Covid 19 Part XXXIII-231,484 ROI(4,610 deaths)116,197 NI (2,107 deaths)(23/03)Read OP

CruelSummer

https://twitter.com/rte_primetime/status/1372638687150931974?s=21

Very good report from China re the origins of Covid on Prime Time.

Monster249

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

As a mother and a nurse, do you believe Covid trumps all associated lockdown related costs for those young people?

Do you not think long term suppression for young adults is likely to cause serious social issues and other health problems?

Is Covid really that dangerous for those under 30

Covid isn't dangerous for the non-vulnerable and that's just a fact. There's always going to be outliers, the "friends sister's boyfriend that was health and got sick" but by and large it's not a threat.

Doctor Jimbob

Goldengirl wrote: »

Hospital numbers only marginally down last few weeks as well . Still 20 to 25 a day admitted .
ICU came down mainly due to deaths, not discharges unfortunately, but has not gone up despite hospitalisations, this is good .
Would hope that as things go on , even less severe illness despite case numbers due to vaccinations.

But , and this is the point I was making earlier ...
When do we, when older/ vulnerable population largely vaccinated, say ,
" it's ok lads , get the infection if ye want, which will happen with socialising , we are resuming normality here and won't be going out of our way anymore , to protect you from getting a virus you don't think is an issue !" ?

Is this ethical or moral after all our young people have done and given up for the last year to protect that older/ vulnerable group , even if that younger group do not want to be protected from themselves.
They want to go back to normal sooner , we want to go back too, but will that be the right decision longterm with long Covid etc.
As a mother and nurse, it goes against the grain to put my kids , anyone's kids in the way of long term illness / issues if it can be avoided, but it is a decision coming down the line ,
sooner rather than later , don't you think ?

I want the restrictions to ease as soon as possible, but you raise an interesting point there. I don't know what the best way forward is.

Goldengirl

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

It depends on the metric you judge it by in the short term

It reduces the number of cases of community transmission for a while, at an unprecedented economic and social cost, a cost that hasn’t been calculated fully yet.

It doesn’t, however appear to protect the vulnerable citizens any more than less suppressed nations across the EU. If it did, we would have the lowest vulnerable death rate in the EU. I’m referring to over 65’s as vulnerable deaths as it’s the demographic where 95% of deaths occur.

We don’t. We have a higher rate of vulnerable deaths than Sweden. To put it another way, a citizen over 65 is less likely to die of Covid in Sweden than one in Ireland.
5
So we can rule out a high community suppression level long term lowering death rate.

Also, level 5 used long term becomes a counter productive enigma.

High suppression levels and low numbers from May-December 2020 caused unbelievable pent up demand to socialise last December which in turn created record breaking case numbers and hospitalisation’s.

I believe if we followed Europe’s lead in 2020 we could of had slightly higher daily numbers all Summer to reduce the overall peak in December.

Remember flatten the curve, except flatten it both ways. Flatten the restrictions and associated costs

Fintan , you said the same about over 65s vs over 65s in Sweden .
You were answered by a poster ( CiaranBoyle I think ) who quoted statistics and proved that what you were saying was utter rubbish .
I refer you to this reply as you obviously either did not read it or see it or you would not have repeated the same ...again , would you ?
Of course not

almostover

spookwoman wrote: »

*mod snip - no need to quote all the images*

This is great info, thanks for sharing. Shows the real plight in Irish health care. 1 patient with COVID in UHK and 0 ICU capacity also. The health service is beyond a shambles. A national disgrace that has only been exacerbated by COVID.

Goldengirl

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

As a mother and a nurse, do you believe Covid trumps all associated lockdown related costs for those young people?

Do you not think long term suppression for young adults is likely to cause serious social issues and other health problems?

Is Covid really that dangerous for those under 30

No , yes and no .
Hence my post , maybe read what I said instead of jumping on a bandwagon.

There is a raft of longterm issues and health conditions including make infertility being attributed to even mild to moderate Covid infections sonoIwouod not want that for anyone's child .

FintanMcluskey

Goldengirl wrote: »

Fintan , you said the same about over 65s vs over 65s in Sweden .
You were answered by a poster ( CiaranBoyle I think ) who quoted statistics and proved that what you were saying was utter rubbish .
I refer you to this reply as you obviously either did not read it or see it or you would not have repeated the same ...again , would you ?
Of course not

If you didn’t happen to see it, I did respond to question mr Boyles understanding of the numbers he posted. Which essentially was a display of complete misunderstanding by himself, and yourself indeed who agreed with him.

The numbers we have at present, means a citizen over 65 in Sweden had less of a risk of dying from Covid than an Irish citizen over 65.

That’s not rubbish, that’s just numbers, which not everyone understands how such a statement could be true, given the implications in the media that in Ireland we implemented such severe mitigation measures long term to lower our death rate and protect our vulnerable.

Because that’s not what happened

JRant

Goldengirl wrote: »

Again that is my point ! Why did you only read half of what I wrote ?

I don't think it's fair and that's why we need to mind people , whether they want us to or not , in some way until everyone is vaccinated.
That to me is the only fair return for what has gone on over the last year !
I know so many young people who have given up their lives over the last year so that this end where older vulnerable people can be protected and HCWs like myself until vaccination.
So why now, even though everyone wants to and are sick to the back teeth of restrictions , should we give up and let it RIP and affect those who have given up so much , and may be most affected healthwise and economically in the future ?
Do you get me?

95% of all deaths are the 65+ cohort. That's the end game surely.

By the way, I'm not suggesting we let it rip but surely we can move to at least level 3 in the next few weeks. We need to get something going on the economy sooner rather than later. With HCWs and nursing homes covered it should give us scope to start easing restrictions in April and I'm not just talking about construction and 10km restrictions but some real tangible relaxation of restrictions.

Tordelback

Deleted User wrote: »

Lv. 5 lockdown worked when people believed in it. Think of last March..

Last March (April and May really) there was a 2km exercise limit. All construction and in-person education closed. Playgrounds, beaches closed. Feck-all shops open, long queues at what there was. We basically stayed in our homes. That was not this.

Level 5 is not a real lockdown, there are too many exemptions that apply unevenly across the population. Instead it's a lingering misery that's neither one thing nor the other.

I see more and more people are starting to play the long Covid card.

Look, we could lockdown for the next decade and wait for all kinds of studies to take place to try and determine all potential longer term issues.

Flus, chest infections and other illnesses can cause longer term issues as well...

We’d all love to live in a world where you can’t get sick. But that’s not this world. So we have to put on our big boy pants and accept the tiny risks.

Also, financial ruin will thankfully kick in eventually and we’ll have to alter our approach accordingly.

Russman

Deleted User wrote: »

I see more and more people are starting to play the long Covid card.

Look, we could lockdown for the next decade and wait for all kinds of studies to take place to try and determine all potential longer term issues.

Flus, chest infections and other illnesses can cause longer term issues as well...

We’d all love to live in a world where you can’t get sick. But that’s not this world. So we have to put on our big boy pants and accept the tiny risks.

Also, financial ruin will thankfully kick in eventually and we’ll have to alter our approach accordingly.

Will our big boy pants help us if hospitals experience what we went through in January again ?

FintanMcluskey

Russman wrote: »

Will our big boy pants help us if hospitals experience what we went through in January again ?

With all the HCWs vaccinated that’s unlikely to happen again.

People forget there is 450,000+ (I think) vaccinated with the first dose

Christmas is the new Lombardy it seems

No consideration for what’s changed since

FintanMcluskey

almostover wrote: »

This is great info, thanks for sharing. Shows the real plight in Irish health care. 1 patient with COVID in UHK and 0 ICU capacity also. The health service is beyond a shambles. A national disgrace that has only been exacerbated by COVID.

Unfortunately and ironically, that problem won’t be fixed any decade soon with the economic problems looming on the horizon.

Russman

Russman wrote: »

Will our big boy pants help us if hospitals experience what we went through in January again ?

What did the hospitals experience in January? You mean a bit busy?

Show me a January were that didn’t happen.

TheDoctor

Hospital numbers at 8pm
Total 334 (down from 343 last night)
ICU 83 (up from 82 last night)


Last Thursday
Total 341
ICU 87

Goldengirl

JRant wrote: »

95% of all deaths are the 65+ cohort. That's the end game surely.

By the way, I'm not suggesting we let it rip but surely we can move to at least level 3 in the next few weeks. We need to get something going on the economy sooner rather than later. With HCWs and nursing homes covered it should give us scope to start easing restrictions in April and I'm not just talking about construction and 10km restrictions but some real tangible relaxation of restrictions.

But do you accept that you misunderstand my previous post ?
You and 2 other posters ripped into me over it , but yet not one of you admitted that , or perish the thought, apologised , when you were all mistaken .
I was not saying that " I was vaccinated and to hell with young people , and that I didn't care anymore" , the opposite in fact.
And I certainly am very cognisant of how much people have given up especially young people in the last year and the effects of this awful year on mental health .
That is why we can't give up now , it isn't fair or right on those people , but it isn't my remit or my wish to force anything on anyone else .
I totally agree about relaxing restrictons as cases going down and people being vaccinated btw as I have said on more than one occasion .

Goldengirl

Russman wrote: »

Will our big boy pants help us if hospitals experience what we went through in January again ?

Thankfully probably won't happen now that so many elderly vaccinated .
Bug you could ask that poster will his big boy pants help him if he suffers long Covid which he scorns and cannot work as a result in the future because of it ...oh but the economy ?

Monster249

Goldengirl wrote: »

Thankfully probably won't happen now that so many elderly vaccinated .
Bug you could ask that poster will his big boy pants help him if he suffers long Covid which he scorns and cannot work as a result in the future because of it ...oh but the economy ?

Once again you seemingly take opposing viewpoints in two adjacent posts. Don't blame others for ripping into you when it's that difficult to actually narrow down your exact opinions.

Goldengirl

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

With all the HCWs vaccinated that’s unlikely to happen again.

People forget there is 450,000+ (I think) vaccinated with the first dose

Christmas is the new Lombardy it seems

No consideration for what’s changed since

You quote Sweden ad lib with no consideration for what has gone on since...oh dear
AND please post if you will the link to where you " proved " Mr Boyle wrong as I can't seem to find that ?

Wolf359f

TheDoctor wrote: »

Hospital numbers at 8pm
Total 334 (down from 343 last night)
ICU 83 (up from 82 last night)


Last Thursday
Total 341
ICU 87

Very little movement over 7 days unfortunately.
I see Mayo with 9 new cases/admissions, big jump there.

Corruptedmorals

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What did the hospitals experience in January? You mean a bit busy?

Show me a January were that didn’t happen.

I don't believe it's normal practice to cancel elective care almost totally. All surgeries cancelled except for emergencies, all outpatient clinics cancelled. All staff diverted to covid wards. Staff diverted from other hospitals. ICU's set up in theatres and regular wards. What's normal about that?

Goldengirl

Monster249 wrote: »

Once again you seemingly take opposing viewpoints in two adjacent posts. Don't blame others for ripping into you when it's that difficult to actually narrow down your exact opinions.

At least I gave an opinion other than persistently misreading people's posts in an effort to wind them up .

iamwhoiam

iamwhoiam wrote: »

It’s because we feel abandoned , no leadership , no positive messaging , no road out , no hope . People are throwing in the towel and saying F this for a lark

Yes indeed. I remember posting last year on the vaccine thread I think it was about my fears. That no matter the progress we make in protecting the vulnerable and our hospitals, NPHET would keep us restricted. The rest of Europe would open in response to their vaccine roll out and we would continue to be this predicament.

There's a paragraph in the road map that refers to the unknowns around the coming autumn and winter. In it NPHET basically say that restrictions may be needed if there are other respiratory illnesses occurring. I mean. What? So even with Covid no longer a risk they will impinge upon our freedoms because of a flu outbreak or bunch of people getting pneumonia. I can't figure it out at all.

FintanMcluskey

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes indeed. I remember posting last year on the vaccine thread I think it was about my fears. That no matter the progress we make in protecting the vulnerable and our hospitals, NPHET would keep us restricted. The rest of Europe would open in response to their vaccine roll out and we would continue to be this predicament.

There's a paragraph in the road map that refers to the unknowns around the coming autumn and winter. In it NPHET basically say that restrictions may be needed if there are other respiratory illnesses occurring. I mean. What? So even with Covid no longer a risk they will impinge upon our freedoms because of a flu outbreak or bunch of people getting pneumonia. I can't figure it out at all.

That needs clarification tbh.

Is the precedent set to prevent the health service becoming overwhelmed in future?

Is it easier to impose mitigation measures next Winter than to reform the health service?

The funding won’t be there to reform the health service anyway and a recruitment and pay freeze is much more likely than any improvements.

Monster249

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

That needs clarification tbh.

Is the precedent set to prevent the health service becoming overwhelmed in future?

Is it easier to impose mitigation measures next Winter than to reform the health service?

The funding won’t be there to reform the health service anyway and a recruitment and pay freeze is much more likely than any improvements.

Whatever about this country, I highly doubt there is a precedent set for the rest of Europe or the UK so i don't think Ireland will get away with imposing lockdowns independent of everyone else.

FintanMcluskey

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

That needs clarification tbh.

Is the precedent set to prevent the health service becoming overwhelmed in future?

Is it easier to impose mitigation measures next Winter than to reform the health service?

The funding won’t be there to reform the health service anyway and a recruitment and pay freeze is much more likely than any improvements.

It does. Now I can't remember the exact wording but I do remember be shocked and a bit scared at what I read.

Interestingly they also mention balancing the need for restrictions with people having a life and how the cure must not be worse that the disease.

Steve012

I asked my skin and blister about when we getting the Jab, both early side of 40's, she said next jan... ?

Work's in international architecture company, needs to travel. Getting vaccinated privately to speed things up.

Chivito550

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes indeed. I remember posting last year on the vaccine thread I think it was about my fears. That no matter the progress we make in protecting the vulnerable and our hospitals, NPHET would keep us restricted. The rest of Europe would open in response to their vaccine roll out and we would continue to be this predicament.

There's a paragraph in the road map that refers to the unknowns around the coming autumn and winter. In it NPHET basically say that restrictions may be needed if there are other respiratory illnesses occurring. I mean. What? So even with Covid no longer a risk they will impinge upon our freedoms because of a flu outbreak or bunch of people getting pneumonia. I can't figure it out at all.

Have you a link to this? What page does it appear on? Apologies for the laziness. It's late.

Ficheall

Steve012 wrote: »

I asked my skin and blister about when we getting the Jab, both early side of 40's, she said next jan... ?

I hope that's not an autocorrect and is in fact some rhyming slang for sister I was heretofore unfamiliar with

JPup

Just regular rhyming slang, no? For sister.

Early 40s should get your first shot in June or July. Then second shot by late summer or early autumn.