Covid 19 Part XXVIII- 71,942 ROI(2,050 deaths) 51,824 NI (983 deaths) (28/11) Read OP

is_that_so

ixoy wrote: »

What exactly would the increase in funds to public health achieve to keep cases down? Treating a rise in cases, sure, but to keep them down? Enhanced contact tracing or mass testing?

But significant public health investment is always the answer

Wolf359f

seamus wrote: »

Well, this is unexpected.

Yesterday's swab data has been revised.

The number of positive swabs is the same, but the number of tests has been increaed by 50%.

There were 12,439 tests carried out yesterday, 271 positive, giving a p-rate of 2.18%. 7-day rate is now down to 2.65%

So what was confusing and slightly worrying, is now in fact excellent news.

That's some good news!
I just hope with the extra testing with saliva samples, that those numbers don't feed into swabs, lord knows it's hard to figure out the current figures (I know there was talk/rumors in the UK they were double counting the swabs and saliva sample as 2 tests)
https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/newsfeatures/covid19-updates/alternative-testing-for-covid-19.html

caveat emptor

Here's a handy calculator to estimate the probability of spread in a Christmas setting.

You can tweet the parameters. Not sure how accurate of course. Would make for an interesting if unethical experiment to find out. :pac:

https://twitter.com/QuentinLclrc/status/1331973983412097025?s=20

John O.Groats

owlbethere wrote: »

The case numbers did not come down to as low as where NHPET needed them to be for a safe Christmas. We need double digits as in under 100. The government is still going to open up and ease level 5. They have to at this stage. Especially retail coming up to Christmas. More than likely the government will say businesses can open from December Dec Ist. That's on Tuesday. What's the point dragging it out til then. Can they not give them the go ahead to open from tomorrow? It's not going to make a bit of difference on the numbers.

As far as I know the current restrictions will remain in place until midnight Tuesday night/Wednesday morning.

iguana

I've been looking through the graphs on Worldometers and most of Europe, including the UK, is experiencing a second wave of deaths that is close to or in some cases worse than their first. While ours is still comparably flat in our second wave. What is it that we are getting right here? Is it a case of families actively keeping school children away from elderly family members? I'd really, really like an honest assessment of why we are managing to avoid this second wave of fatalities because that will let us know what to keep on doing. And I really and truly hope we can keep on doing it through Christmas and don't have our real second wave of death in late January/early February.

caveat emptor

AssetBacked2 wrote: »

What a horrible post this is.

Attacking the journalist rather than the article.

You sound like a lovely person, just like all doomers :rolleyes:

I am a lovely person thanks. You sound like a lovely person just like all the let her RIP.com merchants.

How mature. Commenting on me as a person not refuting anything I said. Reverting to name calling. Are you 10? stick to the topic.

If someone wants to let granny die that's up to them. Granny's and grandads are not just people with significant assets.

eagle eye

ACitizenErased wrote:

I have a conscience so I'm not going to make predictions for everyone's Christmas on here. If you wanna PM me I'd be happy to provide a solution and teaching moment

I don't need any teaching. I'll even out up a guesstimate without doing maths when you show us your calculations.

If you wanna challenge others you should have the decency to put up an educated argument with figures.

Thundercats Ho

John O.Groats wrote: »

As far as I know the current restrictions will remain in place until midnight Tuesday night/Wednesday morning.

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1332082722626564100?s=20

ACitizenErased

caveat emptor wrote: »

I am a lovely person thanks. You sound like a lovely person just like all the let her RIP.com merchants.

How mature. Commenting on me as a person not refuting anything I said. Reverting to name calling. Are you 10? stick to the topic.

If someone wants to let granny die that's up to them. Granny's and grandads are not just people with significant assets.

You're questioning that poster's maturity and then use these sort of statements? Pot, kettle.

ACitizenErased

eagle eye wrote: »

I don't need any teaching. I'll even out up a guesstimate without doing maths when you show us your calculations.

If you wanna challenge others you should have the decency to put up an educated argument with figures.

If you want my calculations you can message me, as I said.
You're obsessed with what my opinion is

AssetBacked2

caveat emptor wrote: »

I am a lovely person thanks. You sound like a lovely person just like all the let her RIP.com merchants.

How mature. Commenting on me as a person not refuting anything I said. stick to the topic.

If someone wants to let granny die that's up to them. Granny's and grandads are not just people with significant assets.

The article points out the anti-pub narrative (1) is not backed by solid data and (2) is driven by a general anti-alcohol mob in healthcare.

Care to actually respond to that or do you want to throw your toys out of the pram again when you're called out for your horrible post? "Let granny die"; what sort of post is that?

iguana

iguana wrote: »

I've been looking through the graphs on Worldometers and most of Europe, including the UK, is experiencing a second wave of deaths that is close to or in some cases worse than their first. While ours is still comparably flat in our second wave. What is it that we are getting right here? Is it a case of families actively keeping school children away from elderly family members? I'd really, really like an honest assessment of why we are managing to avoid this second wave of fatalities because that will let us know what to keep on doing. And I really and truly hope we can keep on doing it through Christmas and don't have our real second wave of death in late January/early February.

Keeping control of cases, pure and simple - yesterday for example we were 36th out of 48 for cases in Europe and 34th out of 48 for deaths. In population we are 26th

ACitizenErased

Also, challenging figures?
Figures =/= a random projection.
Figures = a thought out calculation taking into account various factors and assumptions. Nobody here has provided figures as such.

eagle eye

AssetBacked2 wrote:

Some great quotes which are perfect to describe the hystertics around pubs;

That sounds like McConkey's alter antithesis.

Renjit

Time to put my tin foil hat while going through last few pages

caveat emptor

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Also, challenging figures?
Figures =/= a random projection.
Figures = a thought out calculation taking into account various factors and assumptions. Nobody here has provided figures as such.

Having predicted there wouldn't be a second wave for months. I'm interested to know if you think there'll be a third wave. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the subject now you have more data.

eagle eye

ACitizenErased wrote:

If you want my calculations you can message me, as I said. You're obsessed with what my opinion is

I want you to post it on thread for all.to see.

Plumbthedepths

TonyMaloney wrote: »

There's a big difference in sitting in your gaf drinking some cans on your own or with your significant other, and going to the pub for a rake load of pints.
I miss it too.

Ultimately we would all pay for supporting the hospitality sector. But we'll also all pay for lockdowns or harsh restrictions. And they're much more costly.

I'm looking forward to been able to sit in a coffee shop with friends or browse through the library shelves. Not all about pints despite the narrative. There's even some here who would like to go to the cinema despite Netflix.

owlbethere

iguana wrote: »

I've been looking through the graphs on Worldometers and most of Europe, including the UK, is experiencing a second wave of deaths that is close to or in some cases worse than their first. While ours is still comparably flat in our second wave. What is it that we are getting right here? Is it a case of families actively keeping school children away from elderly family members? I'd really, really like an honest assessment of why we are managing to avoid this second wave of fatalities because that will let us know what to keep on doing. And I really and truly hope we can keep on doing it through Christmas and don't have our real second wave of death in late January/early February.

That's an interesting observation. I don't know.

I think there will be a lot of meet ups over Christmas and mixing of households. I think schools should close 2 weeks before Christmas so that children are not mixing with each other and there's less chances of virus transmittion and children being in an incubation period. I think the schools should close so that it's safer for children to meet up with grandparents for Christmas. Otherwise there's chances of the virus dipping into the age group of 60 - 70/75+ and they have been shielded to date.

I really don’t think the pubs and restaurants opening is going to be the big deal that people seem to think.

They were open in the summer for weeks with no real issues. It was the huge clusters in meat factories around the country that seemed to really kickstart the uptick in cases.

caveat emptor

AssetBacked2 wrote: »

The article points out the anti-pub narrative (1) is not backed by solid data and (2) is driven by a general anti-alcohol mob in healthcare.

Care to actually respond to that or do you want to throw your toys out of the pram again when you're called out for your horrible post? "Let granny die"; what sort of post is that?

The anti pub narrative?
The anti alcohol mob?

Why not the main stream media or the NPHET sycophants? you like name calling I can see.

I didn't know I wasn't allowed to have an opinion on an opinion piece. Very sorry.

John O.Groats

owlbethere wrote: »

That's an interesting observation. I don't know.

I think there will be a lot of meet ups over Christmas and mixing of households. I think schools should close 2 weeks before Christmas so that children are not mixing with each other and there's less chances of virus transmittion and children being in an incubation period. I think the schools should close so that it's safer for children to meet up with grandparents for Christmas. Otherwise there's chances of the virus dipping into the age group of 60 - 70/75+ and they have been shielded to date.

There is a slight chance they may close on 18th December but no way will they shut any earlier than that date.

Ficheall

ACitizenErased wrote: »

If you wanna PM me I'd be happy to provide a solution and teaching moment :pac:

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Don't be so condescending, you're not an expert.

Mhmm.

TonyMaloney

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I'm looking forward to been able to sit in a coffee shop with friends or browse through the library shelves. Not all about pints despite the narrative. There's even some here who would like to go to the cinema despite Netflix.

Right, well I guess you should make the most of them for the limited time they'll be open

FinglasFollain

caveat emptor wrote: »

I am a lovely person thanks. You sound like a lovely person just like all the let her RIP.com merchants.

How mature. Commenting on me as a person not refuting anything I said. Reverting to name calling. Are you 10? stick to the topic.

If someone wants to let granny die that's up to them. Granny's and grandads are not just people with significant assets.

This is getting ridiculous. You even stray away from the pro lockdown viewpoint and you’re told you want to let grannies die.

I suppose when you’ve no argument left this is the bile you end up resorting to.

What Username Guidelines

paw patrol wrote: »

or just let people make their own informed decision regarding their health
a bizarre concept I know....:rolleyes:

Not sure why the need for :rolleyes:

People making their own informed decisions was the 2nd option in my post. There's pros and cons to that, like everything, but cons are when looking at the situation from a higher level.

froog

ACitizenErased wrote: »

If you want my calculations you can message me, as I said.
You're obsessed with what my opinion is

Why are your calculations a private matter? Have you some proprietary algorithm or something?

Ficheall

FinglasFollain wrote: »

This is getting ridiculous. You even stray away from the pro lockdown viewpoint and you’re told you want to let grannies die.

I suppose when you’ve no argument left this is the bile you end up resorting to.

It's been ridiculous on that front for quite some time - the other side were accusing the "doom-mongers" of getting turned on when the case numbers went up.

BeefeaterHat

FinglasFollain wrote: »

This is getting ridiculous. You even stray away from the pro lockdown viewpoint and you’re told you want to let grannies die.

I suppose when you’ve no argument left this is the bile you end up resorting to.

Of course NPHET care so much about the elderly they moved patients from the hospitals to care homes without screening them.

Plumbthedepths

TonyMaloney wrote: »

Right, well I guess you should make the most of them for the limited time they'll be open

Like the pub narrative, the assumptions are equally tiresome.