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 XVII-24,841 in ROI (1,639 deaths) 4,679 in NI (518 deaths)(28/05)Read OP

1243244246248249324

Comments

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


    HSE Operations report for today just released.

    As of 8pm there are 52 confirmed covid patients in ICU

    Likewise as of 8pm there are 300 confirmed cases in acute hospitals across the country. Down from 313 last night


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,113 ✭✭✭✭fritzelly


    JP Liz V1 wrote: »
    CEX stores reopening

    Seems everyone is looking for an excuse to reopen


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,764 ✭✭✭Speak Now


    What's CEX?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,343 ✭✭✭Be right back


    Speak Now wrote: »
    What's CEX?

    A shop where you can buy or trade in second hand games, dvds etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    fritzelly wrote: »
    Seems everyone is looking for an excuse to reopen

    Almost like they want to stay in business.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,151 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    I would have presumed they'd have already fallen under the list of businesses that are allowed to open in phase 1.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,293 ✭✭✭billybonkers


    Where was Tony the last two nights?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Arghus wrote: »
    I would have presumed they'd have already fallen under the list of businesses that are allowed to open in phase 1.

    Wasn't there some confusion as to who could open in phase 1. IKEA was victim to a typo.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,109 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Where was Tony the last two nights?

    Fighting crime in the Sudan?

    He is a busy man.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,150 ✭✭✭✭Eod100


    Not sure if this was mentioned in the briefing earlier? https://twitter.com/otuathail/status/1263552473807163392?s=19


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,648 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Eod100 wrote: »
    Not sure if this was mentioned in the briefing earlier? https://twitter.com/otuathail/status/1263552473807163392?s=19
    This is great news. Will be very useful in the game of whack-a-mole as we open up. If this is feasible then there's no reason for the 3 week breaks between phases. The virus is suppressed, the testing regime is now at the required level, international travel is being dealt with and people are now aware of the social distancing requirements.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,839 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    Where was Tony the last two nights?

    He’s getting bored also


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,113 ✭✭✭✭fritzelly


    Dr. Bre wrote: »
    He’s getting bored also

    He's sick of Paul and Zara


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


    Posted this in the relaxation of restrictions thread but probably something for here also

    https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/0521/1139906-coronavirus-active-cases/

    1,807 people were considered 'active' as of Sunday night

    Little further into the article
    "Due to the course of the disease in people, only a percentage of the 1,807 could be considered to be potentially infectious.

    People can typically only spread the disease between the third and eighth day of infection. The department considers cases to be 'active' for a minimum of 14 days."


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,150 ✭✭✭✭Eod100


    Posted this in the relaxation of restrictions thread but probably something for here also

    https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/0521/1139906-coronavirus-active-cases/

    1,807 people were considered 'active' as of Sunday night

    Little further into the article
    "Due to the course of the disease in people, only a percentage of the 1,807 could be considered to be potentially infectious."

    I saw that. Think it would be more accurate for them to say that's the number of confirmed cases that are active as likely more which haven't been diagnosed in community and other areas. But it is definitely a good sign, notteying to take away from that.


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 78,100 Mod ✭✭✭✭New Home


    "Due to the course of the disease in people, only a percentage of the 1,807 could be considered to be potentially infectious."

    Just to nit-pick, 0% and 100% are both percentages. :/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    pjohnson wrote: »
    Shes been wrong in her previous shíte about this virus aswell. She is a crack

    She was on Highland Radio this morning, very strange, when asked a question she seemed to answer a different question, very odd and uncomfortable to listen too.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Miike


    New Home wrote: »
    Just to nit-pick, 0% and 100% are both percentages. :/

    Thank god someone else noticed that. When I read it earlier I felt like a right arsé but like... what the fúck? :rolleyes:


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


    Miike wrote: »
    Thank god someone else noticed that. When I read it earlier I felt like a right arsé but like... what the fúck? :rolleyes:

    Edited the post with the full quote. My bad thought I'd copied it all in.

    "Due to the course of the disease in people, only a percentage of the 1,807 could be considered to be potentially infectious.
    People can typically only spread the disease between the third and eighth day of infection. The department considers cases to be 'active' for a minimum of 14 days."


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


    New Home wrote: »
    Just to nit-pick, 0% and 100% are both percentages. :/

    Yup my bad sorry didn't copy in the full quote with the days that a case is deemed infectious.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Miike


    Edited the post with the full quote. My bad thought I'd copied it all in.

    "Due to the course of the disease in people, only a percentage of the 1,807 could be considered to be potentially infectious.
    People can typically only spread the disease between the third and eighth day of infection. The department considers cases to be 'active' for a minimum of 14 days."

    It's not you! It's whoever wrote the damned article :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,179 ✭✭✭✭fr336


    marno21 wrote: »
    This is great news. Will be very useful in the game of whack-a-mole as we open up. If this is feasible then there's no reason for the 3 week breaks between phases. The virus is suppressed, the testing regime is now at the required level, international travel is being dealt with and people are now aware of the social distancing requirements.

    I think the social distancing needs work especially when you're in a public place. People queue up outside a supermarket the on there's a crowd of them in a aisle. Not good enough and will be replicated in non essential locations.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,196 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    New Home wrote: »
    Just to nit-pick, 0% and 100% are both percentages. :/

    1,000,000% is also a percentage. That could mean there are 18 million people who are infectious in the country. We're fúcked lads. :pac:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,002 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    An Australian-first study examining hundreds of children who were tested for COVID-19 after presenting to hospital with symptoms of the deadly disease has found less than 1 per cent of them had the virus.

    Only four of the 434 children tested by the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne at the height of the coronavirus pandemic between March 21 and April 19 were diagnosed with COVID-19, researchers at the Murdoch Children's Research Institute have found
    https://www.smh.com.au/national/australia-first-study-finds-low-transmission-of-covid-19-in-children-20200521-p54v4d.html


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 78,100 Mod ✭✭✭✭New Home


    Edited the post with the full quote. My bad thought I'd copied it all in.

    "Due to the course of the disease in people, only a percentage of the 1,807 could be considered to be potentially infectious.
    People can typically only spread the disease between the third and eighth day of infection. The department considers cases to be 'active' for a minimum of 14 days."
    Yup my bad sorry didn't copy in the full quote with the days that a case is deemed infectious.
    Miike wrote: »
    It's not you! It's whoever wrote the damned article :D

    I agree with Miike - they could have said "Out of the 1807 people in question, only those who are between the third and the eight day of infection are considered to be actively contagious". Or something.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,492 ✭✭✭McGiver


    Strazdas wrote: »
    I think the asymptomatic thing has probably been vastly overstated. There are definitely such people out there, but the idea that there are five or ten asymptomatic people for every symptomatic one is starting to look very far fetched.

    Several European serology studies place it between 30 and 50%. The recent Czech study (30k samples) showed 28-37% asymptomatic.

    Just to compare, seasonal influenza is estimated at 50-70% asymptomatic.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,196 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    McGiver wrote: »
    Several European serology studies place it between 30 and 50%. The recent Czech study (30k samples) showed 28-37% asymptomatic.

    Just to compare, seasonal influenza is estimated at 50-70% asymptomatic.

    Do the studies say if they stayed asymptomatic or developed symptoms after they were tested?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,287 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    McGiver wrote: »
    Several European serology studies place it between 30 and 50%. The recent Czech study (30k samples) showed 28-37% asymptomatic.

    Just to compare, seasonal influenza is estimated at 50-70% asymptomatic.

    Prof Nolan referred to these type of studies in his briefing tonight. He says he thinks they are highly suspect and are not to be trusted.

    I think he has a point. What sort of a killer virus would show no symptoms whatsoever in most people it infects (and yet horrible and lethal symptoms in a small number of others)?

    Something is wrong with those numbers coming back. Blood testing in Sweden indicates that Stockholm (the Covid hotspot in Scandinavia) has only 7% of people showing traces of Covid.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,513 ✭✭✭bb1234567


    Strazdas wrote: »
    Prof Nolan referred to these type of studies in his briefing tonight. He says he thinks they are highly suspect and are not to be trusted.

    I think he has a point. What sort of a killer virus would show no symptoms whatsoever in most people it infects (and yet horrible and lethal symptoms in a small number of others)?

    Something is wrong with those numbers coming back. Blood testing in Sweden indicates that Stockholm (the Covid hotspot in Scandinavia) has only 7% of people showing traces of Covid.

    There is no guidebook or set rules on how a virus has to act. People have completely different reactions to it based on their age health and biology. I don't think it's unbelievable or suspect at all , many other diseases are extremely mild in some demographics while very dangerous to others, it's really nothing new


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,287 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    There is no guidebook or set rules on how a virus has to act. People have completely different reactions to it based on their age health and biology. I don't think it's unbelievable or suspect at all , many other diseases are extremely mild in some demographics while very dangerous to others, it's really nothing new

    Prof Nolan said he simply doesn't believe the claim that for every one symptomatic person with Covid-19, there are five or ten more walking around with the virus completely unaware of the fact.

    Something about these antibody tests suggesting half the population has contracted the virus just doesn't add up. The same figures for antibody tests seem to be all over the place from country to country to a crazy degree (the UK figures suggest that the rate of infection outside London is 5% at most)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement