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

bb1234567

John O.Groats wrote: »

His arsehole I``d say.

I took it as a joke? Obviously we will have vaccine before october 2021

Goldengirl

Seriously guys , just turn on your tvs and donate a few euros to that appeal on the ToyShow .
Don't be arguing on here .

Widdensushi

Goldengirl wrote: »

Seriously guys , just turn on your tvs and donate a few euros to that appeal on the ToyShow .
Don't be arguing on here .

Done earlier, well done all

KrustyUCC

Goldengirl wrote: »

Seriously guys , just turn on your tvs and donate a few euros to that appeal on the ToyShow .
Don't be arguing on here .

Up to 4.5 million

Super stuff

podgeandrodge

Be interesting if this takes hold over the long run - can't travel if you don't provide confirmation of having vaccine...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/qantas-other-airlines-covid-19-vaccine-proof-1.5813866


If a vaccine leads to herd immunity (assuming enough people take it), it would seem unnecessary.

Imagine if airlines stopped you flying cos you didn't have the flu vaccine!

Wolf359f

Goldengirl wrote: »

Seriously guys , just turn on your tvs and donate a few euros to that appeal on the ToyShow .
Don't be arguing on here .

Done.
I'd love to know the amount of donations by the public this year via the late late show. I know many don't like it, but for charities, it's been a lifeline.

Goldengirl

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Up to 4.5 million

Super stuff

It's a particularly good show tonight, fair dues.
I am in melt down every year and normally Ryan makes me cringe but not for some reason tonight.
The kids are fantastic , and everyone seems more relaxed .
Sorry off topic .

podgeandrodge

As someone who was pushing the 'no masks necessary in supermarkets' agenda myself, given the practically zero cases reported by Lidl, Aldi, Tesco etc. during the height of the pandemic when people weren't even wearing masks, I was surprised to read this.

I dunno, since masks became mandatory things really seem to have gone tits up!

Supermarkets most common Covid exposure location in England, data show


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/covid-supermarkets-uk-exposure-nhs-b1748906.html


Though I see schools are not far behind :pac:


Edit: They qualify the findings saying:

"Explaining the data, Isabel Oliver, director of the National Infection Service at PHE, said: “Suggestions that supermarkets are causing COVID-19 to spread are inaccurate. Common exposure data does not prove where people are contracting COVID-19.

“It simply shows where people who have tested positive have been in the days leading up to their test and it is used to help identify possible outbreaks,” she added.

Here are the proportions of all common locations reported in the data:

Supermarket - 18.3%

Secondary school - 12.7%

Primary school - 10.1%

Hospital - 3.6%"

Wolf359f

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes but other countries go into lockdowns with the actual intent of leaving lockdown, NPHET here just want to live in permanent lockdown. There is no trust there anymore, I just don't believe a word they say anymore.

You're comparing other countries government's making a decision against NPHET making a recommendation. You are aware that almost all countries would have advisers, SAGE in the UK have made recommendations which the government didn't follow fully. But as they are just advisers, that's ok. Some think NPHET run the country.

NPHET could recommend zero covid or go for herd immunity, the government would take that advice on board and then make their own decision.
Simply because you don't agree with NPHET advice, you believe they make all the decisions and run the country? But the rest of Europe their advisers are better or maybe the governments just ignore that advice? That would explain 2nd waves multiple times larger than their first and low and behold they still need a harsh lockdown to reduce the spread.

Widdensushi

podgeandrodge wrote: »

As someone who was pushing the 'no masks necessary in supermarkets' agenda myself, given the practically zero cases reported by Lidl, Aldi, Tesco etc. during the height of the pandemic when people weren't even wearing masks, I was surprised to read this.

I dunno, since masks became mandatory things really seem to have gone tits up!

Supermarkets most common Covid exposure location in England, data show


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/covid-supermarkets-uk-exposure-nhs-b1748906.html


Though I see schools are not far behind :pac:


Edit: They qualify the findings saying:

"Explaining the data, Isabel Oliver, director of the National Infection Service at PHE, said: “Suggestions that supermarkets are causing COVID-19 to spread are inaccurate. Common exposure data does not prove where people are contracting COVID-19.

“It simply shows where people who have tested positive have been in the days leading up to their test and it is used to help identify possible outbreaks,” she added.

Here are the proportions of all common locations reported in the data:

Supermarket - 18.3%

Secondary school - 12.7%

Primary school - 10.1%

Hospital - 3.6%"

A UK survey!!! I don't think people realise how different life, standards are, not applicable while being of interest.

Wolf359f

podgeandrodge wrote: »

As someone who was pushing the 'no masks necessary in supermarkets' agenda myself, given the practically zero cases reported by Lidl, Aldi, Tesco etc. during the height of the pandemic when people weren't even wearing masks, I was surprised to read this.

I dunno, since masks became mandatory things really seem to have gone tits up!

Supermarkets most common Covid exposure location in England, data show


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/covid-supermarkets-uk-exposure-nhs-b1748906.html


Though I see schools are not far behind :pac:


Edit: They qualify the findings saying:

"Explaining the data, Isabel Oliver, director of the National Infection Service at PHE, said: “Suggestions that supermarkets are causing COVID-19 to spread are inaccurate. Common exposure data does not prove where people are contracting COVID-19.

“It simply shows where people who have tested positive have been in the days leading up to their test and it is used to help identify possible outbreaks,” she added.

Here are the proportions of all common locations reported in the data:

Supermarket - 18.3%

Secondary school - 12.7%

Primary school - 10.1%

Hospital - 3.6%"

I never like those kind of comparisons, I mean would it not be accurate to say 100% of those infected left the house?
Only 18% went to a supermarket in the week leading up to testing positive?
I mean statically I would expect 1 in 5 to leave the house each week to go shopping. I wouldn't infer 1 in 5 cases were picked up in a supermarket, which is how many would read into the article.

podgeandrodge

Widdensushi wrote: »

A UK survey!!! I don't think people realise how different life, standards are, not applicable while being of interest.

Yeah totally agree with you!

Right now I'm still pissed at lack of explanation for food from next door restaurant constituting a bigger risk than food cooked on site.

podgeandrodge

Wolf359f wrote: »

I never like those kind of comparisons, I mean would it not be accurate to say 100% of those infected left the house?
Only 18% went to a supermarket in the week leading up to testing positive?
I mean statically I would expect 1 in 5 to leave the house each week to go shopping. I wouldn't infer 1 in 5 cases were picked up in a supermarket, which is how many would read into the article.

Agreed.

Wolf359f

podgeandrodge wrote: »

Yeah totally agree with you!

Right now I'm still pissed at lack of explanation for food from next door restaurant constituting a bigger risk than food cooked on site.

Ignoring Covid just for a second. From a legal and health and safety point of view, whose liable for any food poisoning? The pub or the local chipper?
If a customer asks the waiter if this dish has peanuts, what will the waiter say, go ask the local chinese takeaway?

It's a slow reopening of the economy, some businesses can open sooner than others. There's a grey area around restaurants serving food and pubs serving food. I would say quite a few restaurants would love to open even if they couldn't serve food, as food is their main source of revenue.

Incidentally, if 'pubs' want food from another premises be consumed on their premises, I assume they wouldn't disagree with alcohol purchased from an off licence being consumed on their premises while the customer snacks on a pizza from the local pizzeria?

cameramonkey

podgeandrodge wrote: »

As someone who was pushing the 'no masks necessary in supermarkets' agenda myself, given the practically zero cases reported by Lidl, Aldi, Tesco etc. during the height of the pandemic when people weren't even wearing masks, I was surprised to read this.

I dunno, since masks became mandatory things really seem to have gone tits up!

Supermarkets most common Covid exposure location in England, data show


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/covid-supermarkets-uk-exposure-nhs-b1748906.html


Though I see schools are not far behind :pac:


Edit: They qualify the findings saying:

"Explaining the data, Isabel Oliver, director of the National Infection Service at PHE, said: “Suggestions that supermarkets are causing COVID-19 to spread are inaccurate. Common exposure data does not prove where people are contracting COVID-19.

“It simply shows where people who have tested positive have been in the days leading up to their test and it is used to help identify possible outbreaks,” she added.

Here are the proportions of all common locations reported in the data:

Supermarket - 18.3%

Secondary school - 12.7%

Primary school - 10.1%

Hospital - 3.6%"

This date does not show even one case of where a person caught covid in a supermarket.

alentejo

Masks Indoors. Yes I get that! I haven't seen one study to show that masks are effective outside! Show me the science!

podgeandrodge

cameramonkey wrote: »

This date does not show even one case of where a person caught covid in a supermarket.

Yes agree, guilty of posting having only first read the headline. I've always been dubious of supermarkets being risky.

podgeandrodge

Wolf359f wrote: »

Ignoring Covid just for a second. From a legal and health and safety point of view, whose liable for any food poisoning? The pub or the local chipper?
If a customer asks the waiter if this dish has peanuts, what will the waiter say, go ask the local chinese takeaway?

It's a slow reopening of the economy, some businesses can open sooner than others. There's a grey area around restaurants serving food and pubs serving food. I would say quite a few restaurants would love to open even if they couldn't serve food, as food is their main source of revenue.

Incidentally, if 'pubs' want food from another premises be consumed on their premises, I assume they wouldn't disagree with alcohol purchased from an off licence being consumed on their premises while the customer snacks on a pizza from the local pizzeria?

We're talking about the opening of the economy and supporting businesses at this seriously tough time for them. This is about whether they can stay open. Govt. has not stated that the differentiation is about food safety issues. It's obnoxious nonsense preventing pubs trying to save their business.

Wolf359f

alentejo wrote: »

Masks Indoors. Yes I get that! I haven't seen one study to show that masks are effective outside! Show me the science!

I think it's more a case of busy Christmas shopping, going from store to store, taking off and putting on a mask.... maybe just leave it on as you walk outdoors going from shop to shop?

We're 8 months into a pandemic, use common sense.
Or do you think a packed Grafton street would be the same as a walk in a remote forest. Both outdoors, but maybe, just maybe, a mask may be effective in 1 of those situations.

Polar101

podgeandrodge wrote: »

As someone who was pushing the 'no masks necessary in supermarkets' agenda myself, given the practically zero cases reported by Lidl, Aldi, Tesco etc. during the height of the pandemic when people weren't even wearing masks, I was surprised to read this.

If I catch Covid-19 somewhere, it's most likely going to be at the supermarket - because that's the place visit most often these days. I don't go to the office, can't go to the pub or the cafe, or the local restaurant - so the place where I meet the most people is the supermarket. I guess it's not surprising the supermarket ranks high on a list like that.

Does that mean the supermarket is Covid central? Maybe not.

I think it makes sense, but maybe I'm being too simple?

Polar101

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Up to 4.5 million

Super stuff

5.2 million now, sounds pretty good.

Wolf359f

podgeandrodge wrote: »

We're talking about the opening of the economy and supporting businesses at this seriously tough time for them. This is about whether they can stay open. Govt. has not stated that the differentiation is about food safety issues. It's obnoxious nonsense preventing pubs trying to save their business.

There's plenty of reasons where a restaurant is safer than a pub.
You need to understand McDonald's and Burger King are actually classed as a restaurant. Same as a Restaurant that serves food and drink. The local cafe down he street also classed as a restaurant. It seems people get hung up on the serving of alcohol aspect. I dunno, maybe allow all restaurants to open, but not allow alcohol to be served or consumed on the premises would be a better alternative?

cameramonkey

Polar101 wrote: »

If I catch Covid-19 somewhere, it's most likely going to be at the supermarket - because that's the place visit most often these days. I don't go to the office, can't go to the pub or the cafe, or the local restaurant - so the place where I meet the most people is the supermarket. I guess it's not surprising the supermarket ranks high on a list like that.

Does that mean the supermarket is Covid central? Maybe not.

I think it makes sense, but maybe I'm being too simple?

There is no evidence to say anyone is catching it in supermarkets. All the articles really does is give a list of places people visit by %, there is no correlation between that % and people catching covid.

alentejo

Wolf359f wrote: »

I think it's more a case of busy Christmas shopping, going from store to store, taking off and putting on a mask.... maybe just leave it on as you walk outdoors going from shop to shop?

We're 8 months into a pandemic, use common sense.
Or do you think a packed Grafton street would be the same as a walk in a remote forest. Both outdoors, but maybe, just maybe, a mask may be effective in 1 of those situations.

I get the mask issue and would always keep mask on dashing from shop to shop! Still haven't seen any evidence regarding outdoor usage! Are the risks the same on a windy day in Grafton street to that of a calm day.

CIARAN_BOYLE

podgeandrodge wrote: »

As someone who was pushing the 'no masks necessary in supermarkets' agenda myself, given the practically zero cases reported by Lidl, Aldi, Tesco etc. during the height of the pandemic when people weren't even wearing masks, I was surprised to read this.

The one thing that we have learned thought this whole thing is that contact tracing can only trace when you know who your contacts are.

You don't know who your contacts are in a supermarket. The restaurant might have an idea who your contacts are in a restaurant but probably not and you definitely don't. Same as with a pub but there's less of a chance of the pub knowing who your contacts are.

This makes it pretty damn hard to find the source of a lot of infections. It's presumed to have happened in the shops or in a restaurants simply because that's what's left.

Everyone shops for food at least so if there is not a definitive source just blame the supermarket.

The contact tracing app is pretty useless. Not enough people use it and it doesn't really see a difference in vertical and horizontal distance.

Widdensushi

Polar101 wrote: »

If I catch Covid-19 somewhere, it's most likely going to be at the supermarket - because that's the place visit most often these days. I don't go to the office, can't go to the pub or the cafe, or the local restaurant - so the place where I meet the most people is the supermarket. I guess it's not surprising the supermarket ranks high on a list like that.

Does that mean the supermarket is Covid central? Maybe not.

I think it makes sense, but maybe I'm being too simple?

When we were in a more strict lockdown premasks supermarket staff were Statistically less likely to get covid than the average person, they were like "schools" at the time with a major focus on them to find evidence of infection / clusters but it wasn't there, I believe the high ceiling s might be a big factor, I presume there was some outlier but I can't currently recall a cluster in a supermarket.

podgeandrodge

Polar101 wrote: »

If I catch Covid-19 somewhere, it's most likely going to be at the supermarket - because that's the place visit most often these days. I don't go to the office, can't go to the pub or the cafe, or the local restaurant - so the place where I meet the most people is the supermarket. I guess it's not surprising the supermarket ranks high on a list like that.

Does that mean the supermarket is Covid central? Maybe not.

I think it makes sense, but maybe I'm being too simple?

You don't to the office, you can't go to the pub or the cafe or the local restaurant. Govt. saying most cases coming from house gatherings. So you still are unlikely to catch it in the supermarket running in for a few items and not being in close contact with other people for any significant amount of time.

So, imo, just because you're in the supermarket more often, doesn't mean it has anything to do with chances of catching covid.

Wolf359f

alentejo wrote: »

I get the mask issue and would always keep mask on dashing from shop to shop! Still haven't seen any evidence regarding outdoor usage! Are the risks the same on a windy day in Grafton street to that of a calm day.

I guess it's easier if you use common sense. You know the weather is random in Ireland. You could be walking down a windy street mask off and turn the corner and it's calm, so mask off and rinse and repeat.
Government is giving advice, listen to it or don't, but don't go giving out about something the government advises you do to protect other people and perhaps yourself.

Arghus

hotmail.com wrote: »

I presume all those wanting more restrictions will avoid pubs and restaurants and avoid unnecessary shopping despite today's announcement.

Well that's what I'll be doing anyway.

podgeandrodge

Wolf359f wrote: »

There's plenty of reasons where a restaurant is safer than a pub.
You need to understand McDonald's and Burger King are actually classed as a restaurant. Same as a Restaurant that serves food and drink. The local cafe down the street also classed as a restaurant. It seems people get hung up on the serving of alcohol aspect. I dunno, maybe allow all restaurants to open, but not allow alcohol to be served or consumed on the premises would be a better alternative?

You seem caught up with alcohol. For some people, it's possible to have a meal in a pub with a few pints. No different than going for a meal in a restaurant and having a few pints. That's what happened during the summer when things opened back up, and when pubs abided by the rules (and restaurants) I'm not aware of serious issues arising.