Covid 19 Part XXIX-85,394 ROI(2,200 deaths) 62,723 NI (1,240 deaths) (26/12) Read OP

eigrod · 14-12-2020 05:37PM

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, swabs aren't nearly as bad as the numbers yesterday suggest

Sunday - 359/10728 = 3.35%
Today - 292/10220 = 2.86%

We *could* be trending a little in the wrong direction. We'll be able to make a better call on it after Friday and into next week.

The question though was never about whether we would trend back up, just how sharply we would.

My calculations suggest both swab numbers and cases announced for the last 4 days (Thurs to Sunday) are exactly 1300 each.

Tonight’s figure therefore should be in the region of 292, but it hasn’t always worked that way.

bb1234567 · 14-12-2020 05:39PM

landofthetree wrote: »

I was mocked here last March for saying 2023.

I was mocked here for saying a second lockdown would happen

Governments aren't telling it like it is. All the evidence suggest it will take at least 3 years to get back to normal. Everything else is suggest wishful thinking in the face of all the evidence.

COVID might be hanging around then but certainly enough of the population in the developed world will be vaccinated to prevent widespread transmission and bring it to endemic level, and so it won't be a pandemic or a problem

ACitizenErased · 14-12-2020 05:39PM

landofthetree wrote: »

I was mocked here last March for saying 2023.

I was mocked here for saying a second lockdown would happen

Governments aren't telling it like it is. All the evidence suggest it will take at least 3 years to get back to normal. Everything else is wishful thinking in the face of all the evidence.

Are you okay? Sounds like you're having a moment.

caveat emptor · 14-12-2020 05:39PM

I'd say while there is a different strain there is no material difference. They needed to get people's attention for the restrictions there. Saying "new variant" does that.

https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1338514626531700739?s=20

eagle eye · 14-12-2020 05:40PM

El SueÃ&#177 wrote: »

Please provide us with this evidence

It's a prediction, how can you have evidence of a prediction.

Deeper Blue · 14-12-2020 05:41PM

eagle eye wrote: »

It's a prediction, how can you have evidence of a prediction.

Sigh...

To quote the poster directly: "All the evidence suggest it will take at least 3 years to get back to normal."

I then asked for him/her to provide this evidence.

Always_Running · 14-12-2020 05:43PM

landofthetree wrote: »

I was mocked here last March for saying 2023.

I was mocked here for saying a second lockdown would happen

Governments aren't telling it like it is. All the evidence suggest it will take at least 3 years to get back to normal. Everything else is wishful thinking in the face of all the evidence.

Keep posting nonsense and you will continue to get mocked on here.

ninebeanrows · 14-12-2020 05:44PM

This new variant news is for sure to force support for the London Lockdown which there will be huge pushback against.

This new news might buy them some slack.

eagle eye · 14-12-2020 05:44PM

El Sueño wrote: »

Sigh...

From the post I quoted: "All the evidence suggest it will take at least 3 years to get back to normal."

I then asked for him/her to provide this evidence.

Do you sigh a lot?

I mixed up your posts, you quoted two close together. I read the quote from one and then read the reply from the other one.

eagle eye · 14-12-2020 05:46PM

Always_Running wrote: »

Keep posting nonsense and you will continue to get mocked on here.

Did you mock him for saying there would be a second lockdown?

Necro · 14-12-2020 05:52PM

landofthetree wrote: »

New mutation of Covid won't be stopped by vaccine.

We won't be back to normal pre summer 2023 at the earliest.

https://news.sky.com/story/new-variant-of-coronavirus-identified-in-uk-health-secretary-says-12161416

Mod:

I suggest you read your links more thoroughly in the future and stop spreading misinformation or your permission to post in this thread will be removed

Always_Running · 14-12-2020 05:54PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Did you mock him for saying there would be a second lockdown?

Restrictions. A everyone expected restrictions to be applied in the winter.

bilston · 14-12-2020 05:55PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

I'd say while there is a different strain there is no material difference. They needed to get people's attention for the restrictions there. Saying "new variant" does that.

https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1338514626531700739?s=20

That is my thinking as well.

The UK govt realise they have made an error allowing a 5 day free for all over Christmas and realise that now the genie is out of the bottle they can't row back on it, so hoping up the dangers is the only move they have left to try and get people to calm down about over the next few weeks.

As for a new a variant that appears to spread faster, do viruses that mutate to spread faster not normally become less deadly as a result...in other words this might turn out to be a good thing?

eagle eye · 14-12-2020 05:56PM

Always_Running wrote:

Restrictions. A everyone expected restrictions to be applied in the winter.

Pubs, restaurants, retail, hairdressers, bookmakers all locked down is a lockdown in the eyes of most.
I rarely heard anybody call it restrictions.

Always_Running · 14-12-2020 05:59PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Pubs, restaurants, retail, hairdressers, bookmakers all locked down is a lockdown in the eyes of most.
I rarely heard anybody call it restrictions.

You clearly never watch the press briefings. Dr Holohan and Co have said on a number of occasions that he never use the word lockdown for restrictions.

ShyMets · 14-12-2020 05:59PM

eagle eye wrote: »

It's a prediction, how can you have evidence of a prediction.

Exactly. Similar to your recent prediction that that the Pandemic was over and restrictions would would be lifted in the next few weeks.

Any word from your Brother, the Scientist. I believe you were due to speak to him at the weekend about the new wonder drug Ivermectin.

We're on tenterhooks

14-12-2020 06:02PM

RTE Radio 1 Drivetime absolutely ejaculating all over themselves at the prospect of this new mutation.

eagle eye · 14-12-2020 06:03PM

Always_Running wrote: »

You clearly never watch the press briefings. Dr Holohan and Co have said on a number of occasions that he never use the word lockdown for restrictions.

I'm talking about the general.oublic.

eigrod · 14-12-2020 06:04PM

https://twitter.com/juneshannon/status/1338526831394369537?s=21

hmmm · 14-12-2020 06:05PM

WasBornToBoogie wrote: »

RTE Radio 1 Drivetime absolutely ejaculating all over themselves at the prospect of this new mutation.

You think they'd have learned something from the Danish minks.

There's new strains and mutations all the time. If you wake up in the morning and your car is a different colour, it'll still drive. The strains are how scientists can tell for example that our current predominant strain was introduced from Spain over the Summer.

Until the mutation affects the small area of the virus which the vaccine targets we are OK. Not saying it can't happen, but it hasn't happened yet and may never happen - and if it does, the vaccines can be adjusted.

manofwisdom · 14-12-2020 06:15PM

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm talking about the general.oublic.

The term Lockdown is sensationalism by tabloids and journalists on TV.

Deeper Blue · 14-12-2020 06:17PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Do you sigh a lot?
I mixed up your posts, you quoted two close together. I read the quote from one and then read the reply from the other one.

When reading this thread I sigh quite a bit ðŸ˜

marno21 · 14-12-2020 06:21PM

Very convenient that a “new more contagious strain” pops up in a part of the UK the Government were warned was on the brink and required intervention, 11 days before Christmas when people are increasing their number of contacts. Exactly the type of ****up that has become typical of the current UK government response (in England). Ignore the warnings and then have to intervene when it’s too late and more severe intervention is required.

SortingYouOut · 14-12-2020 06:23PM

We've seen this coronavirus mutate but only a few times resulting in a change in the viruses behaviour. I'm seeing in the news now that a new variant is causing the fast rate of transmission in the UK and mainland Europe.

I don't know much about the vaccine but how exposed are they to mutation? This thing seems to adapt very fast, like the flu.

It looks like we're living with Covid from here on in and there's a very real risk that 2019 was the last year of the life that we used to know?

Arghus · 14-12-2020 06:24PM

marno21 wrote: »

Very convenient that a “new more contagious strain” pops up in a part of the UK the Government were warned was on the brink and required intervention, 11 days before Christmas when people are increasing their number of contacts. Exactly the type of ****up that has become typical of the current UK government response (in England). Ignore the warnings and then have to intervene when it’s too late and more severe intervention is required.

That's what happens when you have a bunch of after dinner speakers running a country.

ElJeffe · 14-12-2020 06:31PM

This new strain is awful news, absolutely awful.

Allinall · 14-12-2020 06:31PM

SortingYouOut wrote: »

It looks like we're living with Covid from here on in and there's a very real risk that 2019 was the last year of the life that we used to know?

Not looking good.

Atlantic Dawn · 14-12-2020 06:34PM

If we can keep it below 1000 new cases a day when we are in the first week of January we will be doing very well.

SortingYouOut · 14-12-2020 06:34PM

ACitizenErased wrote: »

More virulent usually suggests less deadly based on how viruses usually try to survive as long as possible. Interesting to see how that pans out.

Not more virulent = less deadly. Less deadly = more virulent. If it's become more virulent but hasn't changed otherwise then more virulent = more deadly.

risteard7 · 14-12-2020 06:34PM

Allinall wrote: »

Not looking good.

My god ðŸ€£

Covid 19 Part XXIX-85,394 ROI(2,200 deaths) 62,723 NI (1,240 deaths) (26/12) Read OP

Comments