Covid 19 Part XXVII- 62,002 ROI (1,915 deaths) 39,609 NI (724 deaths) (02/11) Read OP

Wolf359f

Wolf359f wrote: »

I don't even think I need to say anything about what's highlighted in bold.
But wow, a guess, that's great, just guess stuff up with no data to back it up.
Are you implying asymptomatic people can't spread covid? (I'm gonna leave the China and counting cases to other posters)

John.Icy wrote: »

Not sure if you're disputing the China comment but it is indeed true. Asymptomatic people with a positive test in China are not considered a confirmed case.

I was asking the poster if he beloved asymptomatic people can not spread covid.

fritzelly

Wolf359f wrote: »

I know that, but it certainly wont occur with the first person, it will be closer to the last person.

It will be 60-70% and even before that you are stopping it spread ergo life back to normal as the hospitals are not at risk of collapsing

Wolf359f

Jimson wrote: »

Common sense. Well obviously if you don't have symptoms why would you get tested? Should people start taking a weekly test just in case or something?

Another interesting article

https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2020/08/13/asymptomatic

You're basing your whole argument on common sense now?
No fact's needed, just common sense eh?

Wolf359f

fritzelly wrote: »

It will be 60-70% and even before that you are stopping it spread ergo life back to normal as the hospitals are not at risk of collapsing

60-70% is far away from the first person vaccinated.
The point I was making was if we get an vaccine approved overnight, things won't change overnight. It takes time to vaccinate people.

fritzelly

Wolf359f wrote: »

60-70% is far away from the first person vaccinated.
The point I was making was if we get an vaccine approved overnight, things won't change overnight. It takes time to vaccinate people.

Oh yeah agreed - six months at least probably - but we can't stay like this for another 6 months or more

What is happening with the UK immunisation program? Is it still going ahead?

Jimson

Wolf359f wrote: »

You're basing your whole argument on common sense now?
No fact's needed, just common sense eh?

No you seem to think the only people in the country that have or had the virus are the ones who actually got tested and are positive cases numbers are accurate.

Your still not getting me whatsoever

Wolf359f

Jimson wrote: »

No you seem to think the only people in the country that have or had the virus are the ones who actually got tested and are positive cases numbers are accurate.

Your still not getting me whatsoever

No, I get you, you're saying regardless of our positivity rate, you believe/guess that the average cases over 7 days (764 a day) that was only 15% of what we had, so we really had over 5k a day. Based on your guesses.

Well if everything is equal, Andorra has 4756 positive cases (or symptomatic cases as you say) which means they have 31,706 total cases (including asymptomatic cases), that's 41% of their population, very close to herd immunity. But they are well into a second wave 3x worse then their first.
I would have thought with 41% herd immunity, the virus would be slowed down?

GT89

Ronaldo knows it's bs now too
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/european/cristiano-ronaldo-coronavirus-test-positive-symptoms-pcr-juventus-vs-barcelona-b1397080.html

Wolf359f

GT89 wrote: »

Ronaldo knows it's bs now too
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/european/cristiano-ronaldo-coronavirus-test-positive-symptoms-pcr-juventus-vs-barcelona-b1397080.html

What exactly is BS?

Atlantic Dawn

GT89 wrote: »

Ronaldo knows it's bs now too
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/european/cristiano-ronaldo-coronavirus-test-positive-symptoms-pcr-juventus-vs-barcelona-b1397080.html

There was a recent case in the UK of 3 lads who went to Italy and got the virus, they were stuck there for over 2 months waiting for all 3 to get a negative result. Are we advising people here to go out of self isolation too early after we assume they are clear?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8795303/Three-British-friends-held-covid-quarantine-Italy-test-positive-virus-SEVENTH-time.html

Charles Babbage

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

There was a recent case in the UK of 3 lads who went to Italy and got the virus, they were stuck there for over 2 months waiting for all 3 to get a negative result. Are we advising people here to go out of self isolation too early after we assume they are clear?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8795303/Three-British-friends-held-covid-quarantine-Italy-test-positive-virus-SEVENTH-time.html

We absolutely should test people subsequently. Many contacts never had Covid and should be allowed out after 2 or 3 negative results, while others may.
We need to enforce isolation, but test people to allow them out.

Atlantic Dawn

Charles Babbage wrote: »

We absolutely should test people subsequently. Many contacts never had Covid and should be allowed out after 2 or 3 negative results, while others may.
We need to enforce isolation, but test people to allow them out.

I'd love to get figures of any cases where infected people over 14 days from initial positive test infected people, could be a game changer if people are still spreading it afterwards.

is_that_so

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

I'd love to get figures of any cases where infected people over 14 days from initial positive test infected people, could be a game changer if people are still spreading it afterwards.

If there were we'd have heard it about by now. Isolation tends to take care of that anyway.

SortingYouOut

fritzelly wrote: »

Oh yeah agreed - six months at least probably - but we can't stay like this for another 6 months or more

What is happening with the UK immunisation program? Is it still going ahead?

6 months?!

I admire your optimistic outlook, we won't be seeing positive effects of a vaccine on wider society until 2022. 2021 is another write off unfortunately in terms of gigs, packed stadiums etc.

BringBackMick

Is there a chance of level 2 for December?

Will they let us know this in advance ?

is_that_so

BringBackMick wrote: »

Is there a chance of level 2 for December?

Will they let us know this in advance ?

The plan for now seem to be , 6 weeks of this, then Level 3 on Dec 1 and ideally Level 2 at or around Christmas. All subject to change of course.

Ficheall

Ficheall wrote: »

Why, was anyone forced to turn back?

Probably not but all those people who don't pay car tax, insurance, drug mules etc were restricted from spreading because of this. Also most people don't fancy being stopped by gardai. I certainly don't. Definitely discourages unnecessary journeys.

is_that_so

Ficheall wrote: »

Why, was anyone forced to turn back?

They don't need to be, it's the message that they are about and the long tailbacks these checkpoints cause.

jackboy

BringBackMick wrote: »

Is there a chance of level 2 for December?

Will they let us know this in advance ?

The government may do that but doubtful that Nphet would be on board. Moving to level 2 would likely create a big spike.

However, Germany will have its most vulnerable vaccinated well before Christmas and we should too unless those organising the vaccine distribution here are completely incompetent (which we already know they are).

Jimson

Jimson wrote: »

Do you have a link to that report? Is that 9079 random tests? Well if people had symptoms beforehand that's why their been tested isn't it?

I'm confused here??

Of course they aren't random. They are people with symptoms and close contacts. The definition of a biased sample. The only study they did here was of GPs and that was far from random.

Only way to work out the actual prevalence of the disease is to get actual random samples and test them. Also remember you will only pick up people who have an active infection. Lots of people have been exposed and either already had existing immunity - several papers on this suggesting 30-50% of people have pre existing immunity from previous related coronavirus infections. - or fought it off with no symptoms and are already immune. And yes I know about the 10 "reinfections" worldwide. Total BS.

We need to put numbers on all this and get an actual model of how the disease will evolve from here but no one seems in the least bit interested. Certainly none of the models they are using are taking all of the above into account. All the focus is on cases which as someone with some training in statistics is absolutely baffling to me. Cases can't rise exponentially forever. Maybe what we are seeing is the last gasp of corona - or maybe they have 90% of the population to rip through? If we modelled properly we could see which scenario best fits the data we are now seeing.

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

Of course they aren't random. They are people with symptoms and close contacts. The definition of a biased sample. The only study they did here was of GPs and that was far from random.

Only way to work out the actual prevalence of the disease is to get actual random samples and test them. Also remember you will only pick up people who have an active infection. Lots of people have been exposed and either already had existing immunity or fought it off with no symptoms and are already immune. We need to put numbers on all this but no one seems in the least bit interested. All the focus is on cases which as someone with some training in statistics is absolutely baffling to me.

Not being a good use of resources is why they don't do it. It also fails to do what is the primary purpose of the public health response, to find and track the disease. They don't even know how many get flu' every year. As a statistic it's really not important, just those who will need medical care. There was a small one done on COVID in June and July, which had prevalence at about the same as it is elsewhere.

Happydays2020

is_that_so wrote: »

The plan for now seem to be , 6 weeks of this, then Level 3 on Dec 1 and ideally Level 2 at or around Christmas. All subject to change of course.

I hope you are right. But I expect it will be very a la Carte. Wet pubs will not be allowed to open, restaurants/hotels maybe, very limited family gatherings (maybe two households).

is_that_so

is_that_so wrote: »

Not being a good use of resources is why they don't do it. It also fails to do what is the primary purpose of the public health response, to find and track the disease. They don't even know how many get flu' every year. As a statistic it's really not important, just those who will need medical care. There was a small one done on COVID in June and July, which had prevalence at about the same as it is elsewhere.

The one in June and July was with GPs. Not a random sample.

They have no problem spending billions and losing millions in tax revenue. This would be very cheap in comparison and would be extremely useful for planning. How is that a waste of resources? Flying blind and throwing money and shutting down the country on a worst case scenario is a staggering waste of resources.

They don't lock down the country or cancel essential healthcare for flu evey year.

This is why NPHET being composed entirely of medical people is a huge mistake.

is_that_so

Happydays2020 wrote: »

I hope you are right. But I expect it will be very a la Carte. Wet pubs will not be allowed to open, restaurants/hotels maybe, very limited family gatherings (maybe two households).

This seems to be the plan, although I'm still not convinced it'll happen personally. As mentioned above that depends on NPHET, who are still going with as low as possible so we actually don't know what that number is. Once Level 5 starts to do its thing I'm hoping that numbers will fall away very rapidly leaving them with little choice but to agree.

holdyerhorses

Blondini wrote: »

I'm with you on this one. There has to be some sacrifices.

I think restaurants can open, but (and unlikely, which is the problem) it should only be for people from the same household/bubble. Of course there will some transmission from staff and other tables, but during the late summer, there were multiples of households meeting up. Stop or discourage this and I see an acceptable risk.

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

The one in June and July was with GPs. Not a random sample.

They have no problem spending billions and losing millions in tax revenue. This would be very cheap in comparison and would be extremely useful for planning. How is that a waste of resources? Flying blind and throwing money and shutting down the country on a worst case scenario is a staggering waste of resources.

They don't lock down the country for flu evey year.

This is why NPHET being composed entirely of medical people is a huge mistake.

It's what has been said, numerous times. Why would you waste say a week's worth of testing to get a very low positivity rate that tells you got a very low positivity rate?

TheDeep

Thierry12 wrote: »

China dont even count asymptomatic people as cases these days

That’s the way it should be. Testing positive for coronavirus doesn’t mean you have Covid 19.

pjohnson

TheDeep wrote: »

That’s the way it should be. Testing positive for coronavirus doesn’t mean you have Covid 19.

:pac:

MelbourneMan

SortingYouOut wrote: »

6 months?!

I admire your optimistic outlook, we won't be seeing positive effects of a vaccine on wider society until 2022. 2021 is another write off unfortunately in terms of gigs, packed stadiums etc.

Hello. This is broadly correct, but I think excessive to call it a write off. Certainly it will be very difficult for some sectors, to whom the illusion was given in 2020 that their closure would be short term. They will have to come to terms with being closed until 2022.

There will however, be a great portion of of society and the economy who will operate more or less as normal, facilitated by the closure of the higher transmission risk sectors.

My analysis is that virtually all countries have made the same mistake as they have grappled with control of the virus - while the inclination is admirable, they have tried to distribute the disruption with the all-in-this-together taken to an impractical extreme. Sharing the burden must indeed by economic, but I express probably a personal political view here, but done through subsidised longterm mothballing rather than an attempt to smooth the disruption across all sectors relatively evenly. This understanding will become more common and shared by governments as they draft their plans to exit this second wave over the coming quarter.

manniot2

GT89 wrote: »

Ronaldo knows it's bs now too
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/european/cristiano-ronaldo-coronavirus-test-positive-symptoms-pcr-juventus-vs-barcelona-b1397080.html

Hilarious