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

Goldengirl wrote: »

You do know that is not real don't you ?
It is the Spanish version of Waterford Whispers

Can you show me where you found this out?

Non solum non ambulabit wrote: »

I think you are wrong based on this

I think it’s wrong too. Based on this explanation using 80% sensitivity and 99.9% specificity as an example and an actual positivity rate of 0.1%

in this scenario, 10,000 random people go for a Covid-19 test. With the infection level at 0.1 per cent, just ten people will have Sars-CoV-2 and 9,990 will not. Of the ten who turn up with an infection, 80 per cent will test positive, meaning eight people will be correctly identified while two walk away with a false negative.

And of the 9,990 not infected, all but ten will be correctly diagnosed as negative: hence the success rate of 99.9 per cent (the specificity). But ten will be told they have Covid-19, when in fact they don’t. That leaves us with 18 positive tests: eight from people who genuinely had the virus and ten who did not. So only eight out of 18 (44 per cent) of the infections are real.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-many-covid-diagnoses-are-false-positives-

Getting close to the Witching Hour, all set off by David Quinn.

The irony.

caveat emptor wrote: »

False negatives higher therefore indicating more people get a negative result when they infect have the virus (false negative)
vs those who receive a positive result and do not have the virus (false positive)

Net result undercounting of people who have the virus.

No - there are far fewer real positives than real negatives, so even if the false negative rate is higher, they won't outnumber the false positives.

s1ippy wrote: »

I'm not waiting all day, just occasionally I'll think "what time is it? Oh its nearly half five, the cases are soon" but if I found it out earlier I could go "oh its nearly half five, glad I already know there's thirty cases today"

Hahaha

30 CASES, God those were the days!!!

Non solum non ambulabit wrote:

I think you are wrong based on this

ACitizenErased wrote:

I think it’s wrong too. Based on this explanation using 80% sensitivity and 99.9% specificity as an example and an actual positivity rate of 0.1%

Ok so you guys think a large proportion of our cases are false even though the assays and methods havent changed and are detecting the same virus, the same way it has from the start with over a 99% rate of detecting the virus when it is present.

bpb101 wrote: »

One of you iphone and the other is android?
Im iPhone and havent got the covid one, but have for other things

Maybe they were annoying people, but id would have liken to keep them.

Both iPhone. Only difference is I’m on iOS 14, could be that?

Although I’m getting other RTÉ notifications so not sure. Depending on their vendor, they pay for notifications sent, so maybe they’re sending them to a subset now. Not sure.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's the second wave though. Whole economies and societies are being closed down based on these test results. The decision to close societies is based on the assumption that those cases are infectious and a real threat to others.

So you did mean to post that tweet.

Martina1991 wrote: »

Ok so you guys think a large proportion of our cases are false even though the assays and methods havent changed and are detecting the same virus, the same way it has from the start with over a 99% rate of detecting the virus when it is present.

Assuming that for every 125 tests, you will have 1 false positive (as some are saying)
It means New Zealand, Australia, Thailand, Lativa, Lithuania, Taiwan, Malayasia & Thailand, all of their positive cases are in fact false positives.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/government-will-spend-9bn-on-covid-19-fight-next-year-39554685.html

"The Government will spend €9bn next year fighting Covid-19, Public Expenditure Minister Michael McGrath has revealed." my god.

Now maybe stupid old douglashyde has got the maths wrong, but: we're seeing virtually no deaths / slight increases in hospital admissions and most importantly an advanced mean age of death (83) and 98% comorbidity with COVID 19. We have livelihoods massively impacted, other health conditions neglected... life taken out of life.

Then, we as a country are committing 9BN to combat this virus.

I remember sitting with my wife in St Vincents (about 2016) with what was thought was an mild aneurism or tumor on the brain for a scan for 48 hours - turns out it was an atypical migraine.... Every year we go through the same-old winter of under funded health care with little money/effort to fix the problem..... We need serious capital investment across this country in general.

The level of bureaucracy, status quo and lack of critical thinking from what is suppose to be the 'the middle' parties is amazing.

Maybe the masses will need to feel it first hand before they question the obvious.... I'm not worried about about CV19, I'm worried about what comes next because of the induced lunacy.

caveat emptor wrote: »

I doubt this will make any difference to people with entrenched opinions.

You said false negatives would outweigh false positives because of the differing rates. This would be true if there were similar numbers of both positives and negatives in the population, but there aren't.
You also have to take into account the number of positives and negatives that actually exist.

It's like if I drop a beach ball off a roof in Leitrim vs. dropping a table tennis ball off a roof in central London. Sure, the beach ball would be more likely to catch someone a smack if there were the same number of pedestrians wandering about, but because there are a gazillion pedestrians for the table tennis ball to hit, it's more likely to hit someone.