Covid 19 Part XXVIII- 71,942 ROI(2,050 deaths) 51,824 NI (983 deaths) (28/11) Read OP

majcos · 21-11-2020 01:48PM

Stateofyou wrote: »

Why wouldn't those close to an asymptomatic covid positive patient be deemed a close contact for testing without masks and spending more than 15 minutes together? Something is wrong with that scenario, too. Surely this is contributing to the reason we have clusters in hospitals.

If staff member is not wearing a mask and they spent more than 15 minutes less than 1 metre apart, they would be considered a close contact.

If patient not wearing a mask, but the staff member is, the staff member is not considered a close contact as long as that particular patient is asymptomatic.

The staff member is deemed a casual contact and can remain at work unless becomes symptomatic. Advised to self monitor for 14 days after last casual contact scenario.

As to wisdom of these guidelines, I am not sure but that is the current guideline.

khalessi · 21-11-2020 01:49PM

majcos wrote: »

If staff member is not wearing a mask and they spent more than 15 minutes less than 1 metre apart, they would be considered a close contact.

If patient not wearing a mask, but the staff member is, the staff member is not considered a close contact as long as that particular patient is asymptomatic.

The staff member is deemed a casual contact and can remain at work unless becomes symptomatic. Advised to self monitor for 14 days after last casual contact scenario.

As to wisdom of these guidelines, I am not sure but that is the current guideline.

Child wasnt well in school I found out after from class teacher and regardless, was found to be positive, therefore close contacts should have been tested as per guidelines. In other sectors due to closeness and length of time of contact 2 hours over 2 days at 90cm I should have been tested

ACitizenErased · 21-11-2020 01:49PM

normanoffside wrote: »

According to this, only 64 of Our current hospitalised cases came into Hospital with covid.

The other 211 acquired it in hospital.

https://twitter.com/RiochtConor2/status/1330122887785828352

You’ll never ever ever see the media talk about that.

Cork2021 · 21-11-2020 01:49PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

You’ll never ever ever see the media talk about that.

That’s crazy shît right there!!

Stateofyou · 21-11-2020 01:59PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

You’ll never ever ever see the media talk about that.

Would the main reason be due to there not being enough teacher's/subs to work through quarantines, and the lack of a hybrid style remote learning plan, cost and scope of more robust testing, or am I missing something else?

So basically, there are problems-expensive problems-that need to be dealt with and that have possible solutions but our government are not willing to put in the money, time and effort? Why are the media complicit-are pockets lined or what?

majcos · 21-11-2020 02:03PM

khalessi wrote: »

Child wasnt well in school I found out after from class teacher and regardless, was found to be positive, therefore close contacts should have been tested as per guidelines. In other sectors due to closeness and length of time of contact 2 hours over 2 days at 90cm I should have been tested

Yes. Not arguing that you should not have been tested. I think more testing in these scenarios would be wise. Was just comparing that if that type of contact happened in a hospital, you may not have been tested either. You would be classed as a casual contact.

In hospitals, if asymptomatic patient became symptomatic, risk assessment should be redone. Casual contact status might then be changed to close contact based on the particular scenario such as contact with bodily fluids, presence during an aerosol generating procedure, etc. But it may still after this second assessment, be classed as a casual contact situation.

I think many would be surprised by how much HCW contact with confirmed positive cases is not considered as close contact even when very minimal PPE is in use. Maybe it explains why so many HCWs are testing positive and why number of hospital acquired infections have increased. (BTW, not to Conor’s figures but it has unfortunately increased).

21-11-2020 02:13PM

normanoffside wrote: »

According to this, only 64 of Our current hospitalised cases came into Hospital with covid.

The other 211 acquired it in hospital.

https://twitter.com/RiochtConor2/status/1330122887785828352

That's astonishing, bordering on a national scandal. RTÉ won't touch it with a barge pole, their primary concern is bashing pubs and retail.

political analyst · 21-11-2020 02:17PM

If someone has symptoms that might be of Covid and stays at home for the necessary length of time but doesn't become severely ill, then I don't see the necessity of informing his or her GP. Informing the GP causes unnecessary anxiety to other people and inflates the statistics, thus making the situation seem worse than it actually is.

owlbethere · 21-11-2020 02:24PM

political analyst wrote: »

If someone has symptoms that might be of Covid and stays at home for the necessary length of time but doesn't become severely ill, then I don't see the necessity of informing his or her GP. Informing the GP causes unnecessary anxiety to other people and inflates the statistics, thus making the situation seem worse than it actually is.

Isolation when sick is the most important bit for sure. I disagree about not contacting GP. Covid can be an illness that comes and goes in stages. Covid might first appear mild like a cold or a headache and then a week or 2 later there's potential for symptoms to get worse. You're going to need a support network if it gets worse and GP will be included in that network.

majcos · 21-11-2020 02:28PM

political analyst wrote: »

If someone has symptoms that might be of Covid and stays at home for the necessary length of time but doesn't become severely ill, then I don't see the necessity of informing his or her GP. Informing the GP causes unnecessary anxiety to other people and inflates the statistics, thus making the situation seem worse than it actually is.

Perhaps but only if that person has had absolutely zero contacts and has been living in total isolation but if that was the case how could that person have contracted it?

I think there is a moral obligation to be tested if symptomatic or deemed a close contact even if person themselves is low risk as this allows tracing and others to isolate and protect their contacts.

I would be extremely angry if one of my contacts did not tell me they had Covid/ or suspected they had Covid and didn’t bother to be tested and then I carried it without knowing to someone else more vulnerable.

Ger Roe · 21-11-2020 02:34PM

political analyst wrote: »

If someone has symptoms that might be of Covid and stays at home for the necessary length of time but doesn't become severely ill, then I don't see the necessity of informing his or her GP. Informing the GP causes unnecessary anxiety to other people and inflates the statistics, thus making the situation seem worse than it actually is.

Informing the GP will get the person tested and if positive, the virus is tracked and traced and the stats updated so that we ALL know where we are.

One again, it's not just the effects and consequence for the specific individual that is of concern here.

Your suggestion is a selfish approach that does not help the overall effort to try and reduce the spread of the virus.

Miike · 21-11-2020 02:54PM

Deleted User wrote: »

That's astonishing, bordering on a national scandal. RTÉ won't touch it with a barge pole, their primary concern is bashing pubs and retail.

Hey Bertie. Do you have a link to his data source for this claim? I'm on mobile and trying to find it using my phone is driving me insane!!

Wolf359f · 21-11-2020 03:10PM

normanoffside wrote: »

According to this, only 64 of Our current hospitalised cases came into Hospital with covid.

The other 211 acquired it in hospital.

https://twitter.com/RiochtConor2/status/1330122887785828352

I'm not sure on the data.
Going back to when we had very few in hospital (5 August)
The same day we had 17 in hospital, 3 admissions and zero discharges.
The next day we then had 10 in hospital (a difference of 10, I doubt that would have been 10 deaths)
6th August we had 10 in hospital, zero admissions and 5 discharges.
The next day we then had 11 in hospital (that's hardly going to be 6 hospital acquired?)

Wolf359f · 21-11-2020 03:13PM

Miike wrote: »

Hey Bertie. Do you have a link to his data source for this claim? I'm on mobile and trying to find it using my phone is driving me insane!!

That's the link to the csv file.
I wonder if anyone can make sense of it.
https://opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/fe9bb23592ec4142a4f4c2c9bd32f749_0.csv

normanoffside · 21-11-2020 03:15PM

Wolf359f wrote: »

I'm not sure on the data.
Going back to when we had very few in hospital (5 August)
The same day we had 17 in hospital, 3 admissions and zero discharges.
The next day we then had 10 in hospital (a difference of 10, I doubt that would have been 10 deaths)
6th August we had 10 in hospital, zero admissions and 5 discharges.
The next day we then had 11 in hospital (that's hardly going to be 6 hospital acquired?)

As I said on another thread, the twitter guy doesn't seem to have agendas and produces lots of stats which look spot on.

Someone really needs to pose these questions in a presser or somewhere else so that we know if it's accurate or not.
No-one is asking these types of questions; it's frustrating.

Look at this comment from a GP in the replies.
One way or another the HSE are making things worse than they are.

https://twitter.com/drvkeating/status/1330140824789725184

Stheno · 21-11-2020 03:15PM

https://twitter.com/IsabelO20183051/status/1330132331613609986?s=19

701 HCWs infected in the past two weeks according to the HSpc

Wolf359f · 21-11-2020 03:24PM

normanoffside wrote: »

As I said on another thread, the twitter guy doesn't seem to have agendas and produces lots of stats which look spot on.

Someone really needs to pose these questions in a presser or somewhere else so that we know if it's accurate or not.
No-one is asking these types of questions; it's frustrating.

Look at this comment from a GP in the replies.
One way or another the HSE are making things worse than they are.

https://twitter.com/drvkeating/status/1330140824789725184

There's definitely hospital outbreaks causing serious issues for sure. You can see that in the daily reports where a hospital jumps from 10 to 30 patients over night.
As someone said, the likes of Limerick and Letterkenny hospitals accounting for 25% of all hospital patients.

But using the number in hospital + admissions - discharges is flawed.
The numbers don't line up even going back to August when we had the numbers in single digits.

Would be nice to have a journalist ask the simple question. Of the ~300 currently in hospital, how many acquired covid in hospital.
They used to have those figures in the HPSC reports, but that's been missing the past month or so.

I know hospital visits are banned, but is there anything stopping hospital patients from mingling with each other? Hard to be kept stuck on the ward!

boggerman1 · 21-11-2020 03:26PM

Saint Tony houlihan is busy working on who new to blame next week.farmers could do with a slap down no doubt from st.tony he’s blamed everyone else.anything to distract from hse incompetence

aziz · 21-11-2020 03:29PM

My wife had to bring an elderly relative to hospital in Waterford during the week,she was absolutely gobsmacked at the sheer lack of people there wearing no masks,staff especially

This time last year she was going in there every day as her father was dying and because of the “hospital bug” was told only one at a time could be let in and only if there names were on a list.
Even with their names on a list,she and her family were often stopped by a over zealous security guard.

This year out there is so different,nearly normal,even with this “deadly “ virus

ACitizenErased · 21-11-2020 03:31PM

Stheno wrote: »

https://twitter.com/IsabelO20183051/status/1330132331613609986?s=19

701 HCWs infected in the past two weeks according to the HSpc

That is genuinely scandalous

majcos · 21-11-2020 03:33PM

Wolf359f wrote: »

That's the link to the csv file.
I wonder if anyone can make sense of it.
https://opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/fe9bb23592ec4142a4f4c2c9bd32f749_0.csv

His data is very flawed. He seems to be as just adding and subtracting admissions and discharges from the previous days’ figures for total hospitalised confirmed cases. It is far more complex than that. (As a a Financial Supply Chain Process Leader/ Process Mining /Chemical Engineer. Walker, Runner, Skier, he doesn’t understand the data or clinical interpretation needed to make a diagnosis.)

A person with Covid after a period of infectivity can remain in hospital but could be reclassified as Covid negative. For example, a person who is in ICU for a few weeks, has recovered and has moved out to a general ward is longer counted in Covid positive numbers as is no longer infectious but remains in hospital due to needing rehabilitation or due to some other medical complication.

On the flip side, someone might be admitted and test negative on initial swab but test positive 24 hours later. They would not be counted in the confirmed positive admissions for their first 24 hour period but would be added to total cases in hospital on overall count the next day. If test positive at over 24 hours but within short time after admission, more likely that patient had contracted it in community but were still incubating and so false negative or viral load was not detected in first sample.

There are cases that are admitted to ICU with very typical inflammatory parameters and x-rays for Covid (who for whatever reason test negative on swab on admissions) and then test positive on samples taken at a bronchoscopy. Not counted on admission but didn’t contract it in hospital.

There are other scenarios too that mean you cannot just add and subtract admissions and discharges and deduce the number of hospital acquired cases.

I do think hospital acquired infection has increased but designating someone as a hospital acquired infection requires an investigation of that patient’s particular circumstances/healthcare journey.

Wolf359f · 21-11-2020 03:37PM

Stheno wrote: »

https://twitter.com/IsabelO20183051/status/1330132331613609986?s=19

701 HCWs infected in the past two weeks according to the HSpc

ACitizenErased wrote: »

That is genuinely scandalous

The figures have been like that for the past 6 weeks and seems to be staying quite level regardless of the number of cases in the community, which is why when you look at HCW's as a % of total cases, it's rising high % wise.

BringBackMick · 21-11-2020 03:40PM

It is clear to most that the hospitals just aren't up to standard to deal with this.

It is truly shocking that over the last 2 weeks we have had our health officials target citizens doing low risk activities rather than dealing with the actual issues.

It is frankly disgusting. And I hope some of the media can get together and actually expose what is going on.

normanoffside · 21-11-2020 03:40PM

majcos wrote: »

His data is very flawed. He seems to be as just adding and subtracting admissions and discharges from the previous days’ figures for total hospitalised confirmed cases. It is far more complex than that. (As a a Financial Supply Chain Process Leader/ Process Mining /Chemical Engineer. Walker, Runner, Skier, he doesn’t understand the data or clinical interpretation needed to make a diagnosis.)

A person with Covid after a period of infectivity can remain in hospital but could be reclassified as Covid negative. For example, a person who is in ICU for a few weeks, has recovered and has moved out to a general ward is longer counted in Covid positive numbers as is no longer infectious but remains in hospital due to needing rehabilitation or due to some other medical complication.

On the flip side, someone might be admitted and test negative on initial swab but test positive 24 hours later. They would not be counted in the confirmed positive admissions for their first 24 hour period but would be added to total cases in hospital on overall count the next day. If test positive at over 24 hours but within short time after admission, more likely that patient had contracted it in community but were still incubating and so false negative or viral load was not detected in first sample.

There are cases that are admitted to ICU with very typical inflammatory parameters and x-rays for Covid (who for whatever reason test negative on swab on admissions) and then test positive on samples taken at a bronchoscopy. Not counted on admission but didn’t contract it in hospital.

There are other scenarios too that mean you cannot just add and subtract admissions and discharges and deduce the number of hospital acquired cases.

I do think hospital acquired infection has increased but designating someone as a hospital acquired infection requires an investigation of that patient’s particular circumstances/healthcare journey.

I figured it wouldn't be as simple as adding and distracting, however we ca all agree someone should just ask the question that Wolf359f proposed:

Of the ~300 currently in hospital, how many acquired covid in hospital?

ACitizenErased · 21-11-2020 03:43PM

normanoffside wrote: »

I figured it wouldn't be as simple as adding and distracting, however we ca all agree someone should just ask the question that Wolf359f proposed:

Of the ~300 currently in hospital, how many acquired covid in hospital?

The most simple questions are the ones least likely to be asked.
We could also ask:
What's the positivity rate per county?
What's the testing numbers per county?
Positivity rate in community vs hospitals?
Are HCWs picking it up in hospital or community?
Age of people who died?

Etc etc.
Never ever going to be asked.

ElTel · 21-11-2020 03:46PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

That is genuinely scandalous

They're on the front line. It was the same in wave 1.
Unless we go down the space suit/dedicated infection area protocol this will happen. Ensuring people are not infectious after discharge should be standard though.
Does anyone have the info/report on the HCW antibody status from September?
I suppose you don't need PPE if your recovered and thus immune.

political analyst · 21-11-2020 03:52PM

majcos wrote: »

Perhaps but only if that person has had absolutely zero contacts and has been living in total isolation but if that was the case how could that person have contracted it?

I think there is a moral obligation to be tested if symptomatic or deemed a close contact even if person themselves is low risk as this allows tracing and others to isolate and protect their contacts.

I would be extremely angry if one of my contacts did not tell me they had Covid/ or suspected they had Covid and didn’t bother to be tested and then I carried it without knowing to someone else more vulnerable.

If you maintained social distancing from the rest of your contacts then they won't get the virus from you if you have got it from that contact.

political analyst · 21-11-2020 03:56PM

Ger Roe wrote: »

Informing the GP will get the person tested and if positive, the virus is tracked and traced and the stats updated so that we ALL know where we are.

One again, it's not just the effects and consequence for the specific individual that is of concern here.

Your suggestion is a selfish approach that does not help the overall effort to try and reduce the spread of the virus.

If those people who the individual has been in contact with after getting the virus from the first contact have taken the necessary precautions when in contact with that individual then they are at no more risk of getting the virus than they are of being struck by lightning in a thunderstorm.

Self-isolation fulfills the public-interest obligation.

majcos · 21-11-2020 03:57PM

Stheno wrote: »

https://twitter.com/IsabelO20183051/status/1330132331613609986?s=19

701 HCWs infected in the past two weeks according to the HSpc

It is awful to see so many HCWs being infected but that figure has been high throughout. Percentage of 13.02 is comparable as far as I know to other countries.

A study published in September showed 24.4% of a healthcare cohort tested in UK had antibodies. In Tallaght Hospital study, percentage with antibodies across almost 1200 staff tested between mid July and mid October was 18%. So it’s high but it is not something particular to last few weeks.

Even with PPE, it’s obviously a high risk environment for transmission. Staff cannot avoid close contact with patients and with each other in many situations.

A recent study from UK showed that positivity was lowest in staff in ICU. This was initially a surprise as ICU has some of the sickest Covid patients requiring very close contact care. However, they wear the highest level of PPE. This suggests to me that maybe getting staff who work in even lower risk situations to wear more PPE could reduce HCW and hospital acquired infections. For majority of healthcare staff, the only PPE provided and worn is a mask.

It makes me very disappointed and very very surprised to read the various posts about doctors and other hospital staff not even wearing masks. This is shocking. Definitely suggests that there is room for improvement. It cannot be eliminated completely among HCWs at the moment but more needs to be done.

Wolf359f · 21-11-2020 03:59PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

The most simple questions are the ones least likely to be asked.
We could also ask:
What's the positivity rate per county?
What's the testing numbers per county?
Positivity rate in community vs hospitals?
Are HCWs picking it up in hospital or community?
Age of people who died?

Etc etc.
Never ever going to be asked.

They did show a slide before with positivity rate per county.
Nolan did reference the positivity rate in the last briefing and it seemed very high at 8% (unless he meant close contacts)
The HCW breakdown is in the reports, shows what kind of HCW and where it was picked up.https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/covid-19casesinhealthcareworkers/COVID-19_HCW_14%2011%202020_v1.0%20website.pdf
It annoys me, as when asked, they will provide the information, it was like that initially with skant details, but as the media kept asking the details became part of the daily or weekly reports.

Covid 19 Part XXVIII- 71,942 ROI(2,050 deaths) 51,824 NI (983 deaths) (28/11) Read OP

Comments