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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

Covid 19 Part XXVII- 62,002 ROI (1,915 deaths) 39,609 NI (724 deaths) (02/11) Read OP

1…160161163165166…320

Comments

  • #4862
    MerlinSouthDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭MerlinSouthDub


    Icyseanfitz wrote: »
    Well thats purely the responsibility of parents to ensure their children are abiding by the rules.

    Indeed. So, it won't happen.


  • #4863
    majcos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 596 ✭✭✭majcos


    Icyseanfitz wrote: »
    Considering the contact tracing loopholes/failures in schools you can be garunteed its a lot higher, but lets continue the party line, schools are safe.
    Yes. Some cases are being missed but under diagnosis is not high and transmission rates in schools not high. If it was, the percentage of cases found in mass testing in schools would be higher than that in the wider community.

    Mass testing is giving a low positivity rate which suggests that transmission is not as high in schools as other environments. Percentage positive in school age groups is lower than it is in community. Same has been found in other countries with regard to schools.


  • #4864
    majcos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 596 ✭✭✭majcos


    Icyseanfitz wrote: »
    The fact that 15k out if a million+ is considered mass testing is ridiculous
    It’s a large enough sample size to be able to make some inferences on positivity rates. Similar data on larger scale from other countries is giving the same results.


  • #4865
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,801 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    MerlinSouthDub wrote: »
    A completely pointless one. How would we strip out the effect of school closures from the impact of level 5? It's not as if kids won't be meeting eachother during the 1 extra week off anyway, rules or no rules

    But I thought kids interacting with each other (as they do in schools) is not a source of transmission?


  • #4866
    khalessi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,218 ✭✭✭khalessi


    majcos wrote: »
    Yes. Some cases are being missed but under diagnosis is not high and transmission rates in schools not high. If it was, the percentage of cases found in mass testing in schools would be higher than that in the wider community.

    Mass testing is giving a low positivity rate which suggests that transmission is not as high in schools as other environments. Percentage positive in school age groups is lower than it is in community. Same has been found in other countries with regard to schools.

    It may not be as high but when a teacher insisted on getting a class tested after HSE wanted only pod of covid+ve student tested, another 7 asympomatic children were discovered with covid.

    It is great that they were asymptomatc but who could they or did they pass it on to and how long did they have it?

    The parameters for what is considered a close contact in schools is narrower than other sectors, it is alost as if they don't want schools higlighted as sources of transmissions. You would wonder why.


  • Advertisement
  • #4867
    MerlinSouthDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭MerlinSouthDub


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    But I thought kids interacting with each other (as they do in schools) is not a source of transmission?

    Correct, that is what the data shows. It was you who proposed the experiment though. If you want an experiment, you need one which is capable of stripping out the effect you (not I) believes exists


  • #4868
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,100 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    Widdensushi wrote: »
    Level 3 is not going to be adhered to so we have to strive for 2? Surely now it appears that level 3 can control this if there is enforcement then we should just aim for level 3 with the gardai given powers to enforce it where necessary. Going beyond that is a waste of money with open borders which there is no possibility of closing. We will have an influx of people from America etc in December as usual. Just get to 3 as soon as possible as try to live with covid as best we can.

    Level three travel restrictions will be very hard to take in December

    6 weeks of 5km minimum under December 1st

    Level three is stay within your own county

    That's no good to anyone with friends, family, relations partners in other counties


  • #4869
    petes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,382 ✭✭✭petes


    MerlinSouthDub wrote: »
    Correct, that is what the data shows. It was you who proposed the experiment though. If you want an experiment, you need one which is capable of stripping out the effect you (not I) believes exists

    You have a strange way of looking at data. When talking about the schools follow the data, when we were talking about the data on Dublin's numbers a while ago it you said it was the other counties driving the numbers up despite looking directly at the 'data'. Seems you look at the data when it suits you.


  • #4870
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,100 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    Funny what I think will happen is level three for 1st December for two weeks

    Then travel allowed 15th December to New Years


  • #4871
    MerlinSouthDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭MerlinSouthDub


    petes wrote: »
    You have a strange way of looking at data. When talking about the schools follow the data, when we were talking about the data on Dublin's numbers a while ago it you said it was the other counties driving the numbers up despite looking directly at the 'data'. Seems you look at the data when it suits you.

    You don't think the surge in Meath impacted Dublin? And, now that the rest of the country is stabilising, Dublin has stabilised again. And you think it's me who has a strange way of looking at the data....


  • Advertisement
  • #4872
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    eigrod wrote: »
    Hospitalisations down to 295

    https://covid19ireland-geohive.hub.arcgis.com/pages/hospitals-icu--testing
    A few days into Level 5 some metrics seem to be going the other way. If we are actually seeing a positive trend then 6 weeks will obviously be a success but one would wonder if this call was actually right in the first place.


  • #4873
    petes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,382 ✭✭✭petes


    MerlinSouthDub wrote: »
    You don't think the surge in Meath impacted Dublin?

    Seriously? You're questioning the data again but refuse to question anything about the data on schools?

    Suited you at the time to blame other counties for the data in Dublin, you can't look at one set of data and make allowances for it but not the other.


  • #4874
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    Funny what I think will happen is level three for 1st December for two weeks

    Then travel allowed 15th December to New Years
    Which should be spelt out now anyway even if we don't get there. People are still being kept in the dark and this kind of thing is more than a tad manipulative.


  • #4875
    majcos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 596 ✭✭✭majcos


    khalessi wrote: »
    It may not be as high but when a teacher insisted on getting a class tested after HSE wanted only pod of covid+ve student tested, another 7 asympomatic children were discovered with covid.

    It is great that they were asymptomatc but who could they or did they pass it on to and how long did they have it?

    The parameters for what is considered a close contact in schools is narrower than other sectors, it is alost as if they don't want schools higlighted as sources of transmissions. You would wonder why.
    The mass testing was specifically carried out in schools where there was a confirmed case/cases and in schools where based on public health risk assessment, there was a higher risk of transmission. So if anything, there was bias in the school related testing towards finding more positive cases but it still returned a low positivity rate.

    There will always be exceptions to the normal rates that leads to a higher positivity rate than expected as in the situation you mention above, but decisions should not be made on anomalies as this one school is not a statistically significant sample. I don’t know any of the details of the scenario you mention but there may have been a specific reason cases were higher there. Perhaps there was a superspreader teacher there that led to that cluster.

    I would rather base conclusions on positivity rate in schools on the analysis of data taken from the 634 schools than based on results in one school.


  • #4876
    MerlinSouthDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭MerlinSouthDub


    petes wrote: »
    Seriously? You're questioning the data again but refuse to question anything about the data on schools?

    What aspect of the data am I questioning? I really don't get what point you are making.


  • #4877
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,100 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    Philip Nolans modelling definitely seems to be far wrong again

    1800 - 2500 cases a day by next Sunday

    I'd hope hospital cases won't go up to 400 either


  • #4878
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,100 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Which should be spelt out now anyway even if we don't get there. People are still being kept in the dark and this kind of thing is more than a tad manipulative.

    They'll never commit to anything unfortunately


  • #4879
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 518 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Covid-19 confirmed cases in half of Northern Ireland schools
    The PHA has been informed of 2,030 positive Covid cases in schools since teaching returned at the beginning of term.

    There had been 608 Covid-19 so-called incidents in 519 schools up until 20 October, said the agency.

    Overall, 86% of post-primary schools had at least one case since the start of term, compared to around 40% of primary schools and 66% of special schools.

    Around three-quarters of schools (76%) in the Belfast City Council area have been affected by positive cases.

    That local government district had the highest proportion of schools affected, just higher than the numbers recorded in Derry, Strabane and Omagh - the district with the second highest proportion.

    Of school cases notified to the PHA, just over two-thirds (68%) were pupils and one-third (32%) were staff.


    These should be included in the case numbers on the Island of Ireland.




    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-54656456


  • #4880
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    They'll never commit to anything unfortunately
    Agreed but they'd get credit for being honest even if it meant Christmas was cancelled.


  • #4881
    majcos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 596 ✭✭✭majcos


    is_that_so wrote: »
    A few days into Level 5 some metrics seem to be going the other way. If we are actually seeing a positive trend then 6 weeks will obviously be a success but one would wonder if this call was actually right in the first place.
    Downward trends have happened too soon for it to be the effect of level 5 but any trend in the right direction is welcome!


  • Advertisement
  • #4882
    smellyoldboot
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,073 ✭✭✭smellyoldboot


    I predict a sharp drop off in cases in 2/3 weeks time followed by a similar rise in the 2/3 weeks following that. Nothing to do with the mid term holidays just a coincidence. Call it a hunch.


  • #4883
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,100 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    smellyoldboot wrote: »
    I predict a sharp drop off in cases in 2/3 weeks time followed by a similar rise in the 2/3 weeks following that. Nothing to do with the mid term holidays just a coincidence. Call it a hunch.

    I hope you're wrong but that's definitely a worry


  • #4884
    Ger Roe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,198 ✭✭✭Ger Roe


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    Philip Nolans modelling definitely seems to be far wrong again

    1800 - 2500 cases a day by next Sunday

    I'd hope hospital cases won't go up to 400 either

    I think you might be misquoting him - he always says that his projections are based on 'if we do nothing'. If you introduce restrictions, then cases, hopefully, drop.

    His projections are calculated at a specific time, taking account of the measures in force at that time and 'projecting' on that basis.


  • #4885
    Boggles
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,592 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    Philip Nolans modelling definitely seems to be far wrong again

    1800 - 2500 cases a day by next Sunday

    I'd hope hospital cases won't go up to 400 either

    How do you know we don't have 1800 cases all ready? Predictions were based on the populous not changing there behavior.

    But, that's right tracing is no longer important is the new narrative.

    South Korean model, something, something....Look over there is Paul Reid trying trying to administer a PCR test to a dead hooker.

    Ooopss Sorry, I'll try better, I'll aim for 15%.

    Oh Paul you bullet proof scamp!


  • #4886
    KrustyUCC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,100 ✭✭✭KrustyUCC


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Agreed but they'd get credit for being honest even if it meant Christmas was cancelled.

    That's true

    Surely they have an outline of what and where they want to go to?

    Bigger issue is what NPHET and Tony will allow the government to do

    They're already talking about calling for another lockdown in January even before this one kicked in


  • #4887
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    majcos wrote: »
    Downward trends have happened too soon for it to be the effect of level 5 but any trend in the right direction is welcome!
    Pretty sure I said it wasn't the effect of Level 5 but 6 weeks will probably make it look that way anyway. Is it really the right call though? Remember this is the tail end of Level 3 we are seeing and some of that modelling is already showing signs of being way off.


  • #4888
    Eod100
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,329 ✭✭✭✭Eod100


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    Funny what I think will happen is level three for 1st December for two weeks

    Then travel allowed 15th December to New Years

    I was thinking would they have some exception for travel for Christmas if cases go down enough. Realistically lot of people will still travel regardless either way. If all the country is in level 3 say the stay within county restrictions seem a bit illogical (unless huge disparity in cases per 100k). I think people have to be given something to look forward to in this awful year. See Irish Rail only let's you book up to 12th December. Will be interesting to see when that will change.


  • #4889
    ACitizenErased
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,802 ✭✭✭✭ACitizenErased


    https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1320307797582614528?s=21


  • #4890
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    KrustyUCC wrote: »
    That's true

    Surely they have an outline of what and where they want to go to?

    Bigger issue is what NPHET and Tony will allow the government to do

    They're already talking about calling for another lockdown in January even before this one kicked in
    This is unfortunately going to be the pattern and now that we've been in one Level 5 they'll find it easier to convince government of another one. You could easily see more things becoming "essential" if that's the case.


  • Advertisement
  • #4891
    octsol
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 80 ✭✭octsol


    Hospital numbers down this morning again and daily cases starting to drop we seem to be on the right track again.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement