Covid19 Part XV - 15,251 in ROI (610 deaths) 2,645 in NI (194 deaths) (19/04) Read OP

Micky 32 · 12-04-2020 07:33PM

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

not hoping, but we're not blind either...

Blind or not there will be no scary graphs this week

easypazz · 12-04-2020 07:33PM

Duke of Url wrote: »

As I said. Stats removes emotions. You can celebrate numbers.

I won’t celebrate lives lost.

Will you celebrate lives saved?

Micky 32 · 12-04-2020 07:35PM

Duke of Url wrote: »

As I said. Stats removes emotions. You can celebrate numbers.

I won’t celebrate lives lost.

So celebrate the lives that you thought were going to die that didn’t. You are too focused on doom and gloom going by your posts IMO

Just Saying · 12-04-2020 07:35PM

DebDynamite wrote: »

If Tony Holohan said 54% of our deaths were nursing home cases, would those nursing home residents who were moved to hospital prior to dying be classed as part of that 54% NH deaths, or would they go down as hospital deaths?

70% of deaths occured in a hospital environment...200 out of 288 were the figures at the time I think.This would mean that those nursing home residents who were moved to hospital prior to their passing are recorded as hospital deaths.

Equally it means that for varying reasons 30 % of our deaths occured outside the hospital environment of which I imagine the majority are in nursing homes.

An interesting side note is that this would indicate the UK death figure at present is only 70% roughly of what it would be if they were using our method to record deaths.

RioM · 12-04-2020 07:36PM

Drive by and garden parties at a social distance.

Is it just me or does anyone else think Rte news and social media promoting this is seriously irresponsible. Stay at home.. Means stay at home!! On this evening's news this old couple were celebrating their wedding anniversary with lots of callers to their front door dropping off presents.

caveat emptor · 12-04-2020 07:36PM

FVP3 wrote: »

You have form. I have debunked your points with the science. This type of virus doesn't have the markers of a lab made one. I've heard conspiracies about the US introducing it as well, which would make more sense in terms of warfare, but thats also debunked by science.

Did you think you could post insane conspiracy theories and we all would go "Oh yeh. Fair play."

What are you on about? I've linked a source. You must be some scientist. I'm not saying anything either way. I think it's unlikely it was bioengineered. I do however think it was released from the lab. Occam's razor and all.

Very strange that the lab was studying the exact same strains of virus from bat's that it is thought to originate.

Read the article oh high and mighty one.

Let me debunk something you just wrote.

A R0 of 1 is pretty much there. = Not true.

If R0 equals 1, each existing infection causes one new infection. The disease will stay alive and stable, but there won’t be an outbreak or an epidemic.

Don't spread false hope. We are not there yet.

https://www.healthline.com/health/r-nought-reproduction-number#rsubsubvalues

bekker · 12-04-2020 07:37PM

FVP3 wrote: »

I have to explain simple mathematics? If you don't understand this stuff then please look it up.

I understand mathematics well enough but you made a series of assumptions.

You don't appear to grasp that r0=1, does not mean end of spread this as apparently extremely infectious so r0 can rise again from that level, Wuhan r0 was down to 0.6 before restrictions relaxed (if suspicious of China) then Irish experts have said same on RTE either R0 of 0.6 or 0.4 AFAIR.

What evidence of non-infectivity? Some reports of it in recovered after 8 weeks, no investigations to date have yielded such evidence of absence and probably canot for at least a few months yet.

What evidence to likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine? Growing suggestions amongst virologists that one may not be possible.

easypazz · 12-04-2020 07:37PM

Micky 32 wrote: »

So celebrate the lives that you thought were going to die that didn’t. You are too focused on doom and gloom going by your posts IMO

That's beyond them

"One life lost is too many" is their mantra.

No credit at all to the front line staff, all the people from truck drivers to shelf stackers to pilots to Gardai who are pitching in.

No thanks to all the people who are "Staying at Home"

No thanks or positivity towards anybody.

Ace2007 · 12-04-2020 07:39PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I get that you didn't read or understand my post before you replied to it. It had nothing to do with the availability of ICU beds. You can analyse those numbers all you like but you won't change the fact that most of the people killed by this virus are old people.

You said that it's nearly all old people who get the virus, but this isn't true, 66% of those in hospital with covid are under 65.
50% of people who get the virus are under 48 -

These are all facts.

jackboy · 12-04-2020 07:39PM

wakka12 wrote: »

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2020/04/3a9aebe957d2-tokyo-sees-total-coronavirus-infection-cases-top-2000-up-by-166.html

The province of Hokkaido in Japan has reactivated it's state of emergency which was relaxed just a few weeks ago.

A lot of countries seem to have a plan to get the numbers down to a certain level and then start to ease restrictions. I cannot see how this plan can possibly work. Rapid spiking is inevitable. No amount of testing and contract tracing can resolve the issue.

Jim_Hodge · 12-04-2020 07:39PM

amadangomor wrote: »

What's the story with the Togo figures? Surely they couldn't have tested that many people. Something wrong with the figures?

Thought that too. Guadeloupe's population is suspect too.

All this is on Worldometers.

Jim_Hodge · 12-04-2020 07:40PM

easypazz wrote: »

Won't suit a lot on here.

Would you give it a rest?

Gael23 · 12-04-2020 07:41PM

Can we trust the death figures over the weekend?

caveat emptor · 12-04-2020 07:41PM

FVP3 wrote: »

Well yes, a R0 of < 1, is the definite end of the epidemic. A R0 of 1 is pretty much there. ( Note I say of the epidemic not the virus, small numbers of people still get infected).

The guy I was addressing didn't seem to get that people recover from this. So he kept adding the numbers cumulatively.

bekker wrote: »

I understand mathematics well enough but you made a series of assumptions.

You don't appear to grasp that r0=1, does not mean end of spread this as apparently extremely infectious so r0 can rise again from that level, Wuhan r0 was down to 0.6 before restrictions relaxed (if suspicious of China) then Irish experts have said same on RTE either R0 of 0.6 or 0.4 AFAIR.

What evidence of non-infectivity? Some reports of it in recovered after 8 weeks, no investigations to date have yielded such evidence of absence and probably canot for at least a few months yet.

What evidence to likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine? Growing suggestions amongst virologists that one may not be possible.

Agreed. He might have basic maths down but this doesn't make sense in the context of an epidemic. With an R0 = 1. The number of cases to ~10K in one week, one month, one year we will have the same high number of cases.

It must be below to diminish. People really shouldn't through stones in mathematical glass houses.

Just Saying · 12-04-2020 07:42PM

spookwoman wrote: »

Finally got the population mortality done and not looking good for us. The numbers are based on 2018 population for each country up to the 11/04/2020

Think you have South Africa instead of Spain?

anewme · 12-04-2020 07:42PM

easypazz wrote: »

That's beyond them

"One life lost is too many" is their mantra.

No credit at all to the front line staff, all the people from truck drivers to shelf stackers to pilots to Gardai who are pitching in.

No thanks to all the people who are "Staying at Home"

No thanks or positivity towards anybody.

The frontline staff, putting their own health on the line to help others and save lives would be disgusted at your comments and attitude on here towards their patients.

FixdePitchmark · 12-04-2020 07:43PM

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

not hoping, but we're not blind either...

Looks like about 30,000 cases by the 1st of may - and we could hit about 70 deaths per day at that point.

That would be case if current growth held - you would be hoping growth would reduce more .

igCorcaigh · 12-04-2020 07:44PM

The R0 value is heavily influenced by social distancing measures, so it does have the potential to fluctuate due to changes in these measures.

The point though is that IF those measures are successful enough to keep R0 below one, the number of new cases will inevitably drop to zero, barring any imported cases. So that's the maths part, and is dependent on the social measures.

Jim_Hodge · 12-04-2020 07:44PM

RioM wrote: »

Drive by and garden parties at a social distance.

Is it just me or does anyone else think Rte news and social media promoting this is seriously irresponsible. Stay at home.. Means stay at home!! On this evening's news this old couple were celebrating their wedding anniversary with lots of callers to their front door dropping off presents.

Exaggerate much?

Two of their children and a granddaughter, who all live within 2km, left gifts at the door and stepped well back. Four neighbours across the road stood at their own walls, while the couple never came outside the front door, and applauded them for 65 years together.

"This old couple" - lovely! :rolleyes:

joe_99 · 12-04-2020 07:45PM

Duke of Url wrote: »

As I said. Stats removes emotions. You can celebrate numbers.

I won’t celebrate lives lost.

What are you talking about. Nobody is celebrating lost lives.

There are less people dying than forecast which is great. Lots of families saved a lot of grief.

When roads deaths dropped from 500 hundred plus to 150 I thought that was a very positive development. Did you?

Stheno · 12-04-2020 07:45PM

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Do we know when the tests sent to Germany were taken?

Weeks ago, think early March

tobefrank321 · 12-04-2020 07:46PM

bekker wrote: »

I understand mathematics well enough but you made a series of assumptions.

You don't appear to grasp that r0=1, does not mean end of spread this as apparently extremely infectious so r0 can rise again from that level, Wuhan r0 was down to 0.6 before restrictions relaxed (if suspicious of China) then Irish experts have said same on RTE either R0 of 0.6 or 0.4 AFAIR.

What evidence of non-infectivity? Some reports of it in recovered after 8 weeks, no investigations to date have yielded such evidence of absence and probably canot for at least a few months yet.

What evidence to likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine? Growing suggestions amongst virologists that one may not be possible.

The Chinese R0 of 0.6 came after months of extreme restrictions such as forced isolation of positive cases away from their families.

12-04-2020 07:48PM

Ace2007 wrote: »

You said that it's nearly all old people who get the virus, but this isn't true, 66% of those in hospital with covid are under 65.
50% of people who get the virus are under 48 -

These are all facts.

No I didn't.
The virus infects everyone. Thousands of people have probably had it but don't even know they had it.
It's mostly the old people who suffer the worst consequences from it.

It amazes me that the people who spend most of their day on this covid19 thread know so little about the topic. Maybe read more and post less?

igCorcaigh · 12-04-2020 07:49PM

Turkey leads the way in demonstrating how not to implement a lockdown.

https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1249405543569121282?s=19

bekker · 12-04-2020 07:49PM

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Bekker, the point about an R0 below one is a mathematical one, as it changes exponential growth to exponential decay. It can be modelled very easily in an Excel spreadsheet.

Again I'm well aware of that, the point I am making is that in the progress of an epidemic r0 is a dynamic figure based on contact reporting by those identified which is subject to error.

That is why both in Wuhan and here the r0 figure on which relaxation is to be based is put 40-60% lower.

Achasanai · 12-04-2020 07:52PM

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Hospitalisation and ICU percentages, this shows that the measures taken prior to implementing the current restrictions are working, I'd expect to see the current restrictions reflected more towards the end of this week in the numbers. ICU numbers are very steady and that's a huge positive.

People can argue all they want about testing, testing doesn't make much of a difference in these numbers, your isolating as soon as you show a symptom regardless of a positive or negative test result and regardless if it takes 5 days or 15 days to get that result. If your in a bad way your admitted to hospital.

That's great news. I think though re testing, the idea behind increasing the rates means that people who are asymptomatic and just don't know they have it will get tested and stay at home (and then all their contents are contacted) thus limiting the spread.

At least that's how I understand it, but could be wrong.

TheDoctor · 12-04-2020 07:52PM

Stheno wrote: »

Weeks ago, think early March

Back to Mid March apparently.

Do we know how many tests went to Germany?
Was this a once off to remove the backlog or will it be used going forward?
How many more older tests are outstanding to come back from Gernamy?

igCorcaigh · 12-04-2020 07:52PM

bekker wrote: »

Again I'm well aware of that, the point I am making is that in the progress of an epidemic r0 is a dynamic figure based on contact reporting by those identified which is subject to error.

That is why both in Wuhan and here the r0 figure on which relaxation is to be based is put 40-60% lower.

Oh yes agreed. Apologies if I implied you were misunderstanding the R0 question. Empirical evidence obviously doesn't apply to mathematical concepts.

My previous post also refers to your point.

wakka12 · 12-04-2020 07:53PM

spookwoman wrote: »

Finally got the population mortality done and not looking good for us. The numbers are based on 2018 population for each country up to the 11/04/2020

4% of the population of guadelope died of coronavirus?

leck · 12-04-2020 07:54PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

Has anybody seen this documentary? It's a bit conspiracy theory / anti Chinese. I know this is not the conspiracy theory thread but seeing more and more stories in the media broaching the subject so revisited when I saw this. I know daily mail is ****e also. Does reference lots of verifiable facts. Main one in my mind is that there are lots of wet markets in China but only one biosafety level 4 lab in China that happens to be in the same place the virus originated. Posting if anybody interested.

Hope none of it is true but I doubt it.

So why post it then?

Covid19 Part XV - 15,251 in ROI (610 deaths) 2,645 in NI (194 deaths) (19/04) Read OP

Comments