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…204205207209210…330

Comments

  • #6182
    TheadoreT
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 925 ✭✭✭TheadoreT


    three putt wrote: »
    In Spain, mask wearing is mandatory in all outside areas. So yes, you must wear a mask if you're walking on the footpath. You will be fined on the spot if you're not wearing a mask.

    It's the same in most countries in Europe.

    But the armchair scientists here of course know more than some of the leading ones in the EU.


  • #6183
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Because being high risk does not qualify anyone to stay at home and claim PUP.

    Maybe you should have checked the qualifying conditions on PUP before posting.

    It also doesn't cover anyone who is high risk who has to leave their homes to shop or take their kids to school, or care for family members.

    It covers you if you cannot work due to covid, this would be one of these situations, so are you saying if your highly vulnerable you are ****ed.


  • #6184
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    SpacialNeeds wrote: »
    I accept, but only if you promise you'll wash your hands.

    :) Is all the hand washing because we breathe through our hands? What a waste of yellow ink globally if those campaigns have not been at all relevant.
    Of course there is an element of fomite transmission. I don't know how much or how little. But hand washing and sanitiser is aimed at fomite transmission.

    PS I too am Michael Jackson at the petrol pumps.


  • #6185
    Tandey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,418 ✭✭✭Tandey


    niallo27 wrote: »
    Oh ffs, you have won the dumbest post of the day award

    Gives you a break from that award.

    You should be giving the guy praise.


  • #6186
    Tandey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,418 ✭✭✭Tandey


    Gruffalux wrote: »
    :) Is all the hand washing because we breathe through our hands? What a waste of yellow ink globally if those campaigns have not been at all relevant.
    Of course there is an element of fomite transmission. I don't know how much or how little. But hand washing and sanitiser is aimed at fomite transmission.

    PS I too am Michael Jackson at the petrol pumps.

    Your hair goes on fire when you get petrol?


  • Advertisement
  • #6187
    shoppergal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 168 ✭✭shoppergal


    My 3 year old son was confirmed with covid on 28th December (had symptoms 26th and 27th, tested on 27th). My parents were here Xmas day for 3 hours. My dad tested positive on 30th, no symptoms so far. I had a test yesterday, got negative result earlier today.
    Any theories on how I was negative? My son was literally on me for the 2 days he was sick, I slept in with him, he was all but coughing into my mouth, I didn't make any attempt to distance from him. My dad was here for a few hours, the back door was open the entire time and I don't think he and DS physically touched off each other the entire time. I'm baffled!


  • #6188
    Kimbot
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 18,856 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kimbot


    niallo27 wrote: »
    It covers you if you cannot work due to covid, this would be one of these situations, so are you saying if your highly vulnerable you are ****ed.

    It doesn't cover everyone, civil servants can't claim pup for instance.


  • #6189
    Gael23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,147 ✭✭✭✭Gael23


    Time to bring in the army to enforce level 5


  • #6190
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,690 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    shoppergal wrote: »
    My 3 year old son was confirmed with covid on 28th December (had symptoms 26th and 27th, tested on 27th). My parents were here Xmas day for 3 hours. My dad tested positive on 30th, no symptoms so far. I had a test yesterday, got negative result earlier today.
    Any theories on how I was negative? My son was literally on me for the 2 days he was sick, I slept in with him, he was all but coughing into my mouth, I didn't make any attempt to distance from him. My dad was here for a few hours, the back door was open the entire time and I don't think he and DS physically touched off each other the entire time. I'm baffled!

    You might still be incubating the virus? It does seem to happen though that not everyone in a family gets it


  • #6191
    babybuilder
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,111 ✭✭✭babybuilder


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    The one with less than 10% prevalence here that’s increased transmissibility has only been theorised about because it coincided with a surge in the uk. The causal link has not been established, only the correlation, and given we surged without the “new strain” in the same manner as the uk, I would not be too certain that science will indicate that the new strain is any more transmissible

    Agree but the evidence of a link between the new variant and increased transmissabilty is strong:

    "Researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine combined behavioral and epidemiological data on patterns of disease transmission with mathematical models to determine whether the U.K. variant is more transmissible than previously identified variants.
    They found the new variant to be more transmissible than previous variants."
    Also,
    "U.K. contact-tracing data show that patients infected with the new variant went on to infect more people than those infected with previous variants. Data also suggested that the viral load, or the amount of virus in the body, was higher among people infected with the new variant. The higher the viral load for individuals, the more infectious they tend to be. "
    Lastly
    "A different study by PHE with Birmingham university has confirmed previous scientific suggestions that B.1.1.7 leads to higher levels of coronavirus in the upper respiratory tract."


  • Advertisement
  • #6192
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    niallo27 wrote: »
    It covers you if you cannot work due to covid, this would be one of these situations, so are you saying if your highly vulnerable you are ****ed.

    No it does not. Read the link provided.

    If being high risk was one of the criteria to apply for PUP, then every diabetic, asthmatic, cancer survivor, or immuno-compromised person could claim it.

    How to qualify:
    You can apply for the COVID-19 Pandemic Unemployment Payment if you:
    • are aged between 18 and 66 years old and
    • are currently living in the Republic of Ireland and
    • have lost your job due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • have been temporarily laid off due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • were self-employed and your trading income has ceased or reduced to €960 over a rolling 8 week period due to COVID-19 (You must be available to take up full-time employment) and
    • are not in receipt of any income from an employer and
    • are genuinely seeking work

    The payment also applies if you:
    • worked in the Republic of Ireland or were a cross border frontier worker or
    • are a non-EU/EEA worker who has lost employment due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • are a student (or a non-EU/EEA student) who has lost employment due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • are living in Direct Provision and have lost employment due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • are a part-time worker
    You cannot qualify for this payment if you:
    voluntarily left your employment or self-employment
    do not meet the above criteria

    You must also inform the department if your circumstances change.

    NOTHING there that allows high risk people to claim "just because" they are high risk.

    Note that PUP also comes with a condition that the claimant must be seeking work.


  • #6193
    CIARAN_BOYLE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,599 ✭✭✭✭CIARAN_BOYLE


    shoppergal wrote: »
    My 3 year old son was confirmed with covid on 28th December (had symptoms 26th and 27th, tested on 27th). My parents were here Xmas day for 3 hours. My dad tested positive on 30th, no symptoms so far. I had a test yesterday, got negative result earlier today.
    Any theories on how I was negative? My son was literally on me for the 2 days he was sick, I slept in with him, he was all but coughing into my mouth, I didn't make any attempt to distance from him. My dad was here for a few hours, the back door was open the entire time and I don't think he and DS physically touched off each other the entire time. I'm baffled!

    False negative?
    Some people aren't detectable until incubation is completed and this can be upto 2 weeks. So if you got another test today you could be positive.
    You could have previously had covid (without noticing) and may now be immune. Maybe you had it on 20 December and your son got it from you. If you were over it it might not show up on the PCR.


  • #6194
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    Tandey wrote: »
    Your hair goes on fire when you get petrol?

    I squeal, and do sudden toe stands.


  • #6195
    FintanMcluskey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,621 ✭✭✭FintanMcluskey


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    US life expectancy drops by 2-3 years in 2020, the largest drop in life expectancy in a year since WW2.

    Most shockingly, suicide rate in the US has dropped in 2020 for the first time since 2005. Oddly enough drug overdose has increased massively though, several countries have seen similar massive trend in drug overdose deaths this year, such as Canada and Japan iircc.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-19-deaths-to-reverse-u-s-life-expectancy-gains-11608613261

    Doesn’t seem to be many certainties in that article.

    When the death rate exceeds the birth rate that’s when it’s a real crisis


  • #6196
    coastwatch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 909 ✭✭✭coastwatch


    Gael23 wrote: »
    Time to bring in the army to enforce level 5

    January will enforce level 5.


  • #6197
    Funsterdelux
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,376 ✭✭✭Funsterdelux


    Gruffalux wrote: »
    :) Is all the hand washing because we breathe through our hands? What a waste of yellow ink globally if those campaigns have not been at all relevant.
    Of course there is an element of fomite transmission. I don't know how much or how little. But hand washing and sanitiser is aimed at fomite transmission.

    PS I too am Michael Jackson at the petrol pumps    .

    Putting the petrol nozzle in the diesel tank?


  • #6198
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    Deleted User wrote: »
    No it does not. Read the link provided.

    If being high risk was one of the criteria to apply for PUP, then every diabetic, asthmatic, cancer survivor, or immuno-compromised person could claim it.

    How to qualify:
    You can apply for the COVID-19 Pandemic Unemployment Payment if you:
    • are aged between 18 and 66 years old and
    • are currently living in the Republic of Ireland and
    • have lost your job due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • have been temporarily laid off due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • were self-employed and your trading income has ceased or reduced to €960 over a rolling 8 week period due to COVID-19 (You must be available to take up full-time employment) and
    • are not in receipt of any income from an employer and
    • are genuinely seeking work

    The payment also applies if you:
    • worked in the Republic of Ireland or were a cross border frontier worker or
    • are a non-EU/EEA worker who has lost employment due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • are a student (or a non-EU/EEA student) who has lost employment due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • are living in Direct Provision and have lost employment due to the COVID-19 pandemic or
    • are a part-time worker
    You cannot qualify for this payment if you:
    voluntarily left your employment or self-employment
    do not meet the above criteria

    You must also inform the department if your circumstances change.

    NOTHING there that allows high risk people to claim "just because" they are high risk.

    Note that PUP also comes with a condition that the claimant must be seeking work.

    If their employer agrees that they cannot work due to covid, they would qualify. Is a hundred euro or so worth risking your life over.


  • #6199
    JazzyJ
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 685 ✭✭✭JazzyJ


    shoppergal wrote: »
    My 3 year old son was confirmed with covid on 28th December (had symptoms 26th and 27th, tested on 27th). My parents were here Xmas day for 3 hours. My dad tested positive on 30th, no symptoms so far. I had a test yesterday, got negative result earlier today.
    Any theories on how I was negative? My son was literally on me for the 2 days he was sick, I slept in with him, he was all but coughing into my mouth, I didn't make any attempt to distance from him. My dad was here for a few hours, the back door was open the entire time and I don't think he and DS physically touched off each other the entire time. I'm baffled!

    My friend's wife had it. He and their two kids didnt get it, despite all being in an apartment 24/7. I guess there's a small number of specific scenarios it's not as transmissible.


  • #6200
    Donald Trump
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,327 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    growleaves wrote: »
    How do you know that?

    It strikes me as unlikely.




    Just simple numbers/stats.


    65% of new infections under 45 years of age. What age do you think people consider themselves as "vulnerable"? I'd imagine that most people up to the age of 60 don't regard themselves as vulnerable. Maybe even 65. Also, people who consider themselves to be vulnerable would be less likely to be flippant about precautions. So I don't think that it would be unreasonable to estimate that 90% of those new cases do not consider themselves to be vulnerable. 95% probably wouldn't be an off the wall suggestion.


  • #6201
    Cluedo Monopoly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,367 ✭✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    Gael23 wrote: »
    Time to bring in the army to enforce level 5

    The army :D

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • Advertisement
  • #6202
    Kimbot
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 18,856 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kimbot


    niallo27 wrote: »
    If their employer agrees that they cannot work due to covid, they would qualify. Is a hundred euro or so worth risking your life over.

    The employers only choice is to lay the staff member off and then they can qualify I think.


  • #6203
    JP Liz V1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 91,065 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1


    4 deaths
    3,394 cases
    (includes unstated number from the backlog)

    Number in hospital has exceeded 600

    It's rampant everywhere, take care
    https://forumofgames.com/




  • #6204
    Silentcorner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,536 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    JazzyJ wrote: »
    My friend's wife had it. He and their two kids didnt get it, despite all being in an apartment 24/7. I guess there's a small number of specific scenarios it's not as transmissible.

    Shopping in supermarkets...with or without mask mandates!!!


  • #6205
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    niallo27 wrote: »
    If their employer agrees that they cannot work due to covid, they would qualify. Is a hundred euro or so worth risking your life over.

    Nice try, but no, it doesn't work that way.

    Your average employer is not qualified to make medical assessments on staff. In earlier threads there were plenty of examples given of teachers (as an example) who were very high risk being medically certified as being fit to work by occupational health, and others of consultants refusing to certify people as high risk in case their employers tried to use this information against them at a later stage.

    The point is, its not simply a case of "stay at home and claim PUP" if you're high risk.


  • #6206
    growleaves
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,978 ✭✭✭growleaves


    Donald Trump wrote: »
    Just simple numbers/stats.


    65% of new infections under 45 years of age. What age do you think people consider themselves as "vulnerable"? I'd imagine that most people up to the age of 60 don't regard themselves as vulnerable. Maybe even 65. Also, people who consider themselves to be vulnerable would be less likely to be flippant about precautions. So I don't think that it would be unreasonable to estimate that 90% of those new cases do not consider themselves to be vulnerable. 95% probably wouldn't be an off the wall suggestion.

    Hm but what about the actual hospitalisations. They might come disproportionately from the 35% over 45 might they not?

    Also:

    You don't know that people who got it behaved 'flippantly'. If the theories of causality were precise we wouldn't need to close down every sector of society on a hope and a prayer that we'd closed the ones that contribute to spread. If we need to call the Army out to stop people buying ice cream in the open air just in case then a little humility is called for instead of angry demonising.


  • #6207
    oceanman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,779 ✭✭✭oceanman


    Gael23 wrote: »
    Time to bring in the army to enforce level 5
    lol


  • #6208
    majcos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 596 ✭✭✭majcos


    Donald Trump wrote: »
    Just simple numbers/stats.


    65% of new infections under 45 years of age. What age do you think people consider themselves as "vulnerable"? I'd imagine that most people up to the age of 60 don't regard themselves as vulnerable. Maybe even 65. Also, people who consider themselves to be vulnerable would be less likely to be flippant about precautions. So I don't think that it would be unreasonable to estimate that 90% of those new cases do not consider themselves to be vulnerable. 95% probably wouldn't be an off the wall suggestion.
    Almost 47% of all hospital admissions since this began have been in people under 65 years old.


  • #6209
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Nice try, but no, it doesn't work that way.

    Your average employer is not qualified to make medical assessments on staff. In earlier threads there were plenty of examples given of teachers (as an example) who were very high risk being medically certified as being fit to work by occupational health, and others of consultants refusing to certify people as high risk in case their employers tried to use this information against them at a later stage.

    The point is, its not simply a case of "stay at home and claim PUP" if you're high risk.

    Fair enough, keep working and risk your life then.


  • #6210
    Kimbot
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 18,856 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kimbot


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Nice try, but no, it doesn't work that way.

    Your average employer is not qualified to make medical assessments on staff. In earlier threads there were plenty of examples given of teachers (as an example) who were very high risk being medically certified as being fit to work by occupational health, and others of consultants refusing to certify people as high risk in case their employers tried to use this information against them at a later stage.

    The point is, its not simply a case of "stay at home and claim PUP" if you're high risk.

    I'm classified as very high risk by occupational health in work and still have to go in to the office. My own doctor on the other hand thinks my risk is one to self isolate. If I self isolate I don't get paid and I can't claim pup.


  • Advertisement
  • #6211
    Renjit
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 949 ✭✭✭Renjit


    shoppergal wrote: »
    My 3 year old son was confirmed with covid on 28th December (had symptoms 26th and 27th, tested on 27th). My parents were here Xmas day for 3 hours. My dad tested positive on 30th, no symptoms so far. I had a test yesterday, got negative result earlier today.
    Any theories on how I was negative? My son was literally on me for the 2 days he was sick, I slept in with him, he was all but coughing into my mouth, I didn't make any attempt to distance from him. My dad was here for a few hours, the back door was open the entire time and I don't think he and DS physically touched off each other the entire time. I'm baffled!

    You may already had it in past.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement