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

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

1…118119121123124…333

Comments

  • #3602
    DevilsHaircut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 524 ✭✭✭DevilsHaircut


    ShineOn7 wrote: »
    100% this

    I really wish people would stop with vaccine talk on and offline, it's an absolute pipe dream

    It's not.

    This is an unprecedented situation, in which 100s of companies are expediting vaccine trial phases.

    Safety and efficacy will be proven for several candidates before the end of 2020.

    After that, it's down to approval by the EU medicines board (for Ireland).

    Any vaccine needs to be only c. 60% effective to work.


  • #3603
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,888 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    iguana wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure absolutely nobody thinks a vaccine will be magically available. Many people are aware however, that a very significant level of work is ongoing on a number of vaccines. Several are already in phase 3 of testing, mass production on the most positive looking vaccines is well underway already. And many governments/trading blocks have already made purchasing agreements, like the 400 million doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine secured for Europe. So nope, nobody thinks they are being 'magicked' up but there is a reasonable possibility that we will have a useable vaccine sooner or later.

    Sorry not sure who you’re talking to but lots I talk to do think a vaccine will soon be a panacea. The media have been spinning that line since March so I can’t blame them


  • #3604
    ShineOn7
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,550 ✭✭✭ShineOn7


    road_high wrote: »
    People are off their heads with this near vaccine talk.


    I'm getting that put on a T shirt and I'm buying 7 of them

    It'll save me a lot of explaining off line


  • #3605
    Ce he sin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 215 ✭✭Ce he sin


    road_high wrote: »
    Because there’s a massive registration and efficacy data process needed Before any of this can even contemplate going to market. Takes years. May not even be successful. Feel free to come back in 12 months time to prove me wrong.


    Just because it's taken years in the past doesn't mean it always has to. There's never been such an effort to produce a vaccine as there is now. Back in the spring virologists (you know, people who actually know about these things) were predicting an absolute minimum time scale to have a vaccine available in at least limited quantities of 12 to 18 months. That's still the prediction.


  • #3606
    YFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,717 ✭✭✭YFlyer


    DevilsHaircut wrote: »
    Exactly.

    A rise in cases among 20-40 year olds doesn't stay there for long.


    https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1283134585665200131?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1283134585665200131%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boards.ie%2Fvbulletin%2Fshowthread.php%3Fp%3D114064622

    Can somebody explain this heat map? Looks a blur to me. There was no bar on the side to say the colour order.


  • Advertisement
  • #3607
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,888 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Ce he sin wrote: »
    Just because it's taken years in the past doesn't mean it always has to. There's never been such an effort to produce a vaccine as there is now. Back in the spring virologists (you know, people who actually know about these things) were predicting an absolute minimum time scale to have a vaccine available in at least limited quantities of 12 to 18 months. That's still the prediction.

    I’d be sure There’s a process involved and a min data dossier needed to support it. Much of it based on timelines. Ie 3,6,12 months after etc.
    Then there’ll be an evaluation process from whatever regulatory authority. I admire your optimism but I sadly don’t share it


  • #3608
    iguana
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,917 ✭✭✭✭iguana


    road_high wrote: »
    Sorry not sure who you’re talking to but lots I talk to do think a vaccine will soon be a panacea. The media have been spinning that line since March so I can’t blame them

    Did you read what you just quoted? Why do you think several vaccines are already in mass production and so many governments have already negotiated deals for 100s of millions of them? If any of the several in phase 3 testing pass that phase, mass vaccination will begin. Most vaccines fail in phase 3, so none of the current crop could work and the millions of doses already produced will be scrapped. But if one passes, then vaccination will begin. For what it's worth it began weeks ago in China as they started mass vaccination of their military. Not that I'd take that as meaning anything other than it's a massive, unethical, test on the part of the Chinese government.


  • #3609
    YFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,717 ✭✭✭YFlyer


    fritzelly wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1289209361521184769

    Thanks. That is practically a straight line till July 8th and then off it went. When was restrictions lifted in Florida?


  • #3610
    Away With The Fairies
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,077 ✭✭✭Away With The Fairies


    FintanMcluskey wrote: »
    I believe the quickest vaccine was for SARs which took 4 years.

