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 XXXI-187,554 ROI (2,970 deaths) 100,319 NI (1,730 deaths)(24/01)Read OP

1…285286288290291…333

Comments

  • #8612
    josip
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,785 ✭✭✭✭josip


    landofthetree wrote: »
    Slowly leaking the news that vaccines dont work.


    The Israelis are going to be raging, having paid 4 times over the odds for something that might as well have come out of the back of a Robin Reliant.


  • #8613
    Eod100
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,178 ✭✭✭✭Eod100


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Virgin media news just there was probably the most depressing news segment I’ve seen to date. I feel like sinking myself into a vat of wine and not coming up for air until August

    The grimmest news seems to be on a Friday for some reasons. If only humans could hibernate :pac:


  • #8614
    landofthetree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,463 ✭✭✭landofthetree


    Turtwig wrote: »
    That's Hancock being irresponsible. He's referring to papers in the public domain that suggest there may be vaccine efficacy issues with the SA variant. There may not be. We just don't know yet. Preliminary impressions aren't great though. He made it sound though like there's a definite problem. We. Do. Not. Know. Yet.

    Of course they know. Its standard practice to leak this sort of stuff.

    Sure the WHO told us there was no danger almost exactly a year ago for political reasons and not to create panic.

    We are in deep deep sh1t .


  • #8615
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Turtwig wrote: »
    That's Hancock being irresponsible. He's referring to papers in the public domain that suggest there may be vaccine efficacy issues with the SA variant. There may not be. We just don't know yet. Preliminary impressions aren't great though. He made it sound though like there's a definite problem. We. Do. Not. Know. Yet.
    Getting ahead of it before a media source "exclusively" reveals it, but yeah premature.


  • #8616
    YFlyer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,717 ✭✭✭YFlyer


    I eavesdrop on to Dolores Cahill Facebook page. Some headbangers on it.


  • Advertisement
  • #8617
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    landofthetree wrote: »
    Of course they know. Its standard practice to leak this sort of stuff.

    Sure the WHO told us there was no danger almost exactly a year ago for political reasons and not to create panic.

    We are in deep deep sh1t .

    Ah calm the fck down.

    Check your sources and information.


  • #8618
    giveitholly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,240 ✭✭✭giveitholly


    YFlyer wrote: »
    I eavesdrop on to Dolores Cahill Facebook page. Some headbangers on it.

    Any chance of a quick summary of what crap they are raving about now?


  • #8619
    one armed dwarf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 929 ✭✭✭one armed dwarf


    This thread turning into scaremongering sh*te atm.

    Guess I'll give it a break checking in until there's some more verifiable info


  • #8620
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    landofthetree wrote: »
    Slowly leaking the news that vaccines dont work.
    Nope, that's only possibly the case for the SA variant. They've tested the now widespread B.1.1.17 variant and that's fine. It's still unclear whether this means someone would be vulnerable to the new variant if they'd already had Covid-19, or what this might mean for people who've been vaccinated.


  • #8621
    Kivaro
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Kivaro


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Virgin media news just there was probably the most depressing news segment I’ve seen to date. I feel like sinking myself into a vat of wine and not coming up for air until August

    Funny enough, I just watch VM news at 5:30 pm and that's it for Irish news. But after 30 seconds this evening, I just switched it off and put on some music. It's Friday for fecks sake. Fridays used to be fun.
    Covid is definitely giving us a run for the money :)


  • Advertisement
  • #8622
    TonyMaloney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭TonyMaloney


    Arghus wrote: »
    Feels like the mood music from Europe has changed over the last couple of days. Talk of travel restrictions between states and the phrase "zero Covid" has been flown around a bit in the media. Even over here there's talk of a "two island solution"

    The plates are shifting lads.

    Belgium is closing it's borders to all non essential travelers

    It's happening


  • #8623
    landofthetree
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,463 ✭✭✭landofthetree


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Nope, that's only possibly the case for the SA variant. They've tested the now widespread B.1.1.17 variant and that's fine.

    Loads of new strains will appear unfortunately.


  • #8624
    bb1234567
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,513 ✭✭✭bb1234567


    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1352681126570176514

    Here we go again , more useless border closures. While Dutch and French people will probably stroll in and out on foot daily. Why is Belgium doing this?


  • #8625
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,139 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    one armed dwarf wrote: »
    This thread turning into scaremongering sh*te atm.

    Guess I'll give it a break checking in until there's some more verifiable info

    Don't be getting your news off here, posters try to out doom each other most days. They are wrong 99% of the time.


  • #8626
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    Ah **** sake. This and the mortality increase today. Couldn't be true what are the chances. I give up, what is even the point in caring anymore

    My bad. Hancock made the remarks in private. The Daily Mail leaked them and transposed the worst possible interpretation into them.

    Hancock merely said papers existed. Scientific papers also exist that show

    Water has memory.
    A certain astronomer will cause rain when they try to book a telescope observation period.
    That you can build an interplanetary nuclear rocket engine reliant on seawater.
    (that last one is actually less ridiculous than it sounds but I hope it illustrates the point. Any thing can be published.)


  • #8627
    marno21
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,650 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    The news this evening is full of stories based on inconclusive data. The UK variant “mortality increase” information is based on a subset of data taken during a period when the health system in the UK was close to collapse, when testing was overwhelmed and when a comprehensive dataset on the pandemic was not available. The ONS data on the UK variant today disagrees with most theories on the variant to date.

    The data on the South African variant is also inconclusive. Has there been many reinfections to date? If one mutation on the spike protein is causing severely reduced vaccine effectiveness we may have better luck with inactivated virus vaccines in the future.

    Anyone following AstraZeneca to date will not be surprised by the latest bad news. I’m crossing my fingers that Janssen will bring us good news and start a competent delivery process.

    The EU switch to a zero-Covid approach isn’t altogether surprising. There’s little point in vaccinating the population while it’s running rampant in countries. Getting cases as low as possible in parallel with the vaccine rollout makes sense to try and rescue as much of 2021 as possible.


  • #8628
    paulie21
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,311 ✭✭✭✭paulie21


    https://twitter.com/newschambers/status/1352682013388632064?s=19


  • #8629
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    landofthetree wrote: »
    Loads of new strains will appear unfortunately.
    And loads of them could also weaken it. Mutations are a natural part of this. What is coming at us about these other variants is largely media speculation. We need to wait for the vaccine makers to resolve it.


  • #8630
    StevenToast
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,049 ✭✭✭StevenToast


    I think I will see a Covid 'C' thread by the end of all this....

    "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining." - Fletcher



  • #8631
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    Luke-m wrote: »
    BBC explains it here,
    1,000 60-year-olds infected with the old variant, 10 of them might be expected to die. But this rises to around 13 with the new variant.

    It's based on positive cases. Their positivity rate is not reliable as the number of lateral flow tests being done are more then PCR at this stage. So I'd say it's down to more cases missed, therefore the CFR has increased. All this happening at a time of a big surge with a new variant.


  • Advertisement
  • #8632
    bb1234567
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,513 ✭✭✭bb1234567


    Wolf359f wrote: »
    It's based on positive cases. Their positivity rate is not reliable as the number of lateral flow tests being done are more then PCR at this stage. So I'd say it's down to more cases missed, therefore the CFR has increased. All this happening at a time of a big surge with a new variant.

    IS this really all the statement is based on? Could they be that stupid?


  • #8633
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    Ah **** sake. This and the mortality increase today. Couldn't be true what are the chances. I give up, what is even the point in caring anymore

    A 30% increase in a very small number is still a very small number


  • #8634
    Funsterdelux
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,376 ✭✭✭Funsterdelux


    StevenToast wrote: »
    I think I will see a Covid 'C' thread by the end of all this....

    Its endemic, COVID∞


  • #8635
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    IS this really all the statement is based on? Could they be that stupid?
    Sir Patrick Vallance, the government's chief scientific adviser, said with the initial variant that out of 1,000 people over 60 infected with it, 10 would die.
    Seems to be, they never mentioned hospitalised, just infected.


  • #8636
    saabsaab
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,740 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Happydays2020 wrote: »
    Is it drugs?


    Head shop?


  • #8637
    PokeHerKing
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,921 ✭✭✭PokeHerKing


    Benimar wrote: »
    Well, if he is then so is NPHET and many other countries who believe it exists!

    Of course it exists.. is it 50% more contagious, I believe the science is still out on that claim.


  • #8638
    CIARAN_BOYLE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,599 ✭✭✭✭CIARAN_BOYLE


    bb1234567 wrote: »
    IS this really all the statement is based on? Could they be that stupid?

    Imo its 50/50 between missed cases and stressed hospitals not being able to treat.

    I'm sure they have attempted to adjust for these variables but I they could have gotten it wrong.


  • #8639
    Gael23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,151 ✭✭✭✭Gael23


    10% of all deaths occurred last week


  • #8640
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »
    Imo its 50/50 between missed cases and stressed hospitals not being able to treat.

    I'm sure they have attempted to adjust for these variables but I they could have gotten it wrong.

    We possibly have a lower or the same R0 as last march lockdown (this one not as strict), but this time with 50%+ of the new variant, therefore the new variant is less infectious.
    We have a lower CFR with the new strain compared to the first wave, so therefore the new strain is less lethal.
    Both statements are an assumption made on inaccurate stats/incomplete data etc...


  • Advertisement
  • #8641
    froog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭froog


    the WHO should make themselves useful and start forcefully and very publicly responding to countries going on solo runs with "interpretations" of limited datasets. there's enough bloody misery around right now without the likes of boris and his team of ghouls playing games of smoke and mirrors.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement