Covid 19 Part XXIV-37,063 ROI (1,801 deaths) 12,886 NI (582 deaths) (02/10) Read OP

mloc123 · 28-09-2020 12:21PM

The_Brood wrote: »

15 to 24-year-olds have the HIGHEST number of new cases. I truly wonder where teenagers could be going to be getting so infected, it can't be large indoor all-day socialisation hubs, can it be?

Most children finish school at 17? So... are all the cases in the 15-24 group under 18 or could it be that 18-24 years olds are actually driving the spike?

Micky 32 · 28-09-2020 12:25PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

City in Brazil thought to have herd immunity doesn't apparently.

https://twitter.com/andrewflood/status/1310311581708845059?s=20

Having said that it’s great to see Brazil’s cases and deaths dropping significantly since the end of July.

28-09-2020 12:27PM

DraftDodger wrote: »

There is a keep the school open at all costs narrative out there at present. Yes cases where rising slightly before the schools opened but it's obvious cases accelerated as soon as the kids went back full time.

Iv'e no problem with this per say as i believe it's of the upmost importance to keep the schools functioning for a load of various reasons but i do have a problem with people who are in denial about it. With the winter incoming and the likelihood of windows and doors closing and people socialising indoors more frequently in general we are only headed in one direction in terms case numbers and the inevitable deaths that will follow.

The cases accelerated in the first two weeks of september, and has since slowed. The first two weeks of september were too early for it to have been a school effect, other than increased rates of testing. To pass from child to classmates and home to families would take almost two weeks in itself. The case increase came too early to be the culprit. If you look closely at the data you will see a bubble in travel cases in the second half of August though. This coupled with staycations resulting in huge mixing around the country is the more plausible explanation. Remember the trend we see today is likely the result of what was happening 2 -3 weeks ago due to incubation

podgeandrodge · 28-09-2020 12:29PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Well my opinion on things is that if you are fully read up on everything about this virus then you know you are putting your kids at risk by sending them to school.
We all know that most kids are asymptomatic so you are taking a calculated risk that your kids will be asymptomatic.
Where we differ is that I'm not willing to take the chance that mine will be asymptomatic.
I would never be able to forgive myself if one of them ending up not being able to handle this virus as I know it's a possibility.
Money is not important to me. I'm probably in a better position financially than a lot of people because I've never taken on big debt in my life. I worked my way up the property ladder always maintaining a small mortgage. I'm not a person that wants everything now. I have targets but I'm willing to wait as long as it takes and save money to get there.
Anyways I'm not earning much at the moment because my family's health is paramount.

I think on this subject that every parent has to make their own minds up on their take on the risks - it's their kids and their responsibility. So on that basis I agree that you should be able to make your decisions on this without being slagged off by others, in the same way as they can send their kids to school without being slagged off by anyone either. Parental judgement has to be left up to parents imo.

On risk though, and clarifying that I haven't any view on whether it's risky or not, there does seem to be a reluctance by authorities to assign any potential risk at all to schools opening - and by this I mean that they've assigned risk to practically every type of social interaction that there is out there. But not schools. This morning in the Indo, a doctor suggested that cases in kids were being caused by parents going from table to table at communion parties. But how could he know it wasn't at their schools?

DebDynamite · 28-09-2020 12:29PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not everyone attends bars and nightclubs when they are travelling. I would suggest that most people do not. My partner and I have done plenty of travelling in the last 3 months or so, and has been clear that most people travelling are couples - not groups heading for a party. We keep ourselves to ourselves and enjoy the quietness of the places that we have gone. The "tourist spots" are remarkably quiet (8 people on the Spanish Steps in Rome on a Saturday evening when I was there). And any eating is outside. Plus Spain and Italy and most of the rest of Europe have far better mask etiquette than Ireland

So travelling in itself is certainly not risky. Its the partying that a certain cohort do that is the issue - the leaving cert groups heading off, for example. And those people are going to having house parties if they didn't travel. Much the same risk, given the current COVID numbers in Ireland v. elsewhere in Europe

Yes, I do completely agree with you. Unfortunately with our advisory travel advice, there is absolutely no incentive whatsoever for anyone to isolate/restrict their movements upon return, no matter what holiday they are coming back from. There’s zero testing at airports to even try to catch a small percentage of cases.

TonyMaloney · 28-09-2020 12:33PM

It's a pain in the hole how they slice up the published data. Am I mad to suspect that they cut it this way to make school's impact less visible?

podgeandrodge · 28-09-2020 12:33PM

DebDynamite wrote: »

Yes, I do completely agree with you. Unfortunately with our advisory travel advice, there is absolutely no incentive whatsoever for anyone to isolate/restrict their movements upon return, no matter what holiday they are coming back from. There’s zero testing at airports to even try to catch a small percentage of cases.

I'd be restricting youngsters from travel :P
Let elders travel as they can be trusted! :pac:

Wonder how restrictions would impact cases if done this way? All under 25's (sorry ACE!) stay at home order!

Funsterdelux · 28-09-2020 12:38PM

TonyMaloney wrote: »

It's a pain in the hole how they slice up the published data. Am I mad to suspect that they cut it this way to make school's impact less visible?

Great choice of colours not!

Funsterdelux · 28-09-2020 12:39PM

podgeandrodge wrote: »

I'd be restricting youngsters from travel :P
Let elders travel as they can be trusted! :pac:

Wonder how restrictions would impact cases if done this way? All under 25's (sorry ACE!) stay at home order!

They do havd free travel passes!

caveat emptor · 28-09-2020 12:41PM

TonyMaloney wrote: »

It's a pain in the hole how they slice up the published data. Am I mad to suspect that they cut it this way to make school's impact less visible?

100%. what kind of age bracket is 16-24. We must be the only country in the world to bucket data this way. Only reason is to prevent visibility for school going kids. People will say it’s the pubs if this age cohort increases.

seamus · 28-09-2020 12:46PM

TonyMaloney wrote: »

It's a pain in the hole how they slice up the published data. Am I mad to suspect that they cut it this way to make school's impact less visible?

Never assign to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

Most likely they select data, hit "create chart" and then just use whatever default colours the software inserts.

Funsterdelux · 28-09-2020 12:48PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

100%. what kind of age bracket is 16-24. We must be the only country in the world to bucket data this way. Only reason is to prevent visibility for school going kids. People will say it’s the pubs if this age cohort increases.

Its made me feel young again, Im just one age bracket away from been 15.

28-09-2020 12:53PM

TonyMaloney wrote: »

It's a pain in the hole how they slice up the published data. Am I mad to suspect that they cut it this way to make school's impact less visible?

Is only the 14 day incidence and not the rolling 14 day incidence therefore is a useless chart. Same chart with the rolling 14 day would be very useful.

28-09-2020 12:53PM

Its pretty evident from walking around town and general living what's causing the increases.

The 15-25 demographic hang around in huge groups. It's common enough to see groups of 7-12 so once one in that group gets it, it leads to a snowball effect.

Also I see a trend on Tinder with girls in that age group looking for house parties.
If you're willing to go to house parties with lads you dont know, you're going to have high contacts.

I can see a situation arising where big groups are confronted as their actions at this stage are impacting all of us at an individual level.

Instead if the Guards setting up checkpoints or closing pubs, maybe they should focus on breaking up big groups in that age range.
If they're walking down the main street of town it shouldn't be hard to split them up and start to enforce control of house parties...these parties arent exactly incognito as they're loud and messy.

28-09-2020 12:55PM

seamus wrote: »

Never assign to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

Most likely they select data, hit "create chart" and then just use whatever default colours the software inserts.

The person who used to generate the excel charts is on holidays, so the intern has been let loose with the data

28-09-2020 01:00PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

100%. what kind of age bracket is 16-24. We must be the only country in the world to bucket data this way. Only reason is to prevent visibility for school going kids. People will say it’s the pubs if this age cohort increases.

A cursory review of HSPC site reveals the age bracketing is around a lot longer than covid

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/influenza/seasonalinfluenza/surveillance/influenzasurveillancereports/previousinfluenzaseasonssurveillancereports/20152016season/File,16011,en.pdf

Never let facts get in the way of a good rant

AlmightyCushion · 28-09-2020 01:01PM

patnor1011 wrote: »

Numbers are straight from cdc website. I would say that it is true according to them and untrue according to you. It is their best current estimate. If you think it is untrue then it is them you need to pick a fight.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

You're misinterpreting my post. I was saying the part of your post I highlighted in bold wasn't true. Fauci and CDC were saying the mortality rate was below 1% back in march. If they were saying 3.4% they were talking about the case facility rate which doesn't include people who had it but were never tested. This is always going to be much higher. We've known since February that the IFR is less than 1%.

appledrop · 28-09-2020 01:03PM

Right I've analysed the following data. Now by god I had to dig around to find this they don't make it easy!

Up to 4th April 4,014 cases broken down by age as follows:

0-4- 21 cases
5-14 33 cases
15-24 255 cases
25-34 678 cases
35-44 751 cases
45-54 764 cases
55-65 584 cases
65+ 918 cases
Unknown age 10

In contrast 14 day report 13th -26th Sep nearly same number of cases for comparison 4022 cases as follows:

0-4 114 cases
5-14 325 cases
15-24 984 cases
25-34 708 cases
35-44 576 cases
45-54 552 cases
55-64 375 cases
65+ 386 cases
Unknown age 2

Now that clearly shows the spread among preschool/ school kids. April 0-14 age group only had 1.3% of cases combined, by September its 10.88% of cases. 15-24 age group jumps from 6.3% of cases to 24.5% cases.

I'm sick and tired of hearing on news about house parties, restaurants etc all being blamed when it is as clear as day from stats that child/ teenagers are biggest increase at school.

Why is nobody in media reporting on this?

zerosugarbuzz · 28-09-2020 01:04PM

New Era wrote: »

Virgin media television going full blown "prophet of doom" misery of news coverage again today. Thank God I turned that most apocolyptic of broadcasters off, as soon as it came on now.

Richard Chambers is considerably worse than George Lee with his "grave, major, massive concern" narrative.

It's such a joke the amount of negativity on that station regrading coronavirus. Yes I know its a very serious virus, but they would really really need to press the brake button, with their non-stop negativity, even lecturing us dare I say it.

Yet Virgin media tv cry wolf that they don't get a slice of the tv license cake....

They're all at it other than Ciara Kelly on Newstalk. Even the Eamon Dunphy podcast is full of fear mongering, by Eamon himself mostly but some of his guests too. He seems to forget the many years he spent falling in and out of night clubs with no regard for anyone but himself and his fun. Now he wants young people to stay in cos he is old and vulnerable. Laughable and very very selfish.

ixoy · 28-09-2020 01:07PM

appledrop wrote: »

Now that clearly shows the spread among preschool/ school kids. April 0-14 age group only had 1.3% of cases combined, by September its 10.88% of cases. 15-24 age group jumps from 6.3% of cases to 24.5% cases.

In April, you had to have multiple symptoms to get tested. Younger people are much more likely to have milder symptoms so they weren't being tested in April whereas now it's much easier to get tested (there were a lot more than 4k cases in April). We don't have a true number in most age groups to compare against April but even more so with those less at risk.

The_Brood · 28-09-2020 01:11PM

gilberto_eire wrote: »

Its pretty evident from walking around town and general living what's causing the increases.

The 15-25 demographic hang around in huge groups. It's common enough to see groups of 7-12 so once one in that group gets it, it leads to a snowball effect.

Also I see a trend on Tinder with girls in that age group looking for house parties.
If you're willing to go to house parties with lads you dont know, you're going to have high contacts.

I can see a situation arising where big groups are confronted as their actions at this stage are impacting all of us at an individual level.

Instead if the Guards setting up checkpoints or closing pubs, maybe they should focus on breaking up big groups in that age range.
If they're walking down the main street of town it shouldn't be hard to split them up and start to enforce control of house parties...these parties arent exactly incognito as they're loud and messy.

To be clear it's much more the teenagers hanging out in large groups on the streets rather than people approaching their mid 20s.

28-09-2020 01:14PM

appledrop wrote: »

Right I've analysed the following data. Now by god I had to dig around to find this they don't make it easy!

Up to 4th April 4,014 cases broken down by age as follows:

0-4- 21 cases
5-14 33 cases
15-24 255 cases
25-34 678 cases
35-44 751 cases
45-54 764 cases
55-65 584 cases
65+ 918 cases
Unknown age 10

In contrast 14 day report 13th -26th Sep nearly same number of cases for comparison 4022 cases as follows:

0-4 114 cases
5-14 325 cases
15-24 984 cases
25-34 708 cases
35-44 576 cases
45-54 552 cases
55-64 375 cases
65+ 386 cases
Unknown age 2

Now that clearly shows the spread among preschool/ school kids. April 0-14 age group only had 1.3% of cases combined, by September its 10.88% of cases. 15-24 age group jumps from 6.3% of cases to 24.5% cases.

I'm sick and tired of hearing on news about house parties, restaurants etc all being blamed when it is as clear as day from stats that child/ teenagers are biggest increase at school.

Why is nobody in media reporting on this?

Did you compare the 14 day incidence report from the 2nd of September? You know, when testing criteria was the same, but schools were not back?

caveat emptor · 28-09-2020 01:18PM

Deleted User wrote: »

A cursory review of HSPC site reveals the age bracketing is around a lot longer than covid

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/influenza/seasonalinfluenza/surveillance/influenzasurveillancereports/previousinfluenzaseasonssurveillancereports/20152016season/File,16011,en.pdf

Never let facts get in the way of a good rant

It may have been around before but we are in a pandemic. The bucketing is unhelpful for understanding schools etc. It would be easy to publish the bucketing with 15-18 or even 21.

We have this data but we can't see it. Why?

28-09-2020 01:21PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

It may have been around before but we are in a pandemic. The bucketing is unhelpful for understanding schools etc. It would be easy to publish the bucketing with 15-18 or even 21.

We have this data but we can't see it. Why?

Because the primary concern is not the data posters on Boards would like to see. 15 to 24 year old would collectively be classed as youths/young adults and from a disease point of view would be similar populations

Wolf359f · 28-09-2020 01:35PM

Doesn't appear that the 0-24 (school range) are driving cases up.
In fact, the 0-34 age range is pretty stable.

wadacrack · 28-09-2020 01:38PM

https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1310571209524875264

bodhrandude · 28-09-2020 01:38PM

Thread has become the schools thread again.

The_Brood · 28-09-2020 01:45PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Because the primary concern is not the data posters on Boards would like to see. 15 to 24 year old would collectively be classed as youths/young adults and from a disease point of view would be similar populations

....but the difference in terms of possible Covid exposure and spread potential is dramatically different between teens in school, which are virtually all teens, and people in their 20s who can be in very different situations - and in any case colleges aren't really open.

The people in this country are being made absolute fools by this government.

The_Brood · 28-09-2020 01:48PM

bodhrandude wrote: »

Thread has become the schools thread again.

As it should. Unless people have other explanations for what is driving this? Compliance in the general non-school going public is not one bit worse than at the start of the virus, as someone in the heart and center of Dublin I guarantee you its the same.

OscarMIlde · 28-09-2020 01:52PM

gilberto_eire wrote: »

Its pretty evident from walking around town and general living what's causing the increases.

The 15-25 demographic hang around in huge groups. It's common enough to see groups of 7-12 so once one in that group gets it, it leads to a snowball effect.

Also I see a trend on Tinder with girls in that age group looking for house parties.
If you're willing to go to house parties with lads you dont know, you're going to have high contacts.

I can see a situation arising where big groups are confronted as their actions at this stage are impacting all of us at an individual level.

Instead if the Guards setting up checkpoints or closing pubs, maybe they should focus on breaking up big groups in that age range.
If they're walking down the main street of town it shouldn't be hard to split them up and start to enforce control of house parties...these parties arent exactly incognito as they're loud and messy.

Yup, was supposed to be off work today, had to pop in for an hour. 5 twenty year olds sitting on the top deck of the bus (not together), every single one if them is sporting their mask under their chin. Even if they are not personally worried about getting it, they should have some concern about contributing to community spread. I'm actually astounded how selfish many of them are. These are clearly middle class kids so they know the consequences of their actions.

Covid 19 Part XXIV-37,063 ROI (1,801 deaths) 12,886 NI (582 deaths) (02/10) Read OP

Comments