Covid 19 Part XX-26,644 in ROI (1,772 deaths) 6,064 in NI (556 deaths) (08/08)Read OP

polesheep · 31-07-2020 11:04AM

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

There is a phrase called 'harvesting' in epidemics which is the impression that the more vulnerable get hit first and succumb to the virus. What is actually happening is the virus is spreading heavily with lots of susceptible people available, and all are getting it. During this time, vulnerable get very sick and may die, fill up hospitals etc. Younger, less vulnerable people are getting it too, but are going unnoticed, or untested, due to overburdened public health systems. When the initial wave subsides, more cases are found as testing capacity improves.

This seems to be happening here as well. It appears like more young people are getting it, as we can see by the median age dropping, when it could be theorised that it is actually just less old people are getting it, and/or younger people are now being found to be infected with more accessible testing.

Interestingly, testing can 'keep the pandemic alive' by finding more cases. The more you test, the more you find, the worse the picture gets. A bit like trump saying if we didn't test, we'd have less cases. That's the extreme view, but obviously a true statement, but worded callously.

Numbers to watch are hospitalisations, ICU admissions, and deaths. Which all seem to be following similar patterns in most countries, whether it's Italy who were hit first, NY who were hit hard, UK who locked down late, Ireland who locked down arguably on-time, or Sweden who did not lock down officially. I'd love to see actual death rates from Spain, their recent change to reporting is suspect unfortunately.

Does anyone know if hospitals around Europe are seeing the same dropping levels in Covid patients that we are witnessing in Ireland, despite steady or rising numbers of infections?

polesheep · 31-07-2020 11:06AM

wadacrack wrote: »

Agree with everything. Very well put tbf . The problem is that the virus is causing longer side effects to even very mild cases. Hospital cases, ICU and Deaths obviously take priority. But if a virus is let silently spread its likely to lead to more long term health problems in some minor cases which wasn't understood back in March. Post viral syndrome does seem to be emerging as a worrying development.

There is no good evidence for this.

robbiezero · 31-07-2020 11:06AM

stephenjmcd wrote: »

She's not actually doing anything wrong. Could have opened weeks ago doing the same thing that she'll do from today

My feeling is that Phase 4 probably won't go ahead. The twitchers would do their nut if it does, but that a more relaxed attitude will be taken to this meal and time limit crap, which is already pretty relaxed from what I can see. A typical fudge rather than effective leadership.

I do know of a few pubs in rural areas that are not in much hurry to open up.
Owner and a few family members that work in the pub getting the Covid payment, throwing in a few lock ins and happy enough with that state of affairs.

Plumbthedepths · 31-07-2020 11:09AM

polesheep wrote: »

There is no good evidence for this.

Any report I have read, uses the words 'could, may ,might don't know'. How people can claim long term affects from a new virus is strange tbh. The virus is with us less than a year.

iguana · 31-07-2020 11:10AM

FishOnABike wrote: »

You can't go into an almost empty shop for a minute without a mask yet it is expected that schools cram 30ish into relatively small rooms all day every day without any precautions.

I'd far rather schools don't open if they can't feel pretty close to normal for young children. As a parent I have to judge what is least damaging for my child and I would not send him to school if everyone had to wear masks. As an only child staying at home with no peer interaction wasn't great for him on a social level but it was way, way better for his mental health than sitting in a room with everyone masked up and the virus as a constant mental presence would be.

My son is 7 and will happily wears a mask in shops. And I'm fine with him wearing a mask for an hour or two at activity if he's with me. Because when he's with me, we're one to one and I can help him pick up on things he's missing because of the mask, I can tell if he gets anxious and get him through it/remove him from the situation. I can tell when it's ok to use humour or when he needs a hug and I have the time and ability to help him. But there is no way I'd send him to school for 5 and a half hours in a day, to sit in a room with one adult and multiple children all masked up. Different children will have different reactions to the strangeness and it will be impossible for a teacher to deal with them all in the ways that they need.

All the parents I have spoken to feel the same. Tbh, the general consensus among parents I know is that, they will send the kids back to school if they open in September. But that it will be with the knowledge that it probably isn't completely safe/sustainable as it is, and that they will likely close after a few weeks/in October. Those with vulnerable family members will either keep their children home or accept that they can no longer have contact with that family member. Nobody thinks it's a perfect solution, because there isn't one. It's just probably the best that can be done in crappy circumstances.

Away With The Fairies · 31-07-2020 11:17AM

shinzon wrote: »

Am I right in thinking the Dail is off on it jollies for 6 weeks and this still hasnt been signed off on.

Shin

Ah sure, the virus will wait until after their holidays.

is_that_so · 31-07-2020 11:19AM

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Any report I have read, uses the words 'could, may ,might don't know'. How people can claim long term affects from a new virus is strange tbh. The virus is with us less than a year.

It's what you do at the end of a report anyway and people won't hold it against you if another report puts forth other possible conclusions.

Plumbthedepths · 31-07-2020 11:20AM

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

Ah sure, the virus will wait until after their holidays.

If you get ill, which do you think will be of more benefit to you a politician or a medical professional?

Plumbthedepths · 31-07-2020 11:22AM

is_that_so wrote: »

It's what you do at the end of a report anyway and people won't hold it against you if another report puts forth other possible conclusions.

Agreed which at present all these reports are educated guesswork but guesswork none the less. People relying on them to prove a narrative they are pushing is amusing imo.

Away With The Fairies · 31-07-2020 11:24AM

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

If you get ill, which do you think will be of more benefit to you a politician or a medical professional?

I'd rather not get ill. So what's the reason for being so slow with this whole thing?

Plumbthedepths · 31-07-2020 11:27AM

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

I'd rather not get ill. So what's the reason for being so slow with this whole thing?

Slow with what?

fr336 · 31-07-2020 11:30AM

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

If you get ill, which do you think will be of more benefit to you a politician or a medical professional?

Medical professionals don't make the laws. A revelation, I know.

polesheep · 31-07-2020 11:30AM

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

I'd rather not get ill. So what's the reason for being so slow with this whole thing?

If you are referring to making masks mandatory then I think that the government is doing the right thing by not rushing into legislation. There are significant numbers wearing masks indoors now without pitting people against each other, which is exactly what will happen if it becomes legally enforceable. But I get the impression that you would enjoy seeing a few fireworks.

caveat emptor · 31-07-2020 11:33AM

iguana wrote: »

I'd far rather schools don't open if they can't feel pretty close to normal for young children. As a parent I have to judge what is least damaging for my child and I would not send him to school if everyone had to wear masks. As an only child staying at home with no peer interaction wasn't great for him on a social level but it was way, way better for his mental health than sitting in a room with everyone masked up and the virus as a constant mental presence would be.

...
.

This is in no way having a go. I like your posts.

Does the fact that your child most likely had it factor into your decision making?
I'm genuinely not sure it's safe given our class numbers.
So in my mind, what's the point of a grand experiment if after one month we have to shut it down.

The transmissibility of the virus has not changed and masks do dampen this.

I know they were grand from your previous post but others may not be particularly those with any sort of co morbidity.

I know if I had it, wasn't too bad, I'd be screaming from the rafters for life to get back to normal.

ACitizenErased · 31-07-2020 11:39AM

I don’t think any changes need to be made to masks. I’ve been in Cork City a couple of times and I’m estimating compliance at 80-90%. You can check out the COVID thread on the Cork City forum and you’ll find people who agree.
I doubt it’s much different anywhere else in the country.

Plumbthedepths · 31-07-2020 11:40AM

fr336 wrote: »

Medical professionals don't make the laws. A revelation, I know.

I suggest you educate yourself on NPHET and how this and the previous government deferred completely to them. I suppose as a UK resident you may not be aware however.
Never suggested Medical professionals made the laws however. Silly comment tbh.

What Username Guidelines · 31-07-2020 11:41AM

polesheep wrote: »

Does anyone know if hospitals around Europe are seeing the same dropping levels in Covid patients that we are witnessing in Ireland, despite steady or rising numbers of infections?

I haven't been following all numbers too closely for comparisons to each peak, but I know in the last few days Italy have 38 in ICU from a peak of ~4,000, not dissimilar to the kind of reduction we've seen.

Current vs peak
Sweden: 40/550)
France: 380/7,000
Belgium: 42/550(?)
Spain: 617/6,000

Not to downplay the severity in ICU care, but these are comparatively small(er) numbers than seen throughout April.

What Username Guidelines · 31-07-2020 11:48AM

wadacrack wrote: »

Agree with everything. Very well put tbf . The problem is that the virus is causing longer side effects to even very mild cases. Hospital cases, ICU and Deaths obviously take priority. But if a virus is let silently spread its likely to lead to more long term health problems in some minor cases which wasn't understood back in March. Post viral syndrome does seem to be emerging as a worrying development.

Absolutely worrying – there simply hasn't been enough time elapsed to understand lots of angles to this virus, which is very frustrating. It does seem like as we relax about one worry, such as exponential growth, there's another gotcha, like longer term effects.

The good news, or at least a somewhat positive slant, is that while some continue to suffer effects long after the official recovery period of ~2 weeks, there is a lot of precedent with other viruses with similar long tails. While I don't envy anyone going through it at all, things like mononucleosis (glandular fever) can knock you for months as the body recovers.

From an overall picture of public health, we are in a far better position than April, and hopefully with our hospitals under far less pressure, those with longer term effects will have easier access to healthcare and doctors/analysts have easier access to these patients to understand what is happening with them.

SeaBreezes · 31-07-2020 11:53AM

iguana wrote: »

I'd far rather schools don't open if they can't feel pretty close to normal for young children. As a parent I have to judge what is least damaging for my child and I would not send him to school if everyone had to wear masks. As an only child staying at home with no peer interaction wasn't great for him on a social level but it was way, way better for his mental health than sitting in a room with everyone masked up and the virus as a constant mental presence would be.

My son is 7 and will happily wears a mask in shops. And I'm fine with him wearing a mask for an hour or two at activity if he's with me. Because when he's with me, we're one to one and I can help him pick up on things he's missing because of the mask, I can tell if he gets anxious and get him through it/remove him from the situation. I can tell when it's ok to use humour or when he needs a hug and I have the time and ability to help him. But there is no way I'd send him to school for 5 and a half hours in a day, to sit in a room with one adult and multiple children all masked up. Different children will have different reactions to the strangeness and it will be impossible for a teacher to deal with them all in the ways that they need.

All the parents I have spoken to feel the same. Tbh, the general consensus among parents I know is that, they will send the kids back to school if they open in September. But that it will be with the knowledge that it probably isn't completely safe/sustainable as it is, and that they will likely close after a few weeks/in October. Those with vulnerable family members will either keep their children home or accept that they can no longer have contact with that family member. Nobody thinks it's a perfect solution, because there isn't one. It's just probably the best that can be done in crappy circumstances.

I think you maybe underestimating your sons ability to adapt.
If they changed the school uniform and made everyone wear a tie, do you think he’d need you there 24*7 to explain why he has to wear a tie at school when all the kids around him are wearing a tie?

Mandatory masking would not only keep him, his peers and his teachers safer. It would also normalise the experience ‘cause everyone is wearing one.
And not just the Immunocompromised kid in the corner.

And should your sons health change, and become at risk. Is that it? No more school for him, ever? Or would you prefer the class adapted and wore masks so he could attend school with less risk?

Remember in Feb the chineses studies indicated even mild cases in children caused lesions on lungs and kidneys. Would these be underlying conditions if a secondary infection is possible.?

We know so little yet, better to err on the side of caution.

Anything we can do to minimise risk for all kids, healthy or at risk should be tried.

SeaBreezes · 31-07-2020 11:56AM

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

Absolutely worrying – there simply hasn't been enough time elapsed to understand lots of angles to this virus, which is very frustrating. It does seem like as we relax about one worry, such as exponential growth, there's another gotcha, like longer term effects.

The good news, or at least a somewhat positive slant, is that while some continue to suffer effects long after the official recovery period of ~2 weeks, there is a lot of precedent with other viruses with similar long tails. While I don't envy anyone going through it at all, things like mononucleosis (glandular fever) can knock you for months as the body recovers.

From an overall picture of public health, we are in a far better position than April, and hopefully with our hospitals under far less pressure, those with longer term effects will have easier access to healthcare and doctors/analysts have easier access to these patients to understand what is happening with them.

Another gotcha. Flu and COVID-19.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jmv.26364

The previous SARS pandemic in 2003, researchers found that the patients with fever, cough, or sore throat had a 5% influenza virus‐positive rate. This finding sparked in our minds that the wide range of symptoms and also relatively high prevalence of death in our patients may be due to the co‐infection with other viruses. Thus, we evaluate the co‐infection of SARS‐CoV‐2 with other respiratory viruses in dead patients in North Khorasan. We evaluated the presence of influenza A/B virus, Human metapneumovirus, bocavirus, adenovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, and parainfluenza viruses in 105 SARS‐CoV‐2 positive dead patients, using PCR and RT‐PCR tests. We found co‐infection with influenza virus in 22.3%, respiratory syncytial virus, and bocavirus in 9.7%, parainfluenza viruses in 3.9%, Human metapneumovirus in 2.9% and finally adenovirus in 1.9% of SARS‐CoV‐2 positive dead cases.

The highlights of our findings are a high prevalence of co‐infection with influenza A virus and the monopoly of co‐infection with Human metapneumovirus in children.

Loafing Oaf · 31-07-2020 12:01PM

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

Absolutely worrying – there simply hasn't been enough time elapsed to understand lots of angles to this virus, which is very frustrating. It does seem like as we relax about one worry, such as exponential growth, there's another gotcha, like longer term effects.

The good news, or at least a somewhat positive slant, is that while some continue to suffer effects long after the official recovery period of ~2 weeks, there is a lot of precedent with other viruses with similar long tails.

Is there precedent with other viruses for long-term damage to heart and lungs (obviously we don't know yet whether this will be the case with covid, but there are worrying signs)? That's what would have me worried, I could live with the fatigue and aches and pains for a couple of months.

Plumbthedepths · 31-07-2020 12:04PM

SeaBreezes wrote: »

Another gotcha. Flu and COVID-19.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jmv.26364

The previous SARS pandemic in 2003, researchers found that the patients with fever, cough, or sore throat had a 5% influenza virus‐positive rate. This finding sparked in our minds that the wide range of symptoms and also relatively high prevalence of death in our patients may be due to the co‐infection with other viruses. Thus, we evaluate the co‐infection of SARS‐CoV‐2 with other respiratory viruses in dead patients in North Khorasan. We evaluated the presence of influenza A/B virus, Human metapneumovirus, bocavirus, adenovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, and parainfluenza viruses in 105 SARS‐CoV‐2 positive dead patients, using PCR and RT‐PCR tests. We found co‐infection with influenza virus in 22.3%, respiratory syncytial virus, and bocavirus in 9.7%, parainfluenza viruses in 3.9%, Human metapneumovirus in 2.9% and finally adenovirus in 1.9% of SARS‐CoV‐2 positive dead cases.

The highlights of our findings are a high prevalence of co‐infection with influenza A virus and the monopoly of co‐infection with Human metapneumovirus in children.

I may only be speaking for myself but as just an ordinary 'Joe Bloggs' what does your link mean?

ACitizenErased · 31-07-2020 12:06PM

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I may only be speaking for myself but as just an ordinary 'Joe Bloggs' what does your link mean?

I believe it means that 22.3% of deaths in the region that were studied had co-infection between influenza and COVID.

iguana · 31-07-2020 12:14PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

Does the fact that your child most likely had it factor into your decision making?
I'm genuinely not sure it's safe given our class numbers.
So in my mind, what's the point of a grand experiment if after one month we have to shut it down........ I know if I had it, wasn't too bad, I'd be screaming from the rafters for life to get back to normal.

The fact that we most likely had Covid factors 100% into my decision making. It can't not. That said, I don't think life should be getting back to normal. I just think that the risks to children's mental health are also real. When weighing up the crappy options we face, I won't be sending him to school in a mask, in a room full of people in masks. It's not going to work for a variety of reasons.

Tbh, I don't think we should be opening schools in the way that's planned. My feeling, based on Israel, is that it will lead to clusters and they will all end up shut again before too long. I suspect that if this happened in the 80s or before, when the majority of children had a stay at home parent, we wouldn't be considering reopening schools at all. Reopening schools is economically driven rather than something that's truly being done in the best interests of children. And while I hope I'm wrong, I think it's going to be a disaster. Just less of a disaster than a classroom full of kids in masks would be.

What Username Guidelines · 31-07-2020 12:15PM

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Is there precedent with other viruses for long-term damage to heart and lungs (obviously we don't know yet whether this will be the case with covid, but there are worrying signs)? That's what would have me worried, I could live with the fatigue and aches and pains for a couple of months.

Not that I know, I am far from an expert, just very interested and reading a lot.

Viruses can causes swelling in lots of places, organs, etc and is an immune response. Obviously as we're finding more and more evidence of this (heart scans, etc) it is natural to worry and assume it may be permanent, but like I mentioned earlier, we haven't had the luxury of time to observe, which isnt much solace to those effected. Just be mindful when you see headlines that say "PERMANENT damage, etc".

What got me interested in this stuff, and pinch of salt here as it's a sample of one, and not covid, but my daughter had an over-reactive immune response which caused swelling in the liver, spleen and meninges (fluid around brain) that were all quite severe and lasted throughout treatment and beyond for many months. As she was only 4 months old when sick, they couldnt tell if it was permanent or not, and any cognitive effects could not be observed due to age. Her doctors (immunologists) were confident it would subside and improve, and it didnt feel like anything they hadnt seen with other immune responses. It was almost a full year from diagnosis, and 4 months after leaving hospital, before swelling was no longer observed. All cognitive function is fine now (she's almost 5).

iguana · 31-07-2020 12:17PM

SeaBreezes wrote: »

Anything we can do to minimise risk for all kids, healthy or at risk should be tried.

That's keeping schools closed or going back very part-time in small groups 1 or 2 days a week.

caveat emptor · 31-07-2020 12:20PM

iguana wrote: »

The fact that we most likely had Covid factors 100% into my decision making. It can't not. That said, I don't think life should be getting back to normal. I just think that the risks to children's mental health are also real. When weighing up the crappy options we face, I won't be sending him to school in a mask, in a room full of people in masks. It's not going to work for a variety of reasons.

Tbh, I don't think we should be opening schools in the way that's planned. My feeling, based on Israel, is that it will lead to clusters and they will all end up shut again before too long. I suspect that if this happened in the 80s or before, when the majority of children had a stay at home parent, we wouldn't be considering reopening schools at all. Reopening schools is economically driven rather than something that's truly being done in the best interests of children. And while I hope I'm wrong, I think it's going to be a disaster. Just less of a disaster than a classroom full of kids in masks would be.

Seriously commend your honesty. Always find your opinion very useful.
Agree with all of the points you make.

I really hope we look at practical solutions like alternate days to maintain the safety distance. Or even open on Saturdays. Whatever it takes.
Think the health of Children should be prioritised.
This would suit lots of people. Shift work, work from home people.
Adults can stagger their work pattern to match their children staggered school pattern.

I don't hold out much hope with the politicians off for 6 weeks. They really are contemptuous towards the issues facing families. Whether it be the PUP or return to schools.

polesheep · 31-07-2020 12:23PM

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

I haven't been following all numbers too closely for comparisons to each peak, but I know in the last few days Italy have 38 in ICU from a peak of ~4,000, not dissimilar to the kind of reduction we've seen.

Current vs peak
Sweden: 40/550)
France: 380/7,000
Belgium: 42/550(?)
Spain: 617/6,000

Not to downplay the severity in ICU care, but these are comparatively small(er) numbers than seen throughout April.

Thanks for that. What I'm really interested in is whether or not recent localised spikes are leading to hospitalisations. Here in Ireland that hasn't been the case.

GooglePlus · 31-07-2020 12:23PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

I don’t think any changes need to be made to masks. I’ve been in Cork City a couple of times and I’m estimating compliance at 80-90%. You can check out the COVID thread on the Cork City forum and you’ll find people who agree.
I doubt it’s much different anywhere else in the country.

Here in Dublin and I would say there's about 50-60% of people wearing them in shops but a fair amount more on public transport.

I've seen a fair few shabby looking face coverings as well, so I wonder how many are actually washing theirs or if they're just going around with a petri dish on their face.

FishOnABike · 31-07-2020 12:25PM

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Any guidelines for sector specific reopening are drawn up by the HPSC in conjuction with the sector, in this case HPSC and Failte Ireland.

They'd been due out on Wednesday but publicans asked that the guidelines are sitting at the bar be revisited hence now we get a delay.

Simple answer should be ”No". Unless the bar counter is deep enough so that two people opposite each other (one inside and one outside the counter) can maintain the recommended social distance it is not allowed. I don't know of many 2½ metre deep (allowing for leaning in to sup a pint) bar counters.

Covid 19 Part XX-26,644 in ROI (1,772 deaths) 6,064 in NI (556 deaths) (08/08)Read OP

Comments