ACitizenErased wrote: » The new variant has been proven to be no more virulent than any other variant.
Heckler wrote: » My sister wasn't swanning around any supervalu. Myself and my mother were. And it was the supervalu in Togher.
Stark wrote: » Source? Great news if that's true.
Ludo wrote: » As above, source on this please? I usually hate these kind of posts demanding sources for a claim, but this one is actually interesting and important. Genuinely interested.
ACitizenErased wrote: » Hospital Update CUH increased by 1 to 15, in-hospital positive test. ICU down by 1 to zero. Mercy no change at 3 with zero in ICU.
Away With The Fairies wrote: » Sounds like a hospital outbreak in CUH?
ACitizenErased wrote: » 1 positive test? No, not at all.
Away With The Fairies wrote: » I read your post wrong. I read it as increased from 1 to 15. Had to read it a second time. Increase of 1 to 15? So there was 14 originally?
Ludo wrote: » Same guy today:https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1344031146808647683 He has not PROVEN anything. It is being investigated all over right now and has not been proven to be more or less virulent as of now.
ACitizenErased wrote: » He's making a conclusion based on secondary data and not direct analysis of the genome. Correlation =/= causation.
Ludo wrote: » Also not PROVEN. That is a huge leap and very misleading.
ACitizenErased wrote: » The tweet you posted making conclusions based on things like contact tracing data is exponentially more misleading than a scientific analysis of the genome.
marno21 wrote: » My original hypothesis was that the UK Government saw this new variant take over and decided to blame the explosion of cases on this to deflect from their policy failings and refusal to lockdown London before it became too late. The day after they announced the new variant and countries around the EU started closing borders to the UK, Matt Hancock was doing TV interviews and he looked like he was about to get sick. I thought at the time that he realised that their clever plan to deflect from their own failings had spectacularly backfired and now they were facing border closures for goods 5 days before Xmas.
marno21 wrote: » This new mutation in the UK happily coincides with a requirement to lockdown London 2 weeks after experts told the Government to do so which fell on deaf ears (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-55245417). Pubs were opened after lockdown in an area in which it was totally inappropriate to open pubs, especially in Winter. There would have been a massive amount of new cases, new variant or no new variant. My original hypothesis was that the UK Government saw this new variant take over and decided to blame the explosion of cases on this to deflect from their policy failings and refusal to lockdown London before it became too late. The day after they announced the new variant and countries around the EU started closing borders to the UK, Matt Hancock was doing TV interviews and he looked like he was about to get sick. I thought at the time that he realised that their clever plan to deflect from their own failings had spectacularly backfired and now they were facing border closures for goods 5 days before Xmas I may be substantially wide of the mark here but what's happened in Ireland is similar to the UK but the starting position in Ireland was better so we won't get hit as bad.
the beer revolu wrote: » Very plausible. Hasn't there been multiple variants of the virus all along from different parts of the world? Was this one any different?
Acosta wrote: » Given the current numbers it's grim to see the high levels of traffic today and the full car parks around the place.
ACitizenErased wrote: » How exactly is that grim?
Acosta wrote: » The current high numbers in Cork. I understand people will need to get things before another 5k lockdown, but If I had been heading into some places around the Kinsale road area earlier I would have turned around and gone home.
ACitizenErased wrote: » People in traffic and shopping (which is safe, no clusters in retail in Cork) =/= grim. Weird tbh.
Acosta wrote: » The traffic references was in relation to the amount of people out and about today and heading to the shops. OBVIOUSLY it's not dangerous to be sitting in your own car. You should let the government know how safe retail is. They might leave it open this time around.
ACitizenErased wrote: » Retail won't be closing because it's dangerous, it'll be closing because they want people to stay at home. If people go shopping they usually go in groups with friends etc. That's the danger, not shops.
ACitizenErased wrote: » Just heard that apparently there is a massive COVID outbreak in CUH discovered today.
Zardoz wrote: » Heads need to roll in management at this stage. Its happening far too often in CUH for it to just be bad luck .
Acosta wrote: » Thanks for the scoop, but I was aware it is people that spread the virus, not shops. That is why I thought it was grim to see so many piling into shops the day after the highest daily covid figures were announced.
