Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Covid19 Part XVI- 21,983 in ROI (1,339 deaths) 3,881 in NI (404 deaths)(05/05)Read OP

1…114115117119120…323

Comments

  • #3482
    Curious_Case
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭Curious_Case


    podgeandrodge wrote: »
    Trump speaks too quick and doesn't caution himself with his flippant language. But there is generally something behind what he is saying, even if he gets it all wrong and sounds stupid.

    With the UV, there has been a lot of talk about it, and there is talk about something called UVC that may be beneficial some time in the future....

    See below from a BBC science article:

    There is also a third type: UVC. This relatively obscure part of the spectrum consists of a shorter, more energetic wavelength of light. It is particularly good at destroying genetic material – whether in humans or viral particles. Luckily, most of us are unlikely to have ever encountered any. That’s because it’s filtered out by ozone in the atmosphere long before it reaches our fragile skin.

    Or that was the case, at least, until scientists discovered that they could harness UVC to kill microorganisms. Since the finding in 1878, artificially produced UVC has become a staple method of sterilisation – one used in hospitals, airplanes, offices, and factories every day. Crucially, it’s also fundamental to the process of sanitising drinking water; some parasites are resistant to chemical disinfectants such as chlorine, so it provides a failsafe.

    Though there hasn’t been any research looking at how UVC affects Covid-19 specifically, studies have shown that it can be used against other coronaviruses, such as Sars. The radiation warps the structure of their genetic material and prevents the viral particles from making more copies of themselves.

    As a result, a concentrated form of UVC is now on the front line in the fight against Covid-19. In China, whole buses are being lit up by the ghostly blue light each night, while squat, UVC-emitting robots have been cleaning floors in hospitals. Banks have even been using the light to disinfect their money.

    Recently, scientists have discovered a promising new type of UVC which is less dangerous to handle, and still lethal to viruses and bacteria. Far-UVC has a shorter wavelength than regular UVC, and so far, experiments with human skin cells in the lab have shown that it doesn’t damage their DNA (more research is needed to be sure).

    On the other hand, bacteria and viruses don’t come off as well, because they are small enough for the light to reach. One study found that it could prevent mouse wounds from becoming infected with the superbug MRSA, while another found that it could kill flu viruses suspended in the air.

    However, the vast majority of the UVC lamps on the market don’t use far-UVC yet – and again, it hasn’t been tested in actual humans, just on our cells in petri dishes and other animals. So this type of radiation probably won’t help you during the current pandemic either.

    Not trying to defend Trump, but he spews out stuff sometimes that may have their origin in some facts, albeit he chews them up.

    Full article here if anyone interested.

    https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200327-can-you-kill-coronavirus-with-uv-light


    Great post. In a similar vein, I remember watching a TV piece in which the use of hydrogen peroxide blood treatments were mooted.
    I believe the exponent may have referred to their use against the Spanish Flu towards the end of the First World War.


  • #3483
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Away With The Fairies wrote: »
    Simon Harris on TV last night about relaxing restrictions, until they broaden the criteria and test more, restrictions are here.

    Considering the focus is on nursing homes, how can they ever broaden the criteria to test more people?


    Independent news piece today, longer lockdown because people are flouting rules.

    Why are they blaming people when they're looking for positivity and being told how well we're doing... But they're very much at fault here as well, we need more testing of the population which isn't going to happen in the next week.
    Nursing home testing is a blitz. They are considering the definition change for after that. That could be as early as next week. From what they've said lifting restrictions seems to depend on a low enough number of new cases and a robust testing system that can manage any new cases.


  • #3484
    stephenjmcd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭stephenjmcd


    Kermit.de.frog wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/abadnfluenz/status/1253488964939534344

    Its mind boggling that he'll probably still be reelected


  • #3485
    Boggles
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,489 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Has there been a run on nicotine patches yet?


  • #3486
    timmy_mallet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,165 ✭✭✭timmy_mallet


    Away With The Fairies wrote: »
    Simon Harris on TV last night about relaxing restrictions, until they broaden the criteria and test more, restrictions are here.

    Considering the focus is on nursing homes, how can they ever broaden the criteria to test more people?


    Independent news piece today, longer lockdown because people are flouting rules.

    Why are they blaming people when they're looking for positivity and being told how well we're doing... But they're very much at fault here as well, we need more testing of the population which isn't going to happen in the next week.

    Society is becoming comfortable with the trade-offs, hence the flouting of 'rules'. There job is to try to protect the health service capacity.


  • Advertisement
  • #3487
    Boggles
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,489 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Nursing home testing is a blitz. They are considering the definition change for after that. That could be as early as next week. From what they've said lifting restrictions seems to depend on a low enough number of new cases and a robust testing system that can manage any new cases.

    No it isn't.

    Nursing homes need to be continuously tested, it's not a once off, box ticked exercise.


  • #3488
    wadacrack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,172 ✭✭✭wadacrack


    walshb wrote: »
    People flouting the rules is not the problem....the bloody rules are....nobody knows the bloody things....the government were never firm from day 1; constantly trying to please everyone...

    Only leave for essential items (food mainly) Exercise withing 2km of your home. Don't mix with other house holds. Rules are clear. This is just an excuse to complain about the Government


  • #3489
    ldy4mxonucwsq6
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,537 ✭✭✭ldy4mxonucwsq6


    Away With The Fairies wrote: »
    Simon Harris on TV last night about relaxing restrictions, until they broaden the criteria and test more, restrictions are here.

    Considering the focus is on nursing homes, how can they ever broaden the criteria to test more people?


    Independent news piece today, longer lockdown because people are flouting rules.

    People have grown weary of it sure and I've seen quite a few meet ups/non household groups in the past few days where I am, people are relaxing.

    I drop food and essentials to four cocooners a couple of times a week and usually encounter at least one checkpoint. None at all yesterday.

    Watch the spin between now and next week, I would not be surprised if we see even stricter regulations come 5th of May. Or at least more of the same for another week or two.

    I hope not but if things are still getting worse and people aren't following advice then what choice do we have?


  • #3490
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Boggles wrote: »
    No it isn't.

    Nursing homes need to be continuously tested, it's not a once off, box ticked exercise.
    At present it is. That's not to say it should not be ongoing.


  • #3491
    Harry Palmr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    Guardian
    No deaths in South Korea in last 24 hours

    More positive news out of South Korea. The country reported just six more cases of Covid-19 compared to 24 hours ago as of midnight on Friday local time, raising the total number of infections to 10,708.

    There were no deaths in the last 24 for the first time since March 16 - a full 39 days. The death toll is now at 240; the total fatality rate is 2.24%.

    It is worth remembering that South Korea has not imposed any lockdown, but has instead pursued a policy of ‘test, trace, contain’ from the outset.

    Russia meanwhile
    Russia: 5,849 new cases and 60 new deaths in 24 hours

    Russia on Friday reported 5,849 new confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus, pushing its nationwide tally to 68,622.

    Sixty people with the virus died overnight, pushing the death toll to 615, Russia’s official crisis response centre said.

    Given that half of all cases are in greater Moscow you'd have to wonder how many cases are simply not known in the sticks.


  • Advertisement
  • #3492
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    Away With The Fairies wrote: »
    Simon Harris on TV last night about relaxing restrictions, until they broaden the criteria and test more, restrictions are here.

    Considering the focus is on nursing homes, how can they ever broaden the criteria to test more people?


    Independent news piece today, longer lockdown because people are flouting rules.

    Why are they blaming people when they're looking for positivity and being told how well we're doing... But they're very much at fault here as well, we need more testing of the population which isn't going to happen in the next week.

    They are trying to squeeze the last drop of compliance out of people. And that makes sense. I'm sure they are very aware that any extension to the current restrictions will lead to rapid breakdown in compliance. There will be lifting of restrictions early May, despite anything they say between now and then.


  • #3493
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Away With The Fairies wrote: »
    Simon Harris on TV last night about relaxing restrictions, until they broaden the criteria and test more, restrictions are here.

    Considering the focus is on nursing homes, how can they ever broaden the criteria to test more people?


    Independent news piece today, longer lockdown because people are flouting rules.

    Why are they blaming people when they're looking for positivity and being told how well we're doing... But they're very much at fault here as well, we need more testing of the population which isn't going to happen in the next week.

    The genie is out the bottle now. Nothing that the government says, threats or otherwise, is going to get people to reverse course and stop flouting the rules. The only way is to tighten the restrictions (ie. no going outside) or else bring in active enforcement measures and penalties. I don’t see the government doing either. So I suspect that we will just end up muddling through with the current lockdown for another couple of weeks after 5 May. And I don’t see it lasting for any longer after that


  • #3494
    What Username Guidelines
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,139 ✭✭✭What Username Guidelines


    Harry Palmr wrote: »
    Guardian
    It is worth remembering that South Korea has not imposed any lockdown, but has instead pursued a policy of ‘test, trace, contain’ from the outset.

    They also have a real 'contain' part tho. Provide food, actual follow up, tracking and monitoring. Here it's just jot down some numbers of contacts and ask nicely to self isolate for 14 days. Interestingly, Italy have increased self-isolation to 28 days after seeing lots of healthcare staff still testing positive post-symptoms and well beyond 14 days.


  • #3495
    stephenjmcd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭stephenjmcd


    Brycen Round Symbol wrote: »
    People have grown weary of it sure and I've seen quite a few meet ups/non household groups in the past few days where I am, people are relaxing.

    I drop food and essentials to four cocooners a couple of times a week and usually encounter at least one checkpoint. None at all yesterday.

    Watch the spin between now and next week, I would not be surprised if we see even stricter regulations come 5th of May. Or at least more of the same for another week or two.

    I hope not but if things are still getting worse and people aren't following advice then what choice do we have?

    Interesting you mention about the checkpoints, looks like they're gearing up again this morning.

    Came across 2 on my drive into dublin city centre and on the major roads the cones were out on the roads to filter the traffic into one lane again, looked like a big one was setting up.

    Seems to be weekends when the large checkpoints pop up


  • #3496
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    eldamo wrote: »
    of course they help, there just aren't nearly enough to go around and if it is announced that everyone should wear them some arschloch is gonna go out and buy up every last one of them.


    If we could all have a steady supply it would help, until that point, let the front line workers have them


    No official advice is they don’t work. God some people....


  • #3497
    amadangomor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,148 ✭✭✭amadangomor


    Don't get all the anxiety about the restrictions. Yes it would be great to have more freedom but it is worth this small sacrifice to save lives. People need to keep this goal in focus and relax a bit.


  • #3498
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The genie is out the bottle now. Nothing that the government says, threats or otherwise, is going to get people to reverse course and stop flouting the rules. The only way is to tighten the restrictions (ie. no going outside) or else bring in active enforcement measures and penalties. I don’t see the government doing either. So I suspect that we will just end up muddling through with the current lockdown for another couple of weeks after 5 May. And I don’t see it lasting for any longer after that
    I'd wait till next week to see. If the numbers fall off post-nursing home mass testing then we'll be in a better position.


  • #3499
    Curious_Case
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭Curious_Case


    polesheep wrote: »
    They are trying to squeeze the last drop of compliance out of people. And that makes sense. I'm sure they are very aware that any extension to the current restrictions will lead to rapid breakdown in compliance. There will be lifting of restrictions early May, despite anything they say between now and then.

    Perfectly put.
    We are in an entirely unsustainable situation.
    The system that supports us now, exists by virtue of the fact that it, in turn, was created from the proceeds of taxation.


  • #3500
    iamwhoiam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,248 ✭✭✭✭iamwhoiam


    Brycen Round Symbol wrote: »
    People have grown weary of it sure and I've seen quite a few meet ups/non household groups in the past few days where I am, people are relaxing.

    I drop food and essentials to four cocooners a couple of times a week and usually encounter at least one checkpoint. None at all yesterday.

    Watch the spin between now and next week, I would not be surprised if we see even stricter regulations come 5th of May. Or at least more of the same for another week or two.

    I hope not but if things are still getting worse and people aren't following advice then what choice do we have?

    When you say meet up do you mean all gathered in a house ,or are they chatting outside with plenty space between them .Then I see it here where family are calling to see the elderly and staying outside at about 3-4 metres distance .I actually see no great harm in to be honest
    I think in fairness even sitting in the garden on chairs spaced well apart is no big danger either


  • #3501
    lak
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37 ✭lak


    The good weather although very welcome, doesn't help with compliance to the restrictions. If it was cold and wet outside most people will tend to stay in when very few places,and none entertaining, are opened.


  • Advertisement
  • #3502
    tobefrank321
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    When test eligibility is expanded new cases will rocket.

    However, this is not necessarily a bad thing if hospitalisations and ICU admissions remain relatively low or manageable. It means that most people are getting over this. It also means the prevalence is more widespread than we thought. And it means that the fatality rate is likely far lower than we thought.

    Professor Moynagh said he thought there might be ten times the cases out there, or 160,000. And with deaths at about 800, this gives a fatality rate of 0.5%.


  • #3503
    Gretas Gonna Get Ya!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Gretas Gonna Get Ya!


    stephenjmcd wrote: »
    You think it's going to be completely gotten rid of ? It wont be eradicated.

    Listen to the WHO even who are saying that yes we'll have to live along side it.

    So if theres no vaccine we all just stay at home for what the next 2, 3 years, no chance. There will be a new normality of people more aware of their surroundings and much more conscious of their health and of those around them.

    No, I don't think I will listen to the WHO... (The band perhaps, but not that other crowd:P)

    You really think people are going to be more conscious of health long term?

    We can't even make our mind up, as a nation, whether we should all be wearing masks... I wouldn't be backing us to live alongside this virus and function very well as a society. Maybe some Asian countries or the Germans would be disciplined enough to pull it off... but many of our citizens have struggled even just with being stuck in the house for a few weeks!


  • #3504
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    Given that we’ve decided that we will have to live with it and that current restrictions are costing the economy a great deal, how much will we save?

    No offence meant, save your outrage for whoever released it. As in this thing clearly has a panache for pensioners. Most of the deaths will occur here and their pensionable life will be curtailed (as will all of ours).

    In a bookkeeping sense will it offset some of the economic costs?


  • #3505
    Charles Babbage
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,419 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    tobefrank321 wrote: »
    When test eligibility is expanded new cases will rocket.

    However, this is not necessarily a bad thing if hospitalisations and ICU admissions remain relatively low or manageable. It means that most people are getting over this. It also means the prevalence is more widespread than we thought. And it means that the fatality rate is likely far lower than we thought.

    Professor Moynagh said he thought there might be ten times the cases out there, or 160,000. And with deaths at about 800, this gives a fatality rate of 0.5%.


    0.5% is about right for fatality. But we wouldn't have herd immunity until 25 times the present number get this virus, and that would mean 20,000 deaths in the meantime. So this thing has only started.


  • #3506
    Vicxas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,620 ✭✭✭✭Vicxas


    Have a feeling that this weekend with the good weather could ruin any progress we've made if we dont maintain discipline.


  • #3507
    Drumpot
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,306 ✭✭✭✭Drumpot


    Who could possibly support Trump.........

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzDhm808oU4


    Ah, ok, I see....


  • #3508
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    tobefrank321 wrote: »
    When test eligibility is expanded new cases will rocket.

    However, this is not necessarily a bad thing if hospitalisations and ICU admissions remain relatively low or manageable. It means that most people are getting over this. It also means the prevalence is more widespread than we thought. And it means that the fatality rate is likely far lower than we thought.

    Professor Moynagh said he thought there might be ten times the cases out there, or 160,000. And with deaths at about 800, this gives a fatality rate of 0.5%.
    If the R0 is so low in theory they shouldn't go up that much. As for the rate of infection that should emerge with serological testing when they get an accurate one.


  • #3509
    timmy_mallet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,165 ✭✭✭timmy_mallet


    amadangomor wrote: »
    Don't get all the anxiety about the restrictions. Yes it would be great to have more freedom but it is worth this small sacrifice to save lives. People need to keep this goal in focus and relax a bit.

    Some people are comfortable with the sacrificing of life. We don't have any 'small sacrifice to save lives' for the 100,000+ people per year that die of other respiratory virus and still manage to get on with it.


  • #3510
    timmy_mallet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,165 ✭✭✭timmy_mallet


    Charles Babbage wrote: »
    0.5% is about right for fatality. But we wouldn't have herd immunity until 25 times the present number get this virus, and that would mean 20,000 deaths in the meantime. So this thing has only started.

    Yes, and are we comfortable with that? Some people are.


  • Advertisement
  • #3511
    lak
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37 ✭lak


    caveat emptor wrote: »
    Given that we’ve decided that we will have to live with it and that current restrictions are costing the economy a great deal, how much will we save?

    No offence meant, save your outrage for whoever released it. As in this thing clearly has a panache for pensioners. Most of the deaths will occur here and their pensionable life will be curtailed (as will all of ours).

    In a bookkeeping sense will it offset some of the economic costs?


    While a vaccine may never arrive, what we should be able to find is a treatment which reduces the mortality rate and enable the most severe symptoms to be curtailed.That to me is the only way we can live with this.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement