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

Martina1991 · 05-08-2020 11:15PM

froog wrote: »

which one is the HSE study using?

Liaison Diasorin.

fr336 · 05-08-2020 11:16PM

growleaves wrote: »

For anyone who believes the 7.4% estimate, I have some exciting investing opportunities I'd like to share with you exclusively please PM me for details.

Likewise the 0.01%! Neither seem believable to me

caveat emptor · 05-08-2020 11:16PM

Martina1991 wrote: »

There's a **** load of antibody tests on the market. Most are sh*te because they were churned out to make money.

So it is not correct so lump them all in together and say all antibody tests are inaccurate.

Do you even know what platform Ireland used for the surveillance study or how accurate it is.

Because talking about the sensitivity and specificity of tests in other countries has no relevance to us.

Hey hey hey,

Now be nice.

Firstly I didn't provide a link to paper then misrepresent what it said in order
to prove I'm right or accelerate the reopening of society for my own agenda.

That paper was muck. Wasn't relevant to the point being made and even author concluded serology not useful for testing general population.

Quick estimate of raind's post on this thread are 95% "it'll be grand". IMO
The one link he did post turned out to be not very helpful.

I get we are totally awesome here.
We have the best tests
Nobody got infected
Except when we want to tell people that everyone already had it.
Sure masks don't work.
The pub is grand.
Nurses are only tired.
Some kids may die but not many.

coastwatch · 05-08-2020 11:17PM

JRant wrote: »

Exactly right. Clusters with contact tracing and isolation structure are completely manageable. Community transmission, even with contact tracing is a different animal.

That's why the refusal to move to phase 4 even with our very low numbers is baffling. Realistically, with the current travel policy and lack of enforceable quarantine, it's about as well as we could have hoped for. The alternative is to prevent anyone in or out of the country for 12/18 months without forced quarantine upon arrival and even then there would be a large number of countries not allowed into the state, and I would include NI in that as well.

Just being very cautious and understandable, not making any changes that could be seen to be a risk to the opening of schools and colleges in September.

podgeandrodge · 05-08-2020 11:18PM

Is it not fair to say that with the original roadmap, which anticipated everything opening by August, that they would have been extremely happy with the current case figures?

The 11pm nonsense is clearly to set the new standard in time for applying it to the whole sector when they open in the next phase.

05-08-2020 11:20PM

froog wrote: »

so you discredit or retract that study you linked earlier? cause it is saying the exact opposite of what you are now to trying to claim. your own linked study. in plain english.

The original contention was that the antibody studies complete here were useless as they had a 5% false positive rate. I tried to explain using an example linked how sensitivity and specificity of a test method relates to the false positive rate. The sensitivity is what was challenged in that study, and that has no bearing on the false positive rate. I subsequently identified that lab based testing has an even higher specificity, meaning a much lower false positive rate. And what has all this led me to believe. Far from a reported figure of 5 % antibody presence in the population being an over estimate due to false positives, it is likely an underestimate based on the lack of antibody detection in a significant portion of individuals who have been infected. One caveat..the actual figures have not been published yet

Itssoeasy · 05-08-2020 11:24PM

podgeandrodge wrote: »

Is it not fair to say that with the original roadmap, which anticipated everything opening by August, that they would have been extremely happy with the current case figures?

The 11pm nonsense is clearly to set the new standard in time for applying it to the whole sector when they open in the next phase.

That's a good point actually because had their not been a removal of one phase then the pubs would only be opening next Monday anyway but obviously they aren't.

froog · 05-08-2020 11:26PM

Martina1991 wrote: »

Liaison Diasorin.

this one?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/893435/Evaluation_of_Diasorin_Liaison_anti_SARS_CoV_2.pdf

In conclusion, the DiaSorin Liaison SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG assay gave a specificity of
97.7% (95%CI 95.8-99.0) in this evaluation; the reported specificity of the manufacturer
is 98.5% (95%CI 97.6-99.1).

In this evaluation, the sensitivity of the DiaSorin Liaison SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG assay
measured 69.4% (95%CI 58.5-79.0) for samples collected ≥14 post symptom onset and
71.4% (95%CI 60.0-81.2) for samples collected ≥21 days post symptom onset. For all
samples, the sensitivity was 64.0% (95%CI 53.8-73.4). The manufacturer reported a
sensitivity of 90.4% (95%CI 79.4-95.8) for samples 5-15 days and a sensitivity of 97.4%
(95%CI 86.8-99.5) for samples taken >15 days’ post RT-PCR diagnosis.

05-08-2020 11:26PM

Martina1991 wrote: »

Liaison Diasorin.

99.7% specificity, excellent. Good sensitivity too at greater than 15 days. Any conclusions drawn on studies using this test should be meaningful

caveat emptor · 05-08-2020 11:27PM

Let's agree to disagree.

MOR316 · 05-08-2020 11:30PM

Slightly off topic but, I'm curious...

Has Trump given any indication as to when Irish people are allowed back into America?

05-08-2020 11:31PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

Quick estimate of raind's post are they are 95% "it'll be grand"
The one link he did post turned out to be not very helpful.

I get we are totally awesome here.
We have the best tests
Nobody got infected
Except when we want to tell people that everyone already had it.
Sure masks don't work.
The pub is grand.
Nurses are only tired.
Some kids may die but not many.

Might want to look at the restrictions thread. I would estimate 95% of my posts are “where did you come up with that bull****”, and challenging the most outrageous misrepresentation of facts and outright falsehoods, on both extremes of views

GooglePlus · 05-08-2020 11:36PM

MOR316 wrote: »

Slightly off topic but, I'm curious...

Has Trump given any indication as to when Irish people are allowed back into America?

We have a huge and influential diaspora over there, I can't see that lasting long. I'm surprised there still is a ban.

MOR316 · 05-08-2020 11:40PM

GooglePlus wrote: »

We have a huge and influential diaspora over there, I can't see that lasting long. I'm surprised there still is a ban.

Aye, just curious.
Was thinking about America today as I got my Aer Lingus voucher and just had it in my head*

*Not going to go anytime soon obviously, was just curious.

froog · 05-08-2020 11:47PM

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17317-y

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17317-y/tables/1

according to this study, the Liaison ranks 5th out of 8 for specificity and 8th (last) for sensitivity out of these commercially available testing platforms.

and most interesting is the PPV at 4% prevalence, which for the Liason is just 0.26. i.e. a 26% chance a positive test actually has the disease at a population prevalence of 4%. they all fare pretty bad at that prevalence though. these platforms only seem useful at >50% prevalence. so the HSE studys 5% rate could actually be closer to 1.25%. but it seems so wildly inaccurate no conclusions should be made one way or the other.

interested to hear martina and rainds thoughts on that as i am no expert.

Martina1991 · 05-08-2020 11:47PM

froog wrote: »

this one?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/893435/Evaluation_of_Diasorin_Liaison_anti_SARS_CoV_2.pdf
.

Yes.

caveat emptor · 05-08-2020 11:53PM

Martina1991 wrote: »

Yes.

That's great if test is useful in understanding what amount of the population have had it. I understand that there are differences between the over counter ****e and a state level study. I'm hopeful but I'm highly sceptical about state level mandated anything since the mask and PPE debacle TBH.

I'm more concerned about long term immunity and given this is from same family as some variety of the common cold, i.e we tend to get them different years.
I believe it to be a bit of a nice to know.
Rather than a need to know.

What I'd like to know is......

What's going to happen when schools go back.
Will a vaccine work
Should we just say fvck it and get back to normal
How long realistically will this roll on til it goes away

https://twitter.com/elizashapiro/status/1290632185398132736?s=20

fritzelly · 05-08-2020 11:58PM

froog wrote: »

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17317-y

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17317-y/tables/1

according to this study, the Liaison ranks 5th out of 8 for specificity and 8th (last) for sensitivity out of these commercially available testing platforms.

and most interesting is the PPV at 4% prevalence, which for the Liason is just 0.26. i.e. a 26% chance a positive test actually has the disease at a population prevalence of 4%. they all fare pretty bad at that prevalence though. these platforms only seem useful at >50% prevalence. so the HSE studys 5% rate could actually be closer to 1.25%. but it seems so wildly inaccurate no conclusions should be made one way or the other.

interested to hear martina and rainds thoughts on that as i am no expert.

Were the people in the study (in Ireland) existing positive cases and a few non positive cases? I don't know what the criteria were for the test
If it was a lot of positive cases then the test does well - some are better, but only marginally so

Guess only the HSE really know how it fared on the test group

Myramar · 05-08-2020 11:59PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

We haven't got any details on breakdown other than the average before last week (which is 31%). In the last 3 days community transmission has accounted for less than 10%, based on the figures NPHET give in their press release.

31% is from the beginning of the pandemic. It is meaningless to where we are now.
Three (or Four) weeks ago they decided that they would do phase 4 on 10th August 2020. The CT rate then was probably pretty close to 31% because the numbers for the height of the pandemic were miles above what they are now so the low levels we are seeing for the last 3-4 weeks would not greatly affect this percentage.
When we went into lockdown it was 60-70%. The figure of 31% represents an averaging out of 60%-70% and whatever it was when we came out of lockdown.

Ignoring "weighting" (which you cannot really do) this would suggest that the rate of CT that occurred during the lockdown period was in the region of 12%.
12+66(say) divided by 2 gives you 39%. - as I say you need to take account of the weighting so the 66 has more bearing than the 12 in reality so 31% might be ok.

12% vs 10% - not a big deal.

If anyone cannot follow this that's OK. You should not have to. The only point you need to understand is this:
31% is a calculation of Community Transmission to "Identified Tranmission" from day one of this pandemic.If it was twice as high when we went in then it must have been twice as low when we came out to give us this percentage.

Point is you can make numbers say whatever you like-especially when you work in percentages.

It has nothing to do with the percentage of community transmission that existed 4 weeks ago when they decided to open the pubs on 10th August 2020. It is a number that is entirely influenced by a scenario where contact tracing was crap. The virus was rampant in care homes. Tests were being done in Germany etc., etc.,
What has changes since a month ago to now that has caused them to change their minds?
Not from the beginning of the virus but from the last review when they said they were going to open the pubs on 10th August 2020?
Donnelly says it is and increase in the NUMBER of cases that are Community Transmission cases to the tune of 2.5 times what they were when they decided that they could open the pubs.

ACE I am not getting at you. Your instinct is right. More to the point your conclusion is probably right too. It hasn't gone up by 2.5 times and nothing much has changed to justify the decision to defer phase 4.

My problem however is this. I'm not sure they are wrong now - maybe they were BSing then and they knew it.

Finally - Does anyone really think they will open the Pubs right at the same time as they open the Schools in three weeks time? What excuse will they use then ?

KrustyUCC · 06-08-2020 12:18AM

Even if cases drop

'We've reopened the schools

Can't jeopardise that

They're our priority

Let's wait and see

Here's another three weeks'

bb1234567 · 06-08-2020 12:35AM

seanb85 wrote: »

Hospitalisation rates in Ireland by age for confirmed cases

0-4 - 12%
5-14 - 5%
15-24 - 3.8%
25-34 - 4.5%
35-44 - 6%
45-54 - 9.7%
55-64 - 15.2%
65-74 - 32%
75-84 - 32.3%
85+ - 20.1%

That's very surprising that more children are hospitalised than young middle aged people!

ceadaoin. · 06-08-2020 12:42AM

MOR316 wrote: »

Slightly off topic but, I'm curious...

Has Trump given any indication as to when Irish people are allowed back into America?

Irish are allowed in now, just not within 2 weeks of being in Ireland. So you'd have to quarantine in some other approved country for 2 weeks and then head over.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/from-other-countries.html

igCorcaigh · 06-08-2020 12:43AM

bb1234567 wrote: »

That's very surprising that more children are hospitalised than young middle aged people!

I was very surprised to see any young people hospitalised, perhaps it's cases in hospital for unrelated conditions that then test positive?

iamwhoiam · 06-08-2020 12:46AM

bb1234567 wrote: »

That's very surprising that more children are hospitalised than young middle aged people!

It could be a case of being overly cautious with the very young . They could be admitted for observation for a few days . Or children with multiple medical needs who test positive will be admitted and observed

US2 · 06-08-2020 12:48AM

Really wish they were transparent with everything, I'd really like to know things like that.

How many deaths were covid was the primary cause of death.

How many of the hospitalisations actually needed hospital because they were sick from covid.

Average age of people who actually looked for a test because of symptoms.

06-08-2020 01:16AM

US2 wrote: »

Really wish they were transparent with everything, I'd really like to know things like that.

How many deaths were covid was the primary cause of death.

How many of the hospitalisations actually needed hospital because they were sick from covid.

Average age of people who actually looked for a test because of symptoms.

Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.

I get that the whole world wants extreme detail but it's the least important aspect of the entire situation really.

Renjit · 06-08-2020 01:47AM

Goodnight, chaps!

hmmm · 06-08-2020 02:16AM

caveat emptor wrote: »

What I'd like to know is......
What's going to happen when schools go back.

Will a vaccine work

Should we just say fvck it and get back to normal

How long realistically will this roll on til it goes away

Fingers crossed we should get data from vaccine phase 3 trials in about September/October. That will tell us whether some of the first candidates work, and what level of protection they provide. Vaccines will take time to be approved and manufactured, but with this data we'll have a lot more certainty about the future. Even if the initial vaccines are not perfect, if they buy us a year or two that'll be enough for science to develop better ones.

PTH2009 · 06-08-2020 02:22AM

caveat emptor wrote: »

That's great if test is useful in understanding what amount of the population have had it. I understand that there are differences between the over counter ****e and a state level study. I'm hopeful but I'm highly sceptical about state level mandated anything since the mask and PPE debacle TBH.

I'm more concerned about long term immunity and given this is from same family as some variety of the common cold, i.e we tend to get them different years.
I believe it to be a bit of a nice to know.
Rather than a need to know.

What I'd like to know is......
What's going to happen when schools go back.

Will a vaccine work

Should we just say fvck it and get back to normal

How long realistically will this roll on til it goes away

https://twitter.com/elizashapiro/status/1290632185398132736?s=20

Points 2-4 won't happen with our government and it will be cautious action before the magical vaccine arrives

fritzelly · 06-08-2020 02:25AM

hmmm wrote: »

Fingers crossed we should get data from vaccine phase 3 trials in about September/October. That will tell us whether some of the first candidates work, and what level of protection they provide. Vaccines will take time to be approved and manufactured, but with this data we'll have a lot more certainty about the future. Even if the initial vaccines are not perfect, if they buy us a year or two that'll be enough for science to develop better ones.

They aint gonna hang around with approving any new vaccines if the results look good - I just hope there is due diligence done on the results before going ahead with approving them

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

Comments