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 XXI-27,908 in ROI (1,777 deaths) 6,647 in NI (559 deaths)(22/08)Read OP

1…8788909293…328

Comments

  • #2672
    Renjit
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Renjit


    Arghus wrote: »
    Loads I'm sure.

    I distinctly remember a few weeks back certain posters saying they wouldn't get concerned as long as the daily case numbers stayed under 25/30 a day.

    The new normal has shifted :D

    Mask deniers are in full swing here. I dont see that change. For them wearing mask is the reason in increase :cool:


  • #2673
    podgeandrodge
    Site Banned Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭podgeandrodge


    ACitizenErased wrote: »
    Anyone on here from Kildare able to comment on mask compliance? Genuinely interested in if people actually wear masks in the areas we're seeing biggest increases.
    I only say that because in Cork we're seeing low numbers with high compliance.
    road_high wrote: »
    People really losing their heads here. Calm down. Wearing masks simply because you’re outside is stupid and makes no sense. Think rationally for gods sake instead of jumping off the next available cliff.
    Masks have done flip all to kerb the latest spike.
    road_high wrote: »
    Not from Kildare but neighbouring county and often in Kildare since masks came in. Compliance as high as anywhere else really. Zilch to do with masks or not in my opinion. This is in people’s homes and workplaces
    what the hell! wrote: »
    Lots of people with chips on their shoulders when it comes to Cork. We can’t help it that we’re all wearing masks and doing so well at the moment.
    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    For the umpteenth time so. Empirical evidence.

    No spread in supermarkets, virtually no staff infected. All through March, April, May, June, July. With no masks. With hundreds if not thousands of customers coming through every day. Staff handling their goods and cash. Talking to and interacting with them. Staff stocking the shelves amongst the customers. All with no masks.

    So we masks mandatory in supermarkets.

    Expecting what effect from this exactly?
    landofthetree wrote: »
    Governments are sheep.

    Once the Brits and European governments brought in masks we followed.

    Can you imagine the reaction if we didn't?

    Im pro masks in public but I do wonder are they effective? They dont seem to be stopping casess rising all over Europe.

    Like most, I'm wearing masks because they are mandatory. I think they may be of use in crowded public transport where you can't do sweet feck all about people sniffling and coughing beside you for an hour, and other confined spaces for a significant amount of time, but outside that I think it's a big big mistake to attribute low cases in certain areas to mask compliance.

    Only a couple of months back we had feck all community transmission and practically zero cases in supermarkets (and I don't buy into the counter argument that there were less people shopping in them, not significantly less and it's easy to distance in a supermarket).

    No doubt whatsoever that a mask will help if you're unlucky enough to be sneezed or coughed on, but let's face it, that doesn't happen that much. And wandering around Tesco doesn't put you in the frontline of a heavy viral load or, as the Govt. still states, close contact for 15 minutes.

    So imo, having a qualification to give uneducated opinions on Covid transmission, the increase in community transmission has nothing to do with lower mask compliance in those areas. And as others have pointed out, mask compliance is pretty high everywhere anyway.

    I know I'll be flamed for my opinion, but if masks disappeared tomorrow from easy to distance retail spaces, I don't think it would impact cases that much.

    Cases are coming from workers in close proximity to each other (who should wear masks if that's the case) and in certain accomodation types.


  • #2674
    Gael23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,151 ✭✭✭✭Gael23


    Ships are not enforcing masks for fear of upsetting their customers and losing business


  • #2675
    Leftwaffe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,558 ✭✭✭Leftwaffe


    I'm clinging to the idea that it has lost potency. So many asymptomatic cases.

    You'd really have to wonder how many people have/had it altogether. It's obviously much more prevalent than we know. This has to be a good thing?


  • #2676
    CalamariFritti
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,309 ✭✭✭CalamariFritti


    MattS1 wrote: »
    That they aren't getting the virus. So your point is null.

    You have to explain this one to me.

    They already weren't getting the virus. So now they're REALLY not getting it. Is it that?


  • Advertisement
  • #2677
    Van.Bosch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,004 ✭✭✭Van.Bosch


    Redordeadqwwer wrote: »
    I'm clinging to the idea that it has lost potency. So many asymptomatic cases.

    You'd really have to wonder how many people have/had it altogether. It's obviously much more prevalent than we know. This has to be a good thing?

    I’d like to agree but why would it lose potency?


  • #2678
    ACitizenErased
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,751 ✭✭✭✭ACitizenErased


    Redordeadqwwer wrote: »
    I'm clinging to the idea that it has lost potency. So many asymptomatic cases.

    You'd really have to wonder how many people have/had it altogether. It's obviously much more prevalent than we know. This has to be a good thing?

    If there’s no significant rise in admissions two to three weeks from now we can assume this is true. I don’t buy the whole “its only young people getting infected” malarky.


  • #2679
    ThunbergsAreGo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,399 ✭✭✭✭ThunbergsAreGo


    Redordeadqwwer wrote: »
    I'm clinging to the idea that it has lost potency. So many asymptomatic cases.

    You'd really have to wonder how many people have/had it altogether. It's obviously much more prevalent than we know. This has to be a good thing?

    Yeah i am surprised there isn't more being asked about this


  • #2680
    ThunbergsAreGo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,399 ✭✭✭✭ThunbergsAreGo


    Van.Bosch wrote: »
    I’d like to agree but why would it lose potency?

    Viruses adapt, its not in its interests to kill us, as it then dies itself


  • #2681
    Gael23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,151 ✭✭✭✭Gael23


    Redordeadqwwer wrote: »
    I'm clinging to the idea that it has lost potency. So many asymptomatic cases.

    You'd really have to wonder how many people have/had it altogether. It's obviously much more prevalent than we know. This has to be a good thing?

    I think it’s a case of the elderly looking after themselves and doing everything they can not to catch it.
    However it won’t take long before their children/grandchildren to infect them


  • Advertisement
  • #2682
    Leftwaffe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,558 ✭✭✭Leftwaffe


    Van.Bosch wrote: »
    I’d like to agree but why would it lose potency?

    Im going to say first of all that I'm not a scientist and don't claim to know much if anything about viruses. But from what I've read they can often mutate in order to be more transmissible, when they mutate they often lose their potency.

    That's the reason why the likes of ebola will never cause a pandemic, it kills its host before it has a chance to spread it.


  • #2683
    Strumms
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,822 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    My mother having to babysit my father again.. he wants to go to church to get confession... our local parish have dispensed for now with using confession boxes, instead it’s in a large conference room at the back of the church, you go, say your piece, get ‘absolved’ whatever the fûck.

    He dislikes the idea and is humming and hawing about going to another church where the traditional confession is happening. So he will gointo a tiny poorly ventilated, poorly lit booth where probably 30 people have been in there in front of him, unknown what if any disinfection / sanitizer protocols are in use, yes, brilliant fûcking idea...


  • #2684
    Chris_5339762
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,153 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »
    Yeah i am surprised there isn't more being asked about this


    It seems to my untrained eye that it has surged all over Europe at almost precisely the same time. There does appear to be a marginal increase in hospitalisations, but not the rush thats been expected.



    Could there have been a mutation to a more potent but less lethal form? It all seems too much of a coincidence to me, and I can't explain (in my untrained way) why its all happened seemingly at once.


  • #2685
    0gac3yjefb5sv7
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,947 ✭✭✭0gac3yjefb5sv7


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    You have to explain this one to me.

    They already weren't getting the virus. So now they're REALLY not getting it. Is it that?

    The poster said masks were not useful as supermarket workers have not got it. I wrote off this incorrect logic.


  • #2686
    normanoffside
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,229 ✭✭✭✭normanoffside


    Gael23 wrote: »
    Ships are not enforcing masks for fear of upsetting their customers and losing business

    You’d hardly need a mask in nice fresh sea air surely?


  • #2687
    LiquidZeb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭LiquidZeb


    Boggles wrote: »
    You are minimizing the largest public health crisis in a generation with false equivalency and nonsensical rambling but you are calling me "Blaise".

    Cool.

    Also you should read up on screening, unfortunately it is not the magic bullet the "it's just flu bro" cohort would you lead you to believe.

    Yeah one typo demolished my argument. So breast check and other cancer screenings are all for the craic? What's your authority on that?


  • #2688
    caviardreams
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,967 ✭✭✭caviardreams


    Van.Bosch wrote: »
    I’d like to agree but why would it lose potency?

    Some of it could be the viral load argument i.e. as we are keeping distance, wearing masks etc. you are exposed to less of it, so are affected less. The swiss army study somebody mentioned a while back, and the fact healthcare workers are more frequently affected could back this up. So if you do catch it from a 2m distance or whatever it is less potent


  • #2689
    landofthetree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,463 ✭✭✭landofthetree


    ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »
    Yeah i am surprised there isn't more being asked about this

    An Italian doctor/consultant said it a while back but others disagreed.


    https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2370OQ


  • #2690
    CalamariFritti
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,309 ✭✭✭CalamariFritti


    MattS1 wrote: »
    The poster said masks were not useful as supermarket workers have not got it. I wrote off this incorrect logic.

    That poster was me. And how is it incorrect logic? They weren't getting it. Now they wear masks. Presumably still not getting it. Question I was asking was what is the mask effect then?


  • #2691
    Goldengirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,976 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    polesheep wrote: »
    Not necessarily. If it's a case that the virus is having less of an effect now on those infected, then it's all positive.

    It shows there is a greater amount testing positive in the community, just that those tested are not sick
    Testing is now showing up the asymptomatic who would not have tested in March April. Young and healthy mostly so less virulent infection for them.
    Just as bad for others but those particularly vulnerable are benefiting from the measures like social distancing and handwashing , and testing tracing and u.timately isolation of these clusters...now that is all positive !


  • Advertisement
  • #2692
    Tenzor07
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,383 ✭✭✭Tenzor07


    Van.Bosch wrote: »
    I’d like to agree but why would it lose potency?

    Each time a Virus makes a copy of itself and they do in the millions, gives a greater chance of bad copies being made, so as it jumps from host to host it gets weaker and eventually most people won't know they have it or die with it.


  • #2693
    Strumms
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,822 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    podgeandrodge wrote: »

    I know I'll be flamed for my opinion, but if masks disappeared tomorrow from easy to distance retail spaces, I don't think it would impact cases that much.

    .

    Most retail spaces meet this criterial.

    I was in a hardware store today that would be considered ‘easy to distance’...problem is, the facility might enable distancing, but distancing itself is down to individuals... 100% of people cannot be trusted or will just make an error, masks are required, simply needed.


  • #2694
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,144 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Gael23 wrote: »
    Ships are not enforcing masks for fear of upsetting their customers and losing business

    I assume you meant shops. In which case maybe you should say some shops. Every shop, bar one, I have been to has insisted on masks and refuse entry without them. The one that allowed people without masks has lost custom as some people will no longer go to them because of the lax protocols.


  • #2695
    ThunbergsAreGo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,399 ✭✭✭✭ThunbergsAreGo


    landofthetree wrote: »
    An Italian doctor/consultant said it a while back but others disagreed.


    https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN2370OQ

    Remember reading that exact article

    It does seem to be a trend with previous deaths being denotified and a surge in cases not leading to a surge in hospitalisation/deaths


  • #2696
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    ACitizenErased wrote: »
    If there’s no significant rise in admissions two to three weeks from now we can assume this is true. I don’t buy the whole “its only young people getting infected” malarky.

    Your daily case analyses show it is by far mostly below 50 years old people getting it now.

    Plus in my earlier back of the envelope calculations I showed how the virus cases figures could have been validly reported every single night from March to end of June as 2200 daily cases. So now, even on a bad numbers day like today, we are very low compared to where we were in April, say, when the virus had spent a few months at the beginning of the year building up a head of steam.

    In my opinion that is why hospital figures are low. Not because virus is weaker. Older people are minding themselves. And we have way less, really fractions of, the virus infections in the country than what we had at peak.


  • #2697
    LiquidZeb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭LiquidZeb


    Arghus wrote: »
    Who said that?

    I had a poster tell me a 2000 increase in annual cancer deaths was no big deal


  • #2698
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,144 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »
    Viruses adapt, its not in its interests to kill us, as it then dies itself

    Viruses don't mutate with any intention. It can't decide to be more or less virulent or lethal.


  • #2699
    Boggles
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,505 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    LiquidZeb wrote: »
    Yeah one typo demolished my argument. So breast check and other cancer screenings are all for the craic? What's your authority on that?

    Seriously?

    Jesus.

    To quote Doctor Ronan last week "Google it" or start a separate thread.


  • #2700
    JP Liz V1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 91,194 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1


    200 cases that's high
    https://forumofgames.com/




  • Advertisement
  • #2701
    LiquidZeb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭LiquidZeb


    Boggles wrote: »
    Seriously?

    Jesus.

    To quote Doctor Ronan last week "Google it" or start a separate thread.

    Yes muinteoir, tá bron orm a muinteoir. Who do you think you are lad, seriously? Acting the dick on an internet forum doesn't make you an intellectual. It's sad really.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement