Covid 19 Part XXIII-33,444 in ROI(1,792 deaths) 9,541 in NI(577 deaths)(22/09)Read OP

18-09-2020 07:31PM

Funsterdelux wrote: »

Mary o Commando

saint knickerless

caveat emptor · 18-09-2020 07:33PM

Van the man has joined the resistance.

https://twitter.com/stuartdredge/status/1306883047527243777?s=21

Roger_007 · 18-09-2020 07:33PM

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Closing indoor dining is a massively disproportionate response which will cause untold economic losses for minimal gain.

There will a big demand for thermal underwear and heavy overcoats which will be needed for the outdoor dining in October.
I sense a business opportunity.
I assume that the people of Dublin are still well stocked in toilet rolls from the previous lockdown?

Boggles · 18-09-2020 07:36PM

hetuzozaho wrote: »

I think Dublin is down to one other household.

In the garden or house.

The reason behind is so they don't come into the house start using facilities, touching things and breathing out virus indoors.

15 people can meet outside to "train".

3 kids can play in the green out the front as long as they fúck off back to their own house if they need a drink or the jacks.

hetuzozaho · 18-09-2020 07:39PM

Boggles wrote: »

In the garden or house.

The reason behind is so they don't come into the house start using facilities, touching things and breathing out virus indoors.

15 people can meet outside to "train".

3 kids can play in the green out the front as long as they fúck off back to their own house if they need a drink or the jacks.

Ah I presumed they were young kids in the garden for some reason. Apologies!

Roger_007 · 18-09-2020 07:39PM

Boggles wrote: »

In the garden or house.

The reason behind is so they don't come into the house start using facilities, touching things and breathing out virus indoors.

15 people can meet outside to "train".

3 kids can play in the green out the front as long as they fúck off back to their own house if they need a drink or the jacks.

.....or f**k off back to school where they can play with 100 other kids?

Klopp · 18-09-2020 07:40PM

All these deaths reported, are these actually 100% confirmed as deaths caused by Covid 19 or is it they tested positive for a symptom?

Boggles · 18-09-2020 07:40PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

Van the man has joined the resistance.

https://twitter.com/stuartdredge/status/1306883047527243777?s=21

You mean 75 year old millionaire Van, who will be safe in his gated mansion getting all his requirements delivered by other people actually taking the risks and getting sick?

Get fúcked Van!

Ficheall · 18-09-2020 07:40PM

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Todays Dublin cases are lower than yesterdays! There has been a small increase in cases in Dublin since last week, perhaps 10% week on week.

A 10% increase is not exponential growth.

Exponential growth is 100% increase, followed by 200%, 400%, 800%...

A 10% increase week on week is exponential...

The formula for exponential growth is x_t=x_0(1+r)^t.
A 10% week-on-week increase is of the form x_t=x_0(1+0.1)^t, where t is the number of weeks.

So, if x_0 (the number you start off with) were 1000, r=0.1 (your 10% increase ), then x_t for various t would be
x_0: 1000
x_1: 1100
x_2: 1210
x_3: 1331
x_4: 1464.1
x_5: 1610.51

In your example, your r (rate of increase) is apparently changing each week, going from 100% to 200% to 400%, ie.
x_0: 1000
x_1: 2000 (a 100% increase)

x_2: 6000 (a 200% increase)

x_3: 30000 (a 400% increase)

x_4: 270000 (an 800% increase)

This is definitely faster than 10% week on week, but it does not fit an exponential growth model.

Or, if you meant there would be a 100% increase on the zeroth week, followed by a 200% increase on the zeroth week, followed by a 400% increase on the zeroth week (which would be an odd way to go about things, but who knows...), you would have
x_0: 1000
x_1: 2000 (a 100% increase on the zeroth week)

x_2: 3000 (a 200% increase on the zeroth week)

x_3: 5000 (a 400% increase on the zeroth week)

x_4: 9000 (a 800% increase on the zeroth week)

...

and this would be overtaken by the 10% compounded growth some time around week 39.

What I presume you were thinking of was a 100% week on week increase (so r=1),

which would give

x_0: 1000
x_1: 2000 (a 100% increase)
x_2: 4000 (a 100% increase)
x_3: 8000 (a 100% increase)
x_4: 16000 (a 100% increase).

This is exponential growth, yes. So is a 10% increase week on week, albeit slower.

It might be useful to think of compound interest, and to be less quick to call others clueless.

Boggles · 18-09-2020 07:42PM

Roger_007 wrote: »

.....or f**k off back to school where they can play with 100 other kids?

They are podded in schools, so no.

But I take your point, we deal with the ridiculousness of the schools next, it just dawned on people that indoor pubs could be places that the virus spreads.

Too much for today.

stockshares · 18-09-2020 07:44PM

I thought exponential growth is like below

x_0: 1000
x_1: 2000
x_2: 4000
x_4: 16000

Spanish Eyes · 18-09-2020 07:44PM

This is life going forward.

Keep distance, stay apart, no joy or fun.

So that will be in houses now and then. Covid city there, but who seems to care anymore?

yourdeadwright · 18-09-2020 07:46PM

Asked about road blocks,
Danced around it, quite clear there will be none but they won't say

GooglePlus · 18-09-2020 07:48PM

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Asked about road blocks,
Danced around it, quite clear there will be none but they won't say

Sure is it even enforceable by law?

prunudo · 18-09-2020 07:49PM

70 odd pages since i was on this morning, what I miss :pac: its actually nice to be away from the radio and all the doom and gloom.

Joking aside, I feel for all the staff and businesses who are going to face the brunt of today's decision.

smellyoldboot · 18-09-2020 07:50PM

stockshares wrote: »

I thought exponential growth is like below

x_0: 1000
x_1: 2000
x_2: 4000
x_4: 16000

An exponent can be any value above 0. It's growth rate "exponential" either approaches infinity nor zero without reaching either. There is not set perfect amount that only works with it.

tom1ie · 18-09-2020 07:50PM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

gonna be interesting to see our economically conservative government swallow its pride, and take on a sh1te load of debt, to sort this one out

Is this sh1te load of debt going to pay for any infrastructure?
Icu beds, nurses and docs to staff them etc?
I doubt it.

18-09-2020 07:51PM

bilston wrote: »

Pretty grim news from the UK SAGE committee.

Well good news and bad news...

Almost everyone who gets the virus develops antibodies and immunity.

The bad news is that this appears to begin to wane after 2-3 months.

I don't know what that means for a vaccine, but at the very least it suggests to me as a layman that we will all be getting an injection at least once a year when a vaccine becomes available.

This has been discussed before. It's perfectly normal for antibodies to wane over time. There's a lot more to immunity than just antibodies so it doesn't mean we'll suddenly seeing a wave of reinfections.

As for a vaccine it's too early to tell but they should provide longer lasting protection.

Also no disrespect intended but people need to stop basing their knowledge of immunity on what they read in the headlines. It's not an accurate interpretation of what we know.

BobbyMalone · 18-09-2020 07:52PM

GooglePlus wrote: »

Sure is it even enforceable by law?

It may not be, but there were roadblocks back in March (or whenever it was at the beginning of all this).

CiarraiManc · 18-09-2020 07:54PM

Hardyn wrote: »

This has been discussed before. It's perfectly normal for antibodies to wane over time. There's a lot more to immunity than just antibodies so it doesn't mean we'll suddenly seeing a wave of reinfections.

As for a vaccine it's too early to tell but they should provide longer lasting protection.

Also no disrespect intended but people need to stop basing their knowledge of immunity on what they read in the headlines. It's not an accurate interpretation of what we know.

What about the dozens of reported reinfections? They're becoming more and more frequent

Deeper Blue · 18-09-2020 07:55PM

CiarraiManc wrote: »

What about the dozens of reported reinfections? They're becoming more and more frequent

Do you have a link for these "dozens" of reinfections please?

stockshares · 18-09-2020 07:56PM

wrote: »

An exponent can be any value above 0. It's growth rate "exponential" either approaches infinity nor zero without reaching either. There is not set perfect amount that only works with it.

So the increments can vary but still be considered exponential?

If R reduces for any time interval is it no longer considered exponential growth?

Apologies I'm no mathematician. I think I'm getting confused with to the power of (^).

Goldengirl · 18-09-2020 07:56PM

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Do you agree the time frame is important here?

If cases doubled in a year, would you describe that as exponential? Technically it is, but to describe it as such as simple scaremongering. You would describe it as a slow growth in numbers.

So a politician who throws out the world exponential growth as I've seen a few do lately is just scaremongering.

Yes I would agree that time frame is important.
I think the increase we have seen over the last 2 weeks is very important.

I also think that cases doubling or trebling every week or fortnight is not controlled, and would be exponential.
Finally I really don't think you understand what is exponential .

Roger_007 · 18-09-2020 07:58PM

BobbyMalone wrote: »

It may not be, but there were roadblocks back in March (or whenever it was at the beginning of all this).

I is absolutely not enforceable. There are a myriad of excuses you can give for being on the road. I guarantee that not one case will end up in court or with an on-the-spot fine.

Roger_007 · 18-09-2020 07:59PM

CiarraiManc wrote: »

What about the dozens of reported reinfections? They're becoming more and more frequent

Evidence, please!

Plumbthedepths · 18-09-2020 08:02PM

CiarraiManc wrote: »

What about the dozens of reported reinfections? They're becoming more and more frequent

Dozens? There's a lad here who posts the most obsure and negative stuff he can find here some of it even fake, alas it seems even he has been unable to find dozens a few but dozens nah, not that I doubt he's searched fervently.

18-09-2020 08:02PM

CiarraiManc wrote: »

What about the dozens of reported reinfections? They're becoming more and more frequent

Pretty sure there's only been a few confirmed so far and most were mild cases. Even so with over 30 million cases confirmed so far a few dozen cases of reinfection is hardly signs of a major trend.

GooglePlus · 18-09-2020 08:05PM

BobbyMalone wrote: »

It may not be, but there were roadblocks back in March (or whenever it was at the beginning of all this).

Just for show. Anyone who drives up can tell them that they plan on going outside of Dublin for a feed of pints and they can do nothing about it. There'll be flocks of people heading out of Dublin this weekend and next, spreading the problem.

smellyoldboot · 18-09-2020 08:06PM

stockshares wrote: »

So the increments can vary but still he considered exponential?

If R reduces for antvly time interval is it no longer considered exponential growth?

Apologies I'm no mathematician. I think I'm getting confused with to the power of (^).

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/science/life-and-physics/2014/jul/20/the-meaning-of-exponential

This may help. It's hard to explain without "some" jargon. And the mechanics of the R number calculation I've never cared to look into, but I believe any R number below 1 represents exponential decline and above 1 equals growth. So at its most simple, the lower the better.

igCorcaigh · 18-09-2020 08:09PM

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Do you call doubling every 8 weeks exponential? Of course it isn't.

Doubling over any time period is exponential growth. Or trebling, quadrupling etc.

The 2,3,4 or whatever is the exponent (is that right? I'm not sure).

When that number is 1, then growth is linear.

Less than 1, it's exponential decay (the virus fizzles out).

Covid 19 Part XXIII-33,444 in ROI(1,792 deaths) 9,541 in NI(577 deaths)(22/09)Read OP

Comments