JRant wrote: » I don't think they meant in the fake sense. Would be interesting to see that Californian study though. 0.1 to 0.3 percent would mean a complete sea change in how we deal with this.
FintanMcluskey wrote: » Thats the was it was span in RTE. He released this report and resigned.https://sway.office.com/PwTN7GCvJWDgn9yd?ref=Link I hope that link works
Danno wrote: » That was one eye-opening read. Thank you very much for sharing.
bettyoleary wrote: » He believes the govt have messed up royally but I'm not so sure if they did. Why would he be the only person involved in Govt to grasp this. I think they knew exactly what they were doing from the start and know exactly what they will be doing until the end and no matter how much we argue amongst ourselves the future is decided. They have a very very good idea of the trajectory of this disease now and unless a vaccine is found to work they wont be changing their plan. USA, UK, Ireland they know what they are going to do. and who their plan will benefit and it will be largely themselves.
KrustyUCC wrote: » Simon Harris apologises for suggesting there were 18 previous coronaviruseshttps://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/simon-harris-apologises-for-suggesting-there-were-18-previous-coronaviruses-995582.html Not Harris best moment Bit worrying when he's a big part of government decision making
drunkmonkey wrote: » This is the flu in the states.. I'd believe the cases of coronavirus is much larger if the flu is anything to go by. Not the deaths but the people infected, most never knew I'd guess.
Polar101 wrote: » I wonder how dentists could open - it's going to be difficult to keep them closed for months, yet it's hard to think of any other profession that would be more at risk for Covid infections.
dalyboy wrote: » Dentists have (and always had) THE most stringent hygiene preparation in place before anyone sits in their chair. The dentist is gloved/masked/goggled (dentist safe) , the practice area and dental tool sterilisation occurs after every patient attendance (patient safe) , should open tomorrow in my opinion.
DellyBelly wrote: » I think we can safely. this virus is definitely going to be the story of the year. Unless the Queen dies maybe.. That would be the only thing to top it in my opinion.
ceadaoin. wrote: » That all means nothing when the viruses is aerosolised and sprayed all over the room during procedures. Its extremely high risk and the standard PPE dentists use would not be sufficient protection. Every surface would be contaminated.
Jim Gazebo wrote: » And your assuming that someone goes in there with the virus as well. Ffs if everyone is doing what they are supposed to at the moment and you don't have it then you have a very small chance of having it. It's easy to find a risk in absolutely anything if you think long enough.
snowcat wrote: » https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/17/theres-no-direct-evidence-that-the-lockdowns-are-working/
pjohnson wrote: » Yep. The best "solutions" often appear to involve the minimum amount of thinking.
drunkmonkey wrote: » Everyone needs to read that.
What Username Guidelines wrote: » I do think it’s important to find out the IFR but NYC has seen almost 0.1% of its population killed and Bergamo in Italy has seen 0.25% killed. Bergamo still reporting about 25 odd cases a day after weeks after lockdown. The issue with these antibody surveys is that they are done in hard-hit or not hard-hit areas. Demographics is important too. If you’ve an area with lots of older people and high obesity rates you’ll see a higher IFR than say the french aircraft carrier. These studies are important and can garner lots of interesting analysis, but I don’t see how they’d change our response. Even if the IFR was the same as flu, how would that impact response? It being a new virus, with the whole population susceptible, means overrun health systems everywhere without restrictions. I mean it’s great news and just means we’re further through this than expected, but still need to be sure we can handle it.
facehugger99 wrote: » The hysterical over-reaction to Covid-19 may prove to even more damaging in the future if we are faced with an actually dangerous pandemic. 'The boy who cried wolf' springs to mind.
GazzaL wrote: » The daily increase of cars and vans on the road continues.
facehugger99 wrote: » I'll predict right now that we'll see more road fatalities in Ireland in 2020 than we do deaths from Cornavirus. Proportionate and measure response required, not hysterical overreaction driven by the social-media scare-merchants.
facehugger99 wrote: » Today's figures from the UK don't appear to be showing any exponential growth in numbers.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51822618 No doubt you are able to hear that train wreck approaching though anyway.
facehugger99 wrote: » I'd say we'll look back in 12 months and wish we'd followed the UK approach. We've never produced the same caliber of politician as a country. We're stuck with lads that follow the social media winds. Afraid to make the tough but right decisions.
Merry Prankster wrote: » Even if, with the benefit of hindsight, we learn that the global lockdowns went too far, they were based upon current best medical knowledge and practice. It they hadn't been introduced and the death toll were much higher, the same critics would be berating governments for not taking it seriously enough. It's easy to forget just how uncertain everything was at the beginning. But sure hindsight is a wonderful thing - if you'd had it a while ago, you might have been able to modify previous comments by yourself, like this one from the 10th March: ...or this one, from the same day... ...or this one, from the 14th March...