    There was never a vaccine for SARS. Quickest vaccine was for mumps which took 4 years.


  • #3611
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    road_high wrote: »
    Because there’s a massive registration and efficacy data process needed Before any of this can even contemplate going to market. Takes years. May not even be successful. Feel free to come back in 12 months time to prove me wrong.

    The amount of time and resources poured into R & D for a vaccine is unprecedented. Oxford team have already declared that they know it's now safe, they're now testing efficiency. You can't compare like from like when processes have massively improved from the last comparable.


  • Advertisement
  • #3612
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,462 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    Away With The Fairies wrote: »
    There was never a vaccine for SARS. Quickest vaccine was for mumps which took 4 years.

    Swine flu vaccine not count?
    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-pandemic-timeline.html
    First case April 2019, vaccine available to anyone in December of the same year.


  • #3613
    The HorsesMouth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 513 ✭✭✭The HorsesMouth


    JFC... everyone involved in the vaccine making programs are optimistic about achieving a vaccine. Even Fauci agrees it will be here by end of 2020. But no the guys and gals of boards.ie have decided they are going to stick to their negative, depressing and grim outlook.
    Like why would you choose to be pessimistic about this vaccine? The vaccine is the only way out of this absolute
    s**tshow.
    Are you loving the fact that we are living like this?? Anyone surely wanting out of this is going to be praying and hoping for one...not coming up with endless reasons why the phd scientists are wrong and they can't make one.


  • #3614
    WoollyRedHat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,462 ✭✭✭✭WoollyRedHat


    People who talk about vaccine development taking years are ignoring some key things:

    1. Development of technologies that are driving more efficient vaccines in a timely manner rapidly improves year on year as more research data becomes available.
    2. The urgency of the matter combined with efficiency... Red tape is being removed, it's one thing to be cautious but it's another thing to be risk-averse when money is involved
    3. The amount of resources and financial support devoted to said development is unprecedented.


  • #3615
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,462 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    The HorsesMouth wrote: »
    JFC... everyone involved in the vaccine making programs are optimistic about achieving a vaccine. Even Fauci agrees it will be here by end of 2020. But no the guys and gals of boards.ie have decided they are going to stick to their negative, depressing and grim outlook.
    Like why would you choose to be pessimistic about this vaccine? The vaccine is the only way out of this absolute
    s**tshow.
    Are you loving the fact that we are living like this?? Anyone surely wanting out of this is going to be praying and hoping for one...not coming up with endless reasons why the phd scientists are wrong and they can't make one.

    I'm optimistic on the vaccine front. Never before has so much money and resource been put into developing a vaccine. Granted time hasn't been put in.
    But the fact they ran stages together and companies were supplied with vast sums of money to start building factories and mass producing them before they are approved will shave years off it. It's the building and up scaling and then the legal contracts of supply that take longer than the research. The fact countries have pretty much already purchased million of doses from multiple suppliers means they can begin mass production without a financial hit it their phase 3 fails.

    I'd be more worried if the Oxford vaccine proved a success and the likes of America decided to wait a few months for theirs, just to say their's was better etc... at the cost of many lives.
    The same can be said about the Chinese and Russian ones, most of the world and myself included wouldn't trust them.


  • #3616
    fritzelly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,175 ✭✭✭✭fritzelly


    YFlyer wrote: »
    Thanks. That is practically a straight line till July 8th and then off it went. When was restrictions lifted in Florida?

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/states-reopen-map-coronavirus.html


  • #3617
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,462 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    fritzelly wrote: »
    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/states-reopen-map-coronavirus.html

    Looking at some southern state curves, like Florida, they look like they were flat when they reopened, but their current peak just makes it look flat.
    It seems like they just reopened everything at once without a care in the world, like what happened in Israel. They declared victory and were encouraged to go and back to normal life.


  • #3618
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    caveat emptor wrote: »
    There's been a lot of discussion around why are cases high but deaths low.

    Answer it takes a while for people to die after testing positive.

    The median test to death is 20 days.

    You keep on posting that despite spikes happening and not being followed by hospitalisations and deaths.


  • #3619
    road_high
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,888 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Excuse me, excuse me.. Road High obviously knows things. Don't question him on these matters.

    Never any harm to question things. Saves a lot of disappointment when the promised utopia is years later or never arrives.


  • #3620
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    polesheep wrote: »
    You keep on posting that despite spikes happening and not being followed by hospitalisations and deaths.

    Ah he was also giving out about RA and people going on holidays but is considering going to Scotland or the lake District himself. Make of that what you will.
    caveat emptor wrote: »

    I might.
    I'm undecided.
    I'm undecided between Scotland or the Lake District.


  • #3621
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,462 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    caveat emptor wrote: »
    There's been a lot of discussion around why are cases high but deaths low.

    Answer it takes a while for people to die after testing positive.

    The median test to death is 20 days.
    polesheep wrote: »
    You keep on posting that despite spikes happening and not being followed by hospitalisations and deaths.

    Spikes are generally.....a spike... a blip, usually a cluster. Depending on the setting they may not cause a spike in hospital admissions and if they do, it would generally be a week from result to hospitalisation.

    The internet is a wash with statistics on covid for every country, however you need to know the details. For example, Spain saw 3000+ cases today, but half are antibody tests. I know 1500 is still a hell of a lot.
    Another example, Sky news website haven't been reporting new cases and deaths on their site for weeks. It's probably there, but you would have to go looking. They mentioned an increase in the UK cases and mentioned a rise in cases in Ireland. 24hrs later, new cases in the UK have increased again (slight increase) and halved in Ireland. We know the reason for the spike in Ireland.
    Young workers in a factory won't result in as much hospital admissions as a spike in a nursing home.

    BUT you need to remember, widespread community transmission, even in young and healthy people will eventually spread to nursing homes and hospitals.


  • Advertisement
  • #3622
    Charles Babbage
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,534 ✭✭✭Charles Babbage


    Away With The Fairies wrote: »
    There was never a vaccine for SARS. Quickest vaccine was for mumps which took 4 years.


    As SARS disappeared work on a vaccine stopped. But any work on SARS vaccine has been incorporated into the present vaccine for the related SARS-Covid19 thereby speeding up the process.


  • #3623
    podgeandrodge
    Site Banned Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭podgeandrodge


    road_high wrote: »
    I’d be sure There’s a process involved and a min data dossier needed to support it. Much of it based on timelines. Ie 3,6,12 months after etc.
    Then there’ll be an evaluation process from whatever regulatory authority. I admire your optimism but I sadly don’t share it
    road_high wrote: »
    Different area but comparably rigorous registration process- I work in Agrochemicals and it takes years to register- even to get a new use on a label. So I can just imagine something that directly effects the human body- look at the potential law suits a company could be exposing themselves to with potential side effects? Who would underwrite that? People are off their heads with this near vaccine talk.


    Of course, you could be right. As could plenty others. Fauci, who is no Trump, apparently ignored your knowledge of agrochemicals:

    A coronavirus vaccine could be ready for distribution by the end of the year, and distributed to Americans in 2021, the nation's top infectious disease specialist told lawmakers Friday.

    While it typically takes years to develop vaccines, new technologies, the lack of bureaucratic red tape and the human body's robust immune response to COVID-19 have hastened the process, Dr. Anthony Fauci said.

    "From everything we've seen now — in the animal data, as well as the human data — we feel cautiously optimistic that we will have a vaccine by the end of this year and as we go into 2021," said Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.


  • #3624
    Myramar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 49 ✭Myramar


    "If I had been God
    With my staff and my rod
    I believe I could have done a better job"

    Roger Waters


  • #3625
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    polesheep wrote: »
    You keep on posting that despite spikes happening and not being followed by hospitalisations and deaths.

    Sourc? umerica was doing really well as regards testing until people start dying.

    Lots of people quoting. It must be a weaker strain. Its changing.



  • #3626
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    Wolf359f wrote: »

    BUT you need to remember, widespread community transmission, even in young and healthy people will eventually spread to nursing homes and hospitals.

    Signal noise ratio is very important, I've tried to cull the noise. I hope this is the signal.

    If so I agree.


  • #3627
    podgeandrodge
    Site Banned Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭podgeandrodge


    fritzelly wrote: »
    Is this the sequel?
    caveat emptor wrote: »
    I love boats. Who the fvck in their right mind would get on one these days.
    Seriously.
    owlbethere wrote: »
    The passengers disembarked to go on their ways wherever they came from. Christ.

    If my cruise holiday goes ahead, I'm definitely 100% not going.

    It's all down to your personal views I guess. I don't see it as the 'sequel', it's not one of the main lines, and from what I have read, the main lines have instigated significant measures to hopefully protect crew and passengers. But yes, it's a risk. Four crew members got infected, so they had to isolate the rest. Standard procedure be it staff from a cruise ship or Tesco no? Media obviously prefer "quarantine 160 crew" rather than "4 infected", but that's to be expected :)

    Virus likely with us forever, even with a vaccine. What do people propose - never cruise again, never a,b,c,d,e,f,g etc. again? - we will have to live with it while taking as much precautions as we can, while hoping that we either get a decent treatment or a vaccine that protects most. When the Princess situation evolved there were none of the precautionary measures that we have now.


  • #3628
    JP Liz V1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 91,415 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1


    What Username Guidelines wrote: »
    Yeah I got a text from Three about UB40 playing here in March and while it’s 7 months away, look at how much has changed in the last 5 months. Who knows what will happen.

    Didn’t some Irish band announce a gig for January when all this was kicking off in March? Something about it being free for healthcare workers?

    Anyway, even if it does magically disappear without a vaccine, it may take some time for everyone to feel comfortable in crowds again. I’ve tickets for a theatre show in December which I’ve written off tbh.

    The Script announced a free gig for healthcare frontline but not sure for when next year here though
    https://forumofgames.com/




  • #3629
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    podgeandrodge wrote: »
    It's all down to your personal views I guess. there were none of the precautionary measures that we have now.

    I think we can all agree 3 weeks in close confines with THOUSANDS of people is risky.

    But I agree it's down to your personal views.
    They just might turn out to be wrong.


  • #3630
    podgeandrodge
    Site Banned Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭podgeandrodge


    caveat emptor wrote: »
    I think we can all agree 3 weeks in close confines with THOUSANDS of people is risky.

    But I agree it's down to your personal views.
    They just might turn out to be wrong.

    From what I have read about the precautionary procedures, I really don't think there is much difference between being on them and appropriately social distancing, and going to the pub and having a meal and a few pints, or staying in a hotel for a few nights (which is happening all over the country, can't believe the amount of people I know staying in Killarney hotels!).

    They might be bumping into, occasionally, many of the other thousands as you put it, but at least they aren't bumping into any of the other thousands that might have it at home :) Most of the time though, it's like a small town, and people are passing each other like ships in the night, with a bit of reasonable social distancing hopefully now!

    Choices will have to be made. But if no vaccine arrives (but I think and hope there will be in early 2021), what do we do? Prevent all risk - stop all risky holidays? Prevent all mingling? Forever? **** happens and most will say that if 90% survive then 90% will choose to have a quality of life even if it's at the expense of the 10%. Human nature!


  • Advertisement
  • #3631
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    podgeandrodge wrote: »
    From what I have read about the precautionary procedures, I really don't think there is much difference between being on them and appropriately social distancing, and going to the pub and having a meal and a few pints, or staying in a hotel for a few nights (which is happening all over the country, can't believe the amount of people I know staying in Killarney hotels!).

    Choices will have to be made. But if no vaccine arrives (but I think and hope there will be in early 2021), what do we do? Prevent all risk - stop all risky holidays? Prevent all mingling? Forever? **** happens and most will say that if 90% survive then 90% will choose to have a quality of life even if it's at the expense of the 10%. Human nature!

    I love your way of thinking. Cruises in themselves are not risky. It's the nature of the virus and human behaviour that make it oexokode,

    We can control human behaviour.
    One interesting thing about diamond princess is that there was NO air recalculation yet people still got infected.

    I'd book as balcony at minimum. Or upgrade. Otherwise I wouldn't go thanks.
    The level of viral load is huge predictor on severe disease. We may have all been exposed in lidl but we'd never know. Totally different to a meat factory.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement