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

Covid 19 Part XXX-113,332 ROI(2,282 deaths) 81,251 NI (1,384 deaths) (05/01) Read OP

1…7374767879…330

Comments

  • #2252
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Sammy2012 wrote: »
    Are schools not the 3rd biggest driver on that list?
    At about 5% of household outbreaks. Cases were always expected.


  • #2253
    iguana
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,917 ✭✭✭✭iguana


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Some posters don't seem to be taking this into account at all. Once we get sufficient supplies we should start to see some indicators, even from February.

    The thing with vaccines is that Oxford/AstraZeneca really will be the game changer. If it gets approved for EU use in January, we'll be well on the way to normality in early summer, with many permanent easings of restrictions along the way. If it takes longer, as it might, it will take longer to get back to normal. Pfizer/BT, Moderna, Curevac, etc all help but the sheer availability and accessibility of O/AZ will be what makes a return to normality come relatively quickly. The J&J vaccine has similar potential but isn't expected quite as soon.


  • #2254
    Sammy2012
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,317 ✭✭✭Sammy2012


    khalessi wrote: »
    No schools are safe;);)

    Oh sorry Khalessi!! Silly me...I forgot?!


  • #2255
    TonyMaloney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭TonyMaloney


    caveat emptor wrote: »
    Hospital admissions jumping. Hopefully it starts levelling off soon.

    537632.png

    ICU starting to follow suit


  • #2256
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    Stheno wrote: »
    Apparently a lot of that may be patients who went home for Christmas and are now back

    Never knew this was a thing tbh

    Does look a bit mad alright. Saw a good few ambulances out on the road today. Maybe it was normal I just noticed them more.


  • Advertisement
  • #2257
    Sammy2012
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,317 ✭✭✭Sammy2012


    is_that_so wrote: »
    At about 5% of household outbreaks. Cases were always expected.

    Yea I see that but grooming services are 7 cases!!! 7! Seems totally unnecessary to have them closed as they pose almost no risk at all!


  • #2258
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Hospitalisations are surging because large amounts of people would have done anything to avoid going to hospital over Xmas. So they tough it out until it's unbearable, and suddenly we have 40/50 Covid admissions per day.

    I'd expect to see this continue through to Sunday before we know where we are.

    The majority of these will get a couple of days on oxygen and be fine. We'll see high discharge numbers come next week.

    Still a concern, but numbers are still in a chaotic state due to Xmas, so we don't know if this is a mini peak or a sign of things to come.


  • #2259
    frank8211
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 306 ✭✭frank8211


    vienne86 wrote: »
    Anyone else away from home right now with plans to return home at the weekend? Just wondering should I pack up now. Only visiting one other person in a holiday home and that person is in my my bubble. We're not seeing anyone, but don't want to stay away for a prolonged lockdown!

    I wouldnt rush if youre happy there. I cant see real enforcement and anyway someone cant really be stopped from 'going home'. Im kind of in similar situation as I divide my time and I propose to continue doing so every few weeks as Ive done since this thing started


  • #2260
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    landofthetree wrote: »
    outbreaks.png

    Seems harsh to always close down barbers/hairdressers when they seem so low risk.

    Have to agree. Given current rate numbers I think they should close as we need every possible suppression we can use. I do not think they needed to close for Wave II lockdown. The evidence internationally is low regarding their risks especially with mask and social distancing compliance. I feel they have a weak lobby with not enough connections and influence.


  • #2261
    Neamhshuntasach
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,183 ✭✭✭Neamhshuntasach


    Martina1991 wrote: »
    The reporting of admissions and hospitalizations is confusing and multi factored for the reasons you've mentioned, but I think dismissing or downplaying the number of people in hospital with Covid, just because they dont have the classic Covid symptoms is a bit misplaced.

    Unless you've seen these patients scans and blood work you dont know what effect Covid is having on all these patients. They have blood clotting problems, increased inflammatory markers, cardiac problems. Whether they were admitted for Covid or caught it in the hospital, it can still contribute to their illness and requires extra resources to treat them.

    I agree. And the purpose is not to downplay the effects covid can have on somebody. Either immediate or long term. I'm not a medical professional so I'll leave that up to those qualified.

    My point is more so down to the confusing way of reporting and the terminology used. A lot of people are thinking that 100 new people have all turned up feeling very sick with covid and required hospitalisation from it. When that may not be the case at all. I think it creates a lot of extra fear for people that may be already suffering from the effects it has had on their lives without even catching it thus far. You can even see it in the comments here. My mam is one such person who has started thinking the hospital system is going to collapse and that if she catches it now she'll end up in hospital. She's calmed down a bit on that front after chatting to my wife. But not everyone has someone working in that environment to allay some fears.


  • Advertisement
  • #2262
    Kermit.de.frog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,109 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Hopefully the admissions stabilise soon but there is a lot of wishful thinking. Fact is we have accelerated a problem that was contained and is now no longer contained.

    This leads to tougher, longer measures to regain the hard won control we threw away.

    The lesser restrictions in October maintained would have us now in a far more optimistic position with much lower instances and the start of vaccine rollouts.

    It was not worth it to relax those restrictions in the run up to Christmas.

    We are where we are and have to suck up the medicine now.


  • #2263
    wadacrack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,172 ✭✭✭wadacrack


    Turtwig wrote: »
    Have to agree. Given current rate numbers I think they should close as we need every possible suppression we can use. I do not think they needed to close for Wave II lockdown. The evidence internationally is low regarding their risks especially with mask and social distancing compliance. I feel they have a weak lobby with not enough connections and influence.

    Agree, go with a hard lockdown with the aim of maximum suppression and we may not need another one if it goes well. I hope the vaccination plan could potentially be rolled out more quickly if more vaccines are approved. We have tried rolling restrictions and its not worked. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again.


  • #2264
    igCorcaigh
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 12,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭igCorcaigh


    Stheno wrote: »
    Apparently a lot of that may be patients who went home for Christmas and are now back

    Never knew this was a thing tbh

    That graph is current cases though, not admissions.


  • #2265
    caveat emptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,134 ✭✭✭caveat emptor


    Also the more people in hospital with/ because / of covid the more risk of outbreaks and it getting to vulnerable patients. Also it's more difficult to effectively isolate them and infection control becomes more difficult. Asymptomatic people can spread it. From an infection control point of view there is no difference in the current state of the patient and that makes life difficult for health care workers and patients alike.


  • #2266
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Kermit.de.frog wrote: »
    Hopefully the admissions stabilise soon but there is a lot of wishful thinking. Fact is we have accelerated a problem that was contained and is now no longer contained.

    This leads to tougher, longer measures to regain the hard won control we threw away.

    The lesser restrictions in October maintained would have us now in a far more optimistic position with much lower instances and the start of vaccine rollouts.

    It was not worth it to relax those restrictions in the run up to Christmas.

    We are where we are and have to suck up the medicine now.

    You keep talking about staying locked down to avoid future lockdown...

    It is so bizarre.


  • #2267
    frank8211
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 306 ✭✭frank8211


    awec wrote: »
    Of course the fact that schools provide a safe place for children to be during the day, allowing the workforce to work is a huge part of why they are open.

    I am not sure why you find this surprising or noteworthy. It is surely common sense?

    The problem is that they dont provide a safe place for the students.... see all the cases in schools.....and by extension it opens a weak flank in the family's protective measures


  • #2268
    Supercell
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,643 ✭✭✭✭Supercell


    Bad as it is here it could be far worse, the Germans have 5600 in intensive care at the moment, that's the equivalent of approximately 330 here, doesn't bear thinking about.
    https://www.loughlinstown.ie/

    Have a weather station?, why not join the Ireland Weather Network - http://irelandweather.eu/



  • #2269
    Kermit.de.frog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,109 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You keep talking about staying locked down to avoid future lockdown...

    It is so bizarre.

    You keep misreading intentionally.

    We will now have a tougher regime to regain the control we lost.


  • #2270
    Sweet.Science
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭Sweet.Science


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You keep talking about staying locked down to avoid future lockdown...

    It is so bizarre.

    Yep . And they aren't in the minority


  • #2271
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    So people want a longer lockdown to avoid rolling lockdowns. Give me rolling lockdowns any day, its much easier do a short lockdown for people.


  • Advertisement
  • #2272
    wadacrack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,172 ✭✭✭wadacrack


    niallo27 wrote: »
    So people want a longer lockdown to avoid rolling lockdowns. Give me rolling lockdowns any day, its much easier do a short lockdown for people.

    I want no future lockdowns. Hard lockdown now has much more benefits than a shorter one. If we supress the numbers to under 100, it is possible to keep the Ro below 1 with a vaccine. Testing and tracing is much more valuable at these levels. Importation of cases in the summer is what planted the new chains of transmission , we need more effective checks at airports. Travel may now change however, you may need to be vaccinated to travel. This will help


  • #2273
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    niallo27 wrote: »
    So people want a longer lockdown to avoid rolling lockdowns. Give me rolling lockdowns any day, its much easier do a short lockdown for people.

    Pros and cons. For a lot of business rolling lockdowns are a nightmare. They have to continuously adapt to the changing environment and the greater levels of unpredictability the flux of restrictions creates.


  • #2274
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 55,029 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    wadacrack wrote: »
    I want no future lockdowns. Hard lockdown now has much more benefits than a shorter one. If we supress the numbers to under 100, it is possible to keep the Ro below 1 with a vaccine. Testing and tracing is much more valuable at these levels. Importation of cases in the summer is what planted the new chains of transmission , we need more effective checks at airports. Travel may now change however, you may need to be vaccinated to travel. This will help

    The number is not going to get to 100. Pie in the sky figure.

    The goal will be to get close to the 200 that we had a few weeks ago.

    I think it's also a fallacy to suggest that we have one hard lockdown and that's that. As soon as we open up, numbers will go up again. It's the same fallacy as those suggesting if we hadn't relaxed restrictions there wouldn't be a spike now.


  • #2275
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    Turtwig wrote: »
    Pros and cons. For a lot of business rolling lockdowns are a nightmare. They have to continuously adapt to the changing environment and the greater levels of unpredictability the flux of restrictions creates.

    They will have to adapt anyway, nothing is certain. They are ****ed either way.


  • #2276
    Kermit.de.frog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,109 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Supercell wrote: »
    Bad as it is here it could be far worse, the Germans have 5600 in intensive care at the moment, that's the equivalent of approximately 330 here, doesn't bear thinking about.

    I guess that's the price of losing control. Unfortunately for us we are on the exact same path now having successfully suppressed the virus until December and everyone going through the hardship associated with that.

    To have it thrown away over Christmas is really mind boggling. Can be very few complaints about the restrictions we need to implement now, tougher and more long lasting than before.


  • #2277
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    niallo27 wrote: »
    They will have to adapt anyway, nothing is certain. They are ****ed either way.

    I wasn't just referring to businesses that are on life support. Even the ones that are thriving have to adjust and adapt when the circumstances change.


  • #2278
    Eod100
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,150 ✭✭✭✭Eod100


    awec wrote: »
    The number is not going to get to 100. Pie in the sky figure.

    The goal will be to get close to the 200 that we had a few weeks ago.

    I think it's also a fallacy to suggest that we have one hard lockdown and that's that. As soon as we open up, numbers will go up again. It's the same fallacy as those suggesting if we hadn't relaxed restrictions there wouldn't be a spike now.

    I think it would need to be combined with other measures like investing in public health departments, contact tracing and rolling out vaccines as quick as possible. But there hasn't been much urgency from the government to do the first 2 so far.


  • #2279
    speckle
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,251 ✭✭✭speckle


    Sammy2012 wrote: »
    Yea I see that but grooming services are 7 cases!!! 7! Seems totally unnecessary to have them closed as they pose almost no risk at all!

    I really feel for them as their main advocate organisation was one of the first to be proactive and set out comprehensive detailed health and safety guidelines for their members.. which is why their numbers are so low for such a close personal contact situation.


  • #2280
    Eod100
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,150 ✭✭✭✭Eod100


    Fecking hell https://twitter.com/sharon_utv/status/1344282729060380672?s=19


  • Advertisement
  • #2281
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Kermit.de.frog wrote: »
    I guess that's the price of losing control. Unfortunately for us we are on the exact same path now having successfully suppressed the virus until December and everyone going through the hardship associated with that.

    To have it thrown away over Christmas is really mind boggling. Can be very few complaints about the restrictions we need to implement now, tougher and more long lasting than before.

    It’s not boggling at all, families needed to be allowed time together, retail needed an opportunity to make some revenue. Restrictions were mooted before the last 6 week period ended.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement