nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Where are the deaths coming from?

[Deleted User]

The official figure we are using for the deaths is currently 1802. According to the HPSC report on 02/09, only 447 cases were admitted to ICU. It is very strange that the number admitted to ICU is only a small fraction of the deaths.

I don't believe the figures are available, but I do believe that a very good percentage of ICU cases recover? Obviously the number that died in ICU is a lot lower than 447. Does anybody have these stats?

So it seems like we have about 1500 - 1600 deaths or so that never went to ICU. So where are these cases coming from?

In the over 65 category, there are 164 that went to ICU and 1658 deaths.
Is it a case that most of these people were just too sick to go to ICU? For example, a lot of the deaths would have been already suffering from terminal cancer, late stages of COPD, heart disease, Diabetes etc.

We also test every single person that dies for Covid. The test itself is quite sensitive. Is it a case that already dead people are testing positive and thus included in the figures?

Of course I know that the government/CMO have admitted to overstating the deaths and including possible/probable in the figures.

Anybody any thoughts or input? Surely anybody with even a remote chance of survival goes to ICU when there is capacity available? And we've always had capacity.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Russman

OMM 0000 wrote: »

They did it because they haven't thought it through, they're copying everyone else, and they don't want to be seen as having made a mistake (look at how Sweden is shat on for doing something different).

Isolating the at risk adults is not that difficult. Just arrange food deliveries, etc.

And if they don't want to isolate, that should be their decision, but they should understand they are at risk.

Surely this is a lot smarter than isolating people who have zero chance of dying.

Haven't thought it through and just copying everyone else just doesn't stack up - could it be that the reason almost every country did what they did was that its the right thing to do ?

Sweden is shat on because they made a complete balls of it and they know it.

I'm not having a go, but "just arrange food deliveries" ? Seriously ?

The risk isn't zero of dying if you're younger, granted its very very low and probably a risk lots would accept, but its not as simple as living or dying. How many of the survivors wouldn't have survived if they didn't have hospital treatment ? If the hospitals were overrun and no beds were available would as many younger people, who would "usually" survive, not ? Who knows, and governments, rightly IMO, won't take that risk easily.
That's before anyone considers the long term effects of COVID.

MOH

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

No, because they havent reached the end of their natural lives like most Covid victims.

You cannot suggest a nursing home death, or any deaths around the age of 84 could be compared to a 15 year old dying.

WTF? Of course I can. People are people, a death is a death.
Somebody in their 80s isn't magically worth less because of their age.

See if your viewpoint changes when you're 83.

OMM 0000

spurious wrote: »

Isolation, regardless of food deliveries has a very detrimental effect on the mental health of many older people.

You can be damn sure if it was under 30s dying of something, the older brigade would do all in their power to protect them.

So let's isolate everyone and let everyone's mental health be affected...? I'm not sure that makes sense.

As I said earlier, the solution is people can isolate if they want, with a clear understanding of who is at risk so intelligent decisions can be made. And there should be support to make isolation as painless as possible.

Surely that is a significantly smarter strategy than ruining everything for everyone?

OMM 0000

Russman wrote: »

The risk isn't zero of dying if you're younger, granted its very very low and probably a risk lots would accept, but its not as simple as living or dying.

Nothing is zero risk.

Driving in your car has a real risk of death. So does showering.

This weird mentality where people want to try to reduce the risk to zero is madness.

People don't understand risk. If they did, they would understand lockdowns are higher risk than targeted isolation.

billybonkers

These people still died prematurely of Covid 19. Is that not something to be concerned about? I doubt they wanted to die...

Why wouldn't we do all we can to stop people from dying prematurely?

MrStuffins

One of the things I find weird about this whole thing is, when the Covid pandemic first hit it was widely reported:

"This virus is of particular concern to older people and those with underlying conditions. To them, it can be fatal".

Now we look at the deaths and that's exactly what we see. People with underlying conditions and older people dying!

So why are some elements acting like this is some sort of scandal?

OMM 0000

OSI wrote: »

I didn't realise you could catch HIV from being in the same room, shop, bus, train etc as an active asymptomatic carrier.

If you are a healthy adult of working age and you get COVID your risk of death is almost zero.

Why are you and others trying to pretend otherwise?

This idea of thinking everyone is at risk of death is wrong. Just like most people aren't at risk of getting HIV.

[Deleted User]

It's a clinically decision whether to escalate from ward level to ICU but yes if you have a DNAR attached, you most likely aren't a candidate to get escalated to ICU.

FintanMcluskey

billybonkers wrote: »

These people still died prematurely of Covid 19. Is that not something to be concerned about? I doubt they wanted to die...

Why wouldn't we do all we can to stop people from dying prematurely?

Because its only Covid we do this for.

The greatest 1st world Illness known to man.

10 times the global Covid death toll starved to death this year, we dont need a vaccine to cure starvation.

OMM 0000

MrStuffins wrote: »

One of the things I find weird about this whole thing is, when the Covid pandemic first hit it was widely reported:

"This virus is of particular concern to older people and those with underlying conditions. To them, it can be fatal".

Now we look at the deaths and that's exactly what we see. People with underlying conditions and older people dying!

So why are some elements acting like this is some sort of scandal?

Because the reaction from the government hasn't been to protect older people and those with underlying conditions. It has been to protect everyone, even if that means they will lose their income, get depression, face poverty, start drinking heavily, etc.

The Gardai are at risk of being stabbed so they wear special clothes to protect them from that. Why not force everyone to wear those clothes too? We don't do that because they're not at risk...

billybonkers

OMM 0000 wrote: »

If you are a healthy adult of working age and you get COVID your risk of death is almost zero.

Why are you and others trying to pretend otherwise?

This idea of thinking everyone is at risk of death is wrong. Just like most people aren't at risk of getting HIV.

But there is a risk of death if you get it. It affects many people differently.

We're meant to be protecting everybody in this situation with a particular focus on the elderly and vulnerable. I certainly don't want to get it or any of my family to get it.

[Deleted User]

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

No, because they havent reached the end of their natural lives like most Covid victims.

You cannot suggest a nursing home death, or any deaths around the age of 84 could be compared to a 15 year old dying.

What we need to be looking at is QALY (quality adjusted life years). For you to suggest that just because somebody is in a nursing home/ over some arbitrary age is just a form of ageism.

https://academic.oup.com/heapol/article/21/5/402/578296

Russman

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Nothing is zero risk.

Driving in your car has a real risk of death. So does showering.

This weird mentality where people want to try to reduce the risk to zero is madness.

People don't understand risk. If they did, they would understand lockdowns are higher risk than targeted isolation.

Nobody wants to get risk to zero, if there was a way of doing that the world would do it and get rid of COVID.

Targeted isolation is just not logistically possible, and certainly questionable morally IMO.
Imagine telling someone, say, your mother, "......well you're turning 60 tomorrow so that's it, no visitors or going to the shops for you. If you venture out, well, you know the risks, don't come calling me when you're wheezing on the floor.....its a dangerous world out there"

Mongfinder General

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Are they releasing details of the ages of those who die?

I saw them for a few countries and the average age of people who die of covid is higher than the average age of people who die of everything else. For example, following the same logic as other countries, if the average age of men dying in Ireland is 78, then I would expect to see the average age of men dying of covid to be 82 or so. In other words, people live longer than average if they die of covid....

I'm not into conspiracy theories but the fact it's so hard to find this information makes me feel there is some dishonesty going on with the data. If it turns out almost no one under 50 dies of this disease, then serious questions need to be asked as to why everyone was forced to stay at home when it should have only been the old and sick.

Dishonesty? You would need to know exactly what you're manipulating in order to extrapolate figures that misrepresent the truth.

There is no detail in the statistics because that would mean HSE providing more information than they are required to do and also taking responsibility for it. Not a chance. These lads are far too busy organising zoom calls about having zoom calls.

Russman

OMM 0000 wrote: »

If you are a healthy adult of working age and you get COVID your risk of death is almost zero.

Why are you and others trying to pretend otherwise?

This idea of thinking everyone is at risk of death is wrong. Just like most people aren't at risk of getting HIV.

So what ? Nobody has suggested otherwise. But what about long term chronic conditions as a result of COVID ? or what about asymptomatic transmission ?
If we let the virus run wild, our ICUs will be overrun in short order, whether it be with COVID patients or non COVID patients. What do you do then about the heart attack patient who needs ICU and can't get a bed ? or the young guy recovering from surgery and needs a few days in ICU ?

OMM 0000

billybonkers wrote: »

But there is a risk of death if you get it. It affects many people differently.

We're meant to be protecting everybody in this situation with a particular focus on the elderly and vulnerable. I certainly don't want to get it or any of my family to get it.

There's a risk of death when you drive your car.

Nothing is zero risk.

The flu kills people every year but we don't isolate for that.

You need to weigh up the consequences of the lockdowns with the risk of death for the average person (almost zero) to see if it makes sense.

OMM 0000

Russman wrote: »

So what ? Nobody has suggested otherwise. But what about long term chronic conditions as a result of COVID ? or what about asymptomatic transmission ?
If we let the virus run wild, our ICUs will be overrun in short order, whether it be with COVID patients or non COVID patients. What do you do then about the heart attack patient who needs ICU and can't get a bed ? or the young guy recovering from surgery and needs a few days in ICU ?

But we know that doesn't happen.

I live in a country which didn't do lockdowns (Japan) and everything is fine.

Sweden was even more relaxed and your fantasy didn't happen either.

MOH

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Ah yes, because I think old people should be isolated and protected, that means I think they're worthless and they should die alone.

What is wrong with you? Are you able to think at all?

And stop with the fantasy that it's children who are at risk.

Fantasy? Are you capable of basic reading comprehension? Or just deliberately misunderstanding anything you don't like?

I posited that *if* it were children who were most at risk, some people's attitudes would be a lot different than their general disregard for older people.

How noble and caring of you to suggest isolating older people long term for their own protection (and let's be clear, it's not at all primarily for your own convenience). Regardless of the impact of long term isolation on their mental and physical health. Or their inability to access any form of community support. Presumably this isolation will be until when (if ever) a vaccine is found, or they conveniently die in their isolation and save you having to worry about their wellbeing any more.

Do you have a newsletter or YouTube channel or something I could subscribe to for more of your wonderful social caring initiatives?

Russman

OMM 0000 wrote: »

There's a risk of death when you drive your car.

Nothing is zero risk.

The flu kills people every year but we don't isolate for that.

You need to weigh up the consequences of the lockdowns with the risk of death for the average person (almost zero) to see if it makes sense.

Come on, you know full well that COVID is way more virulent and lethal compared to flu.

Just be honest enough to say the lockdowns are inconvenient for you and you're sick of them. I'd agree with that too, we're all completely sick of it, but I don't see an easy way out if we're to even pretend we're a society rather than just a collection of individuals.

OMM 0000

MOH wrote: »

Fantasy? Are you capable of basic reading comprehension? Or just deliberately misunderstanding anything you don't like?

I posited that *if* it were children who were most at risk, some people's attitudes would be a lot different than their general disregard for older people.

How noble and caring of you to suggest isolating older people long term for their own protection (and let's be clear, it's not at all primarily for your own convenience). Regardless of the impact of long term isolation on their mental and physical health. Or their inability to access any form of community support. Presumably this isolation will be until when (if ever) a vaccine is found, or they conveniently die in their isolation and save you having to worry about their wellbeing any more.

Do you have a newsletter or YouTube channel or something I could subscribe to for more of your wonderful social caring initiatives?

I live in Japan where there was no lockdown, everyone is continuing life as normal, and everything is fine.

We all wear masks everywhere.

I sense the issue here is you don't fully understand this topic and you're only listening to what the Irish government tells you. You shouldn't have such aggressive opinions when you are lacking a lot of knowledge.

OMM 0000

Russman wrote: »

Come on, you know full well that COVID is way more virulent and lethal compared to flu.

Just be honest enough to say the lockdowns are inconvenient for you and you're sick of them. I'd agree with that too, we're all completely sick of it, but I don't see an easy way out if we're to even pretend we're a society rather than just a collection of individuals.

I've never had to live in a lockdown. I live in Japan.

My opinion is based on the fact that lockdowns have been proven to be unnecessary and there's no reason to destroy your economy.

You need to read up on what other countries have done. Ireland have failed.

Russman

OMM 0000 wrote: »

But we know that doesn't happen.

I live in a country which didn't do lockdowns (Japan) and everything is fine.

Sweden was even more relaxed and your fantasy didn't happen either.

And are Irish behaviour patterns similar in any way to Japan and Sweden ?

IIRC Sweden has way more ICU capacity than us. We also have to factor that in to our decisions. If we had 2000 ICU beds it might very well be ok to open everything up, but we don't and it isn't.

JDD

I was looking into this before myself. It appears that a lot of the deaths were in nursing homes, or at home, as a result of those elderly patients being unable to survive the invasive treatment they would have got if they were hospitalised or in the ICU. That makes perfect sense to me.

It would be nice to know how many people died from the symptoms brought on by the covid infection, and how many died of other causes but tested positive for covid (either in the hospital or posthumously). I can't hazard a guess of how many deaths that would reduce overall figure to.

This whole "but they would have died in a couple of years anyway" is distasteful at best, and sociopathic at worst. We're all going to die.

I think everyone agrees that it is more tragic for a young person to die than a person of what we might call a "ripe old age". If this pandemic was causing deaths in under 20s, rather than over 80's, we'd be on full lockdown still and there wouldn't be a word of complaint from anyone. But to be openly measuring the value of a year of someone else's life, no matter how old they are, in terms of whether a cafe owner can continue their business is really cold. What value would you put on a year of your own life?

The issue isn't really preventing deaths though. Not really. The issue is preventing hospitalisations and ICU admissions. Deaths are an awful headline, but prevention of them is not the point of lockdowns. The point is actually to protect you or me if we have a car accident or a stroke, are admitted to hospital, and die because the hospital are overwhelmed and there isn't enough staff to treat you, or the staff are so exhausted they negligently treat you. it's overwhelming hospitals we are preventing, not deaths.

Russman

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Ireland have failed.

By what metric exactly ?

MrStuffins

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Because the reaction from the government hasn't been to protect older people and those with underlying conditions. It has been to protect everyone........

Nope. Incorrect! their reaction has been to stop the spread of the virus so those who are vulnerable don't die.

OMM 0000

Russman wrote: »

By what metric exactly ?

Japan. No lockdowns. People still have their jobs. Economy doing ok. Population is 25 times higher than Ireland. Fewer covid deaths.

There has been common sense isolating (voluntary) and mask use. That's it.

You can use Hong Kong as an example too. Same strategy. Around 100 deaths.

We know lockdowns aren't necessary.

[Deleted User]

OMM 0000 wrote: »

I've never had to live in a lockdown. I live in Japan.

My opinion is based on the fact that lockdowns have been proven to be unnecessary and there's no reason to destroy your economy.

You need to read up on what other countries have done. Ireland have failed.

We're doing much the same as most EU countries now surely?

OMM 0000

Augeo wrote: »

We're doing much the same as most EU countries now surely?

Yes but that doesn't mean it's a good strategy.

Instead of copying other people's mistakes we should be copying other people's successes.

Copy the Japan and Hong Kong model. Don't destroy your economy and even fewer people will die.

But instead, dumb Ireland is copying the EU and the US and surprise surprise these are some of the worst places affected.

da_miser

OMM 0000 wrote: »

Japan. No lockdowns. People still have their jobs. Economy doing ok. Population is 25 times higher than Ireland. Fewer covid deaths.

There has been common sense isolating (voluntary) and mask use. That's it.

You can use Hong Kong as an example too. Same strategy. Around 100 deaths.

We know lockdowns aren't necessary.

What have the people in these Two places got in common?
They have very few overweight/obese people.
In Ireland we have more than our fair share of overweight/obese people, but in these PC times your not allowed to point out this fact as the reason for a higher death toll.
No fat shaming allowed, its better to let them die than heaven forbid they take offence at being told to loose weight.

[Deleted User]

OMM 0000 wrote: »

If you are a healthy adult of working age and you get COVID your risk of death is almost zero.

Why are you and others trying to pretend otherwise?

This idea of thinking everyone is at risk of death is wrong. Just like most people aren't at risk of getting HIV.

You cannot possibly quantify that. Let's not forget the long term effects of having the virus, so far some people who were otherwise young and healthy that are suffering from "long covid" have experienced some of the following;

Blood clots,
COPD,
Chronic Fatigue,
Hair loss,
Heart damage and heartbeat irregularities,
Lung, kidney and brain damage.

These are just short to medium term effects that are being observed. We don't have a looking glass into the future to understand what other effects may come to the fore.

So yes, the chances of death as a result of covid in healthy adults is low, in the short term. However, the chances of long term illnesses or death from them appears to be much higher and could cause huge strains on healthcare systems, the economy and ability of the workforce further down the line.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

But we know that doesn't happen.

I live in a country which didn't do lockdowns (Japan) and everything is fine.

Sweden was even more relaxed and your fantasy didn't happen either.

In Japan measures that needed to be emphasised here are more culturally normal, especially wearing of face masks which helps reduce spread. Having lived in Japan myself, I noticed that hand-shaking, hugging etc were much less prevalent. There is a much greater social cohesion and as a society they are capable of moving in the direction of goals without having to enforce these ideas.

The government requested that people reduced contact with others, that pubs and restaurants suspended their businesses and to follow social distancing guidelines and to adopt risk aversion.

I cannot for a minute believe that the Japanese people went about their business as normal and ignored these requests. The State of Emergency has been lifted but I suspect day-to-day the majority of people in Japan are still exercising these principles, because culturally, I'd expect them to.

Comparing a conformative society like Japan to most western cultures, especially Ireland doesn't work.