. Even Glynn is dismissive of the importance of the daily numbers. It doesn't stop him using them as a daily warning, though!

The weekly numbers are also increasing at an alarming rate, 2 months ago we had around a 100 cases a week, we have that now before I have breakfast