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 XXXII-215,743 ROI (4,137 deaths)111,166 NI (2,036 deaths)(22/02)Read OP

1…229230232234235…333

Comments

  • #6932
    zuutroy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,854 ✭✭✭zuutroy


    TonyMaloney wrote: »
    I have zero interest in doing that, thanks. Read the news.

    Read the news lol. Probably the worst way to inform oneself about reality.


  • #6933
    OwenM
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 860 ✭✭✭OwenM


    TonyMaloney wrote: »
    Well I've good news for you. You have the narrative all wrong.
    The narrative is that strains pose a threat to our vaccination efforts. Not that they will fail.

    I'm sick of the mantra coming from your side, where the "vaccines will work just fine" despite all the evidence to the contrary. It's just mindless optimism.

    If you're sick of it all, stop seeking it out

    All the evidence to the contrary? Evidence of what exactly, that the vaccines don't work and the news out of Israel is false?


  • #6934
    accensi0n
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,992 ✭✭✭accensi0n


    hmmm wrote: »
    But we know also that we can't simply let the virus rip through the country when the highly-vulnerable are vaccinated. The hospitals will still get over-run from younger people, and Israel is providing evidence for this.

    What happened in Israel?

    I had been thinking that you almost could just let it rip through the country after all the medical professionals, at risk and elderly had been vaccinated (something like 20% of the pop?). Would the hospitals really still get over run?


  • #6935
    TonyMaloney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭TonyMaloney


    Deleted User wrote: »
    There has been no evidence that variants will have any impact of the ability of vaccines to prevent severe illness.

    Yes, there is an absence of evidence as the trial didn't include many people that were likely to get severely ill.
    But the evidence they do have is very troubling.

    Anyway, I'm not pointing at the SA variant and saying that's the only variant we have to look out for.
    The SA variant is just an example of the type of difficulty that can arise as we try to vaccinate most of the planet.


  • #6936
    OwenM
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 860 ✭✭✭OwenM


    accensi0n wrote: »
    What happened in Israel?

    I had been thinking that you almost could just let it rip through the country after all the medical professionals, at risk and elderly had been vaccinated (something like 20% of the pop?). Would the hospitals really still get over run?

    You would probably need to have vaccinated the people with vulnerabilities aged 18-64 as well, Group 7 on the HSE schedule then we go to level 2 I think.


  • Advertisement
  • #6937
    hmmm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,202 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    accensi0n wrote: »
    What happened in Israel?

    I had been thinking that you almost could just let it rip through the country after all the medical professionals, at risk and elderly had been vaccinated (something like 20% of the pop?). Would the hospitals really still get over run?
    I don't have it to hand, but there were good posts here earlier with the figures. In Israel the number of hospitalisations in the vaccinated older group 65+ started to fall, but those in the younger group increased.

    It wasn't clear whether this was new variants, or maybe less observation of the lockdown, but either way the pressure remained on the hospitals even as the "vulnerable" group were protected.

    That's a short-term thing though (hopefully), and as the younger groups get vaccinated they should get past that surge.


  • #6938
    stephenjmcd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,467 ✭✭✭✭stephenjmcd


    GP Data

    https://tomorrowscare.ie/covid/2021-02-17_COVID_GP_Survey_Results.pdf

    Usual Monday bump, again lower than previous Mondays, followed by a decent drop yesterday, under 1 for the first time in a long time.


  • #6939
    accensi0n
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,992 ✭✭✭accensi0n


    hmmm wrote: »
    I don't have it to hand, but there were good posts here earlier with the figures. In Israel the number of hospitalisations in the vaccinated older group 65+ started to fall, but those in the younger group increased.

    It wasn't clear whether this was new variants, or maybe less observation of the lockdown, but either way the pressure remained on the hospitals even as the "vulnerable" group were protected.

    That's a short-term thing though (hopefully), and as the younger groups get vaccinated they should get past that surge.

    Yeah found this:
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/more-younger-israelis-now-being-hospitalized-for-covid-than-those-60-plus/

    It does mention higher numbers of younger people being hospitalised and a suspicion of it being more aggressive variants.
    But main point of the article seems to be the flipping of the ratio of older to younger for hospitalisations as apposed to an increase in younger, which is kind of what makes me suspect the hospitals wouldn't get overrun run if you let the virus rip, since the historically typical patient would be way less likely to end up in hospital because of the vaccinations.
    And no greater than normal reduction in medical staff.


  • #6940
    TonyMaloney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭TonyMaloney


    accensi0n wrote: »
    Yeah found this:
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/more-younger-israelis-now-being-hospitalized-for-covid-than-those-60-plus/

    It does mention higher numbers of younger people being hospitalised and a suspicion of it being more aggressive variants.
    But main point of the article seems to be the flipping of the ratio of older to younger for hospitalisations as apposed to an increase in younger, which is kind of what makes me suspect the hospitals wouldn't get overrun run if you let the virus rip, since the historically typical patient would be way less likely to end up in hospital because of the vaccinations.
    And no greater than normal reduction in medical staff.

    In the last 14 days there have been 921 hospitalisations from 12,825 cases.
    458 of those hospitalised were under 65.

    If you go back to mid January where we had 60,000+ cases within 14 days, then you quickly get to the point where your hospitals fill with those under 65.
    It's unsustainable.


  • #6941
    podgeandrodge
    Site Banned Posts: 5,975 ✭✭✭podgeandrodge


    TonyMaloney wrote: »
    In the last 14 days there have been 921 hospitalisations from 12,825 cases.
    458 of those hospitalised were under 65.

    If you go back to mid January where we had 60,000+ cases within 14 days, then you quickly get to the point where your hospitals fill with those under 65.
    It's unsustainable.

    I keep seeing the stats about over 65/under 65. It's a bit of a wide brush isn't it? I'd like to know what proportion of under 65's are over 60 for example. (Necessary boards outrage disclaimer - Just to get perspective, not because it doesn't matter). If you're going to be told that 50% of anything is over 65 and 50% is under 65, it's reasonable to want to know are 90% of the latter at the upper end of the scale. (Not talking about hospitalisations, where age doesn't matter in relation to capacity).


  • Advertisement
  • #6942
    TonyMaloney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭TonyMaloney


    podgeandrodge wrote: »
    I keep seeing the stats about over 65/under 65. It's a bit of a wide brush isn't it? I'd like to know what proportion of under 65's are over 60 for example. (Necessary boards outrage disclaimer - Just to get perspective, not because it doesn't matter). If you're going to be told that 50% of anything is over 65 and 50% is under 65, it's reasonable to want to know are 90% of the latter at the upper end of the scale. (Not talking about hospitalisations, where age doesn't matter in relation to capacity).

    336 of the 458 were under 55 years old

    https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/covid-1914-dayepidemiologyreports/COVID-19_14_day_epidemiology_report_20210216_WEB.pdf


  • #6943
    accensi0n
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,992 ✭✭✭accensi0n


    TonyMaloney wrote: »
    In the last 14 days there have been 921 hospitalisations from 12,825 cases.
    458 of those hospitalised were under 65.

    If you go back to mid January where we had 60,000+ cases within 14 days, then you quickly get to the point where your hospitals fill with those under 65.
    It's unsustainable.

    So at our peak the hospitals had just about become overrun.
    And from what you've noted, possibly more than half of the hospitalisations wouldn't occurr again because of initial vaccination groups, elderly + at risk + medical professionals + slower spread.
    Seems pretty positive, let's let it rip. :D


  • #6944
    TonyMaloney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,150 ✭✭✭TonyMaloney


    accensi0n wrote: »
    So at our peak the hospitals had just about become overrun.
    And from what you've noted, possibly more than half of the hospitalisations wouldn't occurr again because of initial vaccination groups, elderly + at risk + medical professionals + slower spread.
    Seems pretty positive, let's let it rip. :D

    Well I tried.

    Good luck out there


  • #6945
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    hmmm wrote: »
    I don't have it to hand, but there were good posts here earlier with the figures. In Israel the number of hospitalisations in the vaccinated older group 65+ started to fall, but those in the younger group increased.

    It wasn't clear whether this was new variants, or maybe less observation of the lockdown, but either way the pressure remained on the hospitals even as the "vulnerable" group were protected.

    That's a short-term thing though (hopefully), and as the younger groups get vaccinated they should get past that surge.

    NPHET aims to have modelling data in March on the anticipated impact to the health service of vaccinations among various vaccine prioritisation groups. That'll give us a better idea how much an increase in daily case numbers we could tolerate and consequently how much we could relax restrictions as the vaccination progresses.


  • #6946
    Rebelbrowser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,368 ✭✭✭Rebelbrowser


    accensi0n wrote: »
    So at our peak the hospitals had just about become overrun.
    And from what you've noted, possibly more than half of the hospitalisations wouldn't occurr again because of initial vaccination groups, elderly + at risk + medical professionals + slower spread.
    Seems pretty positive, let's let it rip. :D

    Loads of people not hospitalised have and are really suffering nonetheless. From talking to the people I know who have had it (typically people in their 40s and 50s) I am very satisfied I do not want to get this damn thing (I am a fit and healthy 44 year old btw) - so no to letting it rip thank you very much.


  • #6947
    CalamariFritti
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,355 ✭✭✭CalamariFritti


    Turtwig wrote: »
    NPHET aims to have modelling data in March on the anticipated impact to the health service of vaccinations among various vaccine prioritisation groups. That'll give us a better idea how much an increase in daily case numbers we could tolerate and consequently how much we could relax restrictions as the vaccination progresses.

    nphet modelling data, haha. 2025 here we come.


  • #6948
    Wolf359f
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,542 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    accensi0n wrote: »
    So at our peak the hospitals had just about become overrun.
    And from what you've noted, possibly more than half of the hospitalisations wouldn't occurr again because of initial vaccination groups, elderly + at risk + medical professionals + slower spread.
    Seems pretty positive, let's let it rip. :D

    We don't actually know what % of the 18-64 age range hospitalized would be considered at risk due to preexisting conditions. So I think at most with all those above 65 vaccinated, you would expect if we went though that wave again, the hospital and ICU figures would have been half what they were (so a kinda worst case scenario).

    Once the at risk 18-64 also get vaccinated you would hope the potential hospitalizations would be minimal and baring people going crazy, it certainly opens the possibility of actually living with Covid (within reason)


  • #6949
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    accensi0n wrote: »
    So at our peak the hospitals had just about become overrun.
    And from what you've noted, possibly more than half of the hospitalisations wouldn't occurr again because of initial vaccination groups, elderly + at risk + medical professionals + slower spread.
    Seems pretty positive, let's let it rip. :D

    I hope you're being facetious.


  • #6950
    accensi0n
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,992 ✭✭✭accensi0n


    TonyMaloney wrote: »
    Well I tried.

    Good luck out there

    But do you see my point at all? You said that 50% were over 65, and I had been discussing vaccinations of elderly + other groups and letting the virus spread through the pop then.
    We pretty much had the virus ripping through us in December.
    So from the stats you gave it shouldn't be nearly as bad as before.


  • #6951
    Kunta Kinte
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 718 ✭✭✭Kunta Kinte


    accensi0n wrote: »
    So at our peak the hospitals had just about become overrun.
    And from what you've noted, possibly more than half of the hospitalisations wouldn't occurr again because of initial vaccination groups, elderly + at risk + medical professionals + slower spread.
    Seems pretty positive, let's let it rip. :D

    Logic fail. 0.5/10.


  • Advertisement
  • #6952
    accensi0n
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,992 ✭✭✭accensi0n


    Rebelbrowser wrote: »
    Loads of people not hospitalised have and are really suffering nonetheless. From talking to the people I know who have had it (typically people in their 40s and 50s) I am very satisfied I do not want to get this damn thing (I am a fit and healthy 44 year old btw) - so no to letting it rip thank you very much.

    Yeah I know I get it, I know people in their 30s who are still feeling the effects.
    I'm not advocating for it, I think it's an interesting discussion though, would the hospitals cope if just those first few groups were vaccinated and then you just opened everything up.


  • #6953
    Kunta Kinte
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 718 ✭✭✭Kunta Kinte


    accensi0n wrote: »
    Yeah I know I get it, I know people in their 30s who are still feeling the effects.
    I'm not advocating for it, I think it's an interesting discussion though, would the hospitals cope if just those first few groups were vaccinated and then you just opened everything up.

    That won`t be happening though so it is only a hypothetical discussion.


  • #6954
    TheDoctor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,980 ✭✭✭TheDoctor


    In the summer, hospitalisations will be as low as an average summer as they were last year.

    Cases will be lower.

    The high risk groups will be vaccinated.

    NPHET “we aren’t where we need to be”


  • #6955
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Hardyn wrote: »
    Seriously. I'm sick of this whole narrative lately that the vaccines are going to fail.
    This narrative has been around since at least June last year, once it became widespread knowledge that vaccines were in development. "We've never had a vaccine for coronaviruses, so we won't get one now" was the favourite one.

    Now that they're here, the pessimism has just become more intense. The media doesn't help, since they deliberately seek out pessimistic points of view to put across, because these are known to be more engaging than optimistic ones.

    At every step of vaccine development, the pessimists have been proven wrong.


  • #6956
    ninebeanrows
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,780 ✭✭✭✭ninebeanrows


    TheDoctor wrote: »
    In the summer, hospitalisations will be lower than a average summer as they were last year.

    Cases will be lower.

    The high risk groups will be vaccinated.

    NPHET “we aren’t where we need to be”

    20 July 2021

    ' we cannot forfeit the ground we have made '

    Cases still worryingly high as 47 new cases announced.


  • #6957
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    Well what a news headline...

    "UK and Californian coronavirus variants have MERGED into one: Rare combination event spotted in American patient could create strain that spreads rapidly and dodges immunity, scientists warn"

    "A hybrid version of the coronavirus has surfaced in California, after the Kent variant and a strain found in the US merged together inside an infected person. The variant, not yet named, has only been spotted once but scientists fear there are likely to be more cases. Experts are worried because it carries mutations which appear to make it able to spread faster and also to slip past some of the immunity made from past infections or vaccines. It was formed from the Kent Covid variant – known scientifically as B.1.1.7 – and a Californian variant called B.1.429. Scientists in the US claim they merged in a 'recombination event', the New Scientist reports. This happens when two different versions of the virus infect the same cell and then swap genes while they are reproducing, giving rise to a new variant. Researchers have warned in the past that these events are possible but said they are 'unlikely' because they require very specific conditions and the coincidence of mostly uncontrollable events. They are more likely to happen during huge outbreaks. While experts have said there is no need to panic about new variants, one admitted recombination was 'dangerous' because it could change the virus so suddenly."


  • #6958
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    nphet modelling data, haha. 2025 here we come.

    The various modelling consortiums in the Irish Universities produce the data. NPHET merely present it.

    It'll be available in March or April at the latest.


  • #6959
    TheDoctor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,980 ✭✭✭TheDoctor


    Stateofyou wrote: »
    Well what a news headline...

    "UK and Californian coronavirus variants have MERGED into one: Rare combination event spotted in American patient could create strain that spreads rapidly and dodges immunity, scientists warn"

    "A hybrid version of the coronavirus has surfaced in California, after the Kent variant and a strain found in the US merged together inside an infected person. The variant, not yet named, has only been spotted once but scientists fear there are likely to be more cases. Experts are worried because it carries mutations which appear to make it able to spread faster and also to slip past some of the immunity made from past infections or vaccines. It was formed from the Kent Covid variant – known scientifically as B.1.1.7 – and a Californian variant called B.1.429. Scientists in the US claim they merged in a 'recombination event', the New Scientist reports. This happens when two different versions of the virus infect the same cell and then swap genes while they are reproducing, giving rise to a new variant. Researchers have warned in the past that these events are possible but said they are 'unlikely' because they require very specific conditions and the coincidence of mostly uncontrollable events. They are more likely to happen during huge outbreaks. While experts have said there is no need to panic about new variants, one admitted recombination was 'dangerous' because it could change the virus so suddenly."


    Unlikely

    Coincidence

    No need to panic

    Could


  • #6960
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Stateofyou wrote: »
    Well what a news headline...

    "UK and Californian coronavirus variants have MERGED into one: Rare combination event spotted in American patient could create strain that spreads rapidly and dodges immunity, scientists warn"

    "A hybrid version of the coronavirus has surfaced in California, after the Kent variant and a strain found in the US merged together inside an infected person. The variant, not yet named, has only been spotted once but scientists fear there are likely to be more cases. Experts are worried because it carries mutations which appear to make it able to spread faster and also to slip past some of the immunity made from past infections or vaccines. It was formed from the Kent Covid variant – known scientifically as B.1.1.7 – and a Californian variant called B.1.429. Scientists in the US claim they merged in a 'recombination event', the New Scientist reports. This happens when two different versions of the virus infect the same cell and then swap genes while they are reproducing, giving rise to a new variant. Researchers have warned in the past that these events are possible but said they are 'unlikely' because they require very specific conditions and the coincidence of mostly uncontrollable events. They are more likely to happen during huge outbreaks. While experts have said there is no need to panic about new variants, one admitted recombination was 'dangerous' because it could change the virus so suddenly."

    Ack I hate modern media sometimes.
    Newscientist reported on this yesterday.
    It may be significant. It may not be. It's only something of interest for now.

    Relevant paragraph from the original article
    Korber has only seen a single recombinant genome among thousands of sequences and it isn’t clear whether the virus is being transmitted from person to person or is just a one-off.
    ...

    The implications of the finding aren’t yet clear because very little is known about the recombinant’s biology. However, it does carry a mutation from B.1.1.7, called Δ69/70, which makes the UK virus more transmissible, and another from B.1.429, called L452R, which can confer resistance to antibodies.

    Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2268014-exclusive-two-variants-have-merged-into-heavily-mutated-coronavirus/#ixzz6mjkB4sJ2


  • Advertisement
  • #6961
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 543 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    seamus wrote: »
    This narrative has been around since at least June last year, once it became widespread knowledge that vaccines were in development. "We've never had a vaccine for coronaviruses, so we won't get one now" was the favourite one.

    Now that they're here, the pessimism has just become more intense. The media doesn't help, since they deliberately seek out pessimistic points of view to put across, because these are known to be more engaging than optimistic ones.

    At every step of vaccine development, the pessimists have been proven wrong.

    I preferred the minks. The maddening thing though is it's not just the media. There are experts that push it too. A certain nutritionist in particular comes to mind.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement