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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Covid 19 Part XXXIII-231,484 ROI(4,610 deaths)116,197 NI (2,107 deaths)(23/03)Read OP

1…187188190192193…326

Comments

  • #5672
    PTH2009
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,832 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    alentejo wrote: »
    It just seems with the English variant, Level 5 seems to have the same effect as level 3 on the original Covid variant.

    More grim times ahead!

    Are the UK actual concerned with there own variant ?


  • #5673
    marno21
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,713 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    alentejo wrote: »
    It just seems with the English variant, Level 5 seems to have the same effect as level 3 on the original Covid variant.

    More grim times ahead!
    That doesn't seem to apply in England though, just here.

    Maybe if we had clear goals and dates to work towards instead of the powers that be wondering why people are spending their 29th weekend in lockdown out and about when we're being told its indefinite?


  • #5674
    Tazz T
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,246 ✭✭✭Tazz T


    jackboy wrote: »
    Yes, it’s the real world. There is little the Irish government can do to punish AZ and even if they do something there could be consequences to our reputation and future investments in the country could be put at risk.

    There's plenty they can do if they had the balls, but they're too busy fining me and you for going beyond 5km to take Astra to account for breaking the law.

    But hey Astrazenaca's future investment in country is more important the entire pub sector, or the aviation industry to name just two Irish industries?

    They're just useless cowards.


  • #5675
    funnydoggy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,065 ✭✭✭funnydoggy


    alentejo wrote: »
    It just seems with the English variant, Level 5 seems to have the same effect as level 3 on the original Covid variant.

    More grim times ahead!


    Not with vaccines.


  • #5676
    hynesie08
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,383 ✭✭✭✭hynesie08


    PTH2009 wrote: »
    Are the UK actual concerned with there own variant ?

    Very much so. See you in 36 hours when you ask again.


  • Advertisement
  • #5677
    jackboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,086 ✭✭✭jackboy


    Tazz T wrote: »
    There's plenty they can do if they had the balls, but they're too busy fining me and you for going beyond 5km to take Astra to account for breaking the law.

    But hey Astrazenaca's future investment in country is more important the entire pub sector, or the aviation industry to name just two Irish industries?

    They're just useless cowards.

    The issue is that an attack on AZ will be noted by all the other multinationals and could impact their future decisions to invest in Ireland. Punishing AZ will not help us get more vaccines anyway. What they need to do is actually enforce the restrictions so that the virus will very quickly dwindle in the population.


  • #5678
    tigger123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,605 ✭✭✭tigger123


    Tazz T wrote: »
    There's plenty they can do if they had the balls, but they're too busy fining me and you for going beyond 5km to take Astra to account for breaking the law.

    But hey Astrazenaca's future investment in country is more important the entire pub sector, or the aviation industry to name just two Irish industries?

    They're just useless cowards.

    Genuine question: what do you think the Irish government could do to AZ?


  • #5679
    spookwoman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,059 ✭✭✭✭spookwoman


    Slide1.jpg
    Slide2.jpg
    Slide3.jpg
    Slide4.jpg
    Slide5.jpg
    Slide6.jpg
    Slide7.jpg
    Slide8.jpg
    Slide9.jpg
    Slide10.jpg
    Slide12.jpg
    Slide13.jpg
    Slide14.jpg


  • #5680
    DellyBelly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,651 ✭✭✭DellyBelly


    The daily cases are very worrying. We can't get below 500..I fear the schools reopening and St Patrick's day as well it could rise again above 600. No reopening I'm afraid for a long time yet.. Very depressing


  • #5681
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    niallo27 wrote: »
    Where is the line drawn.
    The line is drawn where the case fatality rate varies, upon fairly well-understood parameters, between 0.25% and 10%:

    https://ourworldindata.org/covid-mortality-risk

    Another way of looking at it is to look at the excess deaths which - depending on how the disease is working through the community - varies in the UK between 0% and 100%:

    https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid

    And that's deaths due to covid. Long-tail covid is a separate issue and affects large numbers of people too.


  • Advertisement
  • #5682
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,793 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Long-tail covid

    That's a new one


  • #5683
    MerlinSouthDub
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭MerlinSouthDub


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    People can only take so much lockdown before eventually they decide to live again.

    Lockdown is not effective if it lasts 7 months with just a 3 week slight break at Christmas. Not to mention NPHET are not helping saying just another 5 months.

    Stick with a failed policy and prepare to fail

    NPHET insisting on Level 5 in October was a catastrophic mistake. It wasn't needed (level 3 was working - the data proves this). That decision caused a pent-up demand to shop and to socialize over Christmas, as well as a loss of public support.


  • #5684
    Deeper Blue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,506 ✭✭✭Deeper Blue


    DellyBelly wrote: »
    The daily cases are very worrying. We can't get below 500..I fear the schools reopening and St Patrick's day as well it could rise again above 600. No reopening I'm afraid for a long time yet.. Very depressing

    You say that literally every time the numbers go up.


  • #5685
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    lawred2 wrote: »
    Long-tail covid

    That's a new one

    Not at all. It's used as often as Long Covid or Long-haul Covid
    They call the illness, “Long-Haul COVID” or “Long-tail COVID.” Many of these patients are health care workers who had massive exposure to the virus early in the pandemic and describe having symptoms for 100+ days.....


  • #5686
    lawred2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,793 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Jim_Hodge wrote: »
    Not at all. It's used as often as Log Covid or Long-haul Covid

    After effects just doesn't sound as cool


  • #5687
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    lawred2 wrote: »
    After effects just doesn't sound as cool

    That's not what you said.

    Your cynicism continues unabated.


  • #5688
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 6,775 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    500 new cases is deemed "concerning" and "widespread community transmission".

    I disagree.

    5 million population / 500 new cases = 1 in 10,000 people have the virus.

    If you have a small town of 30,000 people, you would need to personally meet all of them before securing the risk of catching the virus.

    The real question is: why isn't current levels deemed a sufficiently safe "minimum" to relax restrictions? At least to Lv. 3.


  • #5689
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Deleted User wrote: »
    500 new cases is deemed "concerning" and "widespread community transmission".

    I disagree.

    5 million population / 500 new cases = 1 in 10,000 people have the virus.

    If you have a small town of 30,000 people, you would need to personally meet all of them before securing the risk of catching the virus.

    The real question is: why isn't current levels deemed a sufficiently safe "minimum" to relax restrictions? At least to Lv. 3.

    That's the new cases in a day, not the total currently with the virus.

    That daily figure is only what it is because of the restrictions. Don't put the cart in front of the horse.


  • #5690
    tom1ie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,192 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    MerlinSouthDub wrote: »
    NPHET insisting on Level 5 in October was a catastrophic mistake. It wasn't needed (level 3 was working - the data proves this). That decision caused a pent-up demand to shop and to socialize over Christmas, as well as a loss of public support.

    Nope people caused the virus to spread not NPHET.


  • #5691
    odyssey06
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,754 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Deleted User wrote: »
    500 new cases is deemed "concerning" and "widespread community transmission".

    I disagree.
    5 million population / 500 new cases = 1 in 10,000 people have the virus.

    Well, for one thing, new cases is not the same as people who currently have the virus.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Advertisement
  • #5692
    noplacehere
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 585 ✭✭✭noplacehere


    mightyreds wrote: »
    I know of an outbreak from a creche in kildare too that has led to about 20 cases plus the outbreak then got from the creche to home then into a primary school by the person who works in the creche passing it to the child at home.
    I'm friends with all the people involved and the turn around is just too slow, the outbreak in the creche happened last Friday, my friend found out she was a close contact Monday then wait on results till Tuesday, her close contacts were advised the next day.
    This went on through about 3 people by the time each had been informed and tested their husbands had been in to work and then the cycle starts with his work contacts. Luckily alot of the passing contacts work etc seem to be negative.

    Interesting to hear. If it’s the same creche the family I know didn’t get a test until Thursday for one kid and the other (although deemed a close contact at exactly the same time) is not being tested until Monday. Texts messages to restrict movements are arriving every morning for one child but not for the other. It seems very disorganised


  • #5693
    Monster249
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 268 ✭✭Monster249


    Jim_Hodge wrote: »
    That's the new cases in a day, not the total currently with the virus.

    That daily figure is only what it is because of the restrictions. Don't put the cart in front of the horse.

    This level 5 is not equal to last year's level 5. People are everywhere and retail parks are flooded. A lot less compliance so it's natural for it to see case decline stagnate.


  • #5694
    prunudo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,236 ✭✭✭prunudo


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    500 new cases is deemed "concerning" and "widespread community transmission".

    I disagree.

    5 million population / 500 new cases = 1 in 10,000 people have the virus.

    If you have a small town of 30,000 people, you would need to personally meet all of them before securing the risk of catching the virus.

    The real question is: why isn't current levels deemed a sufficiently safe "minimum" to relax restrictions? At least to Lv. 3.

    While im not so concerned about the 500 figure at present, i suppose the fact is, with varying stages of incubation, there will be a few thousand going around at any one time who could be infectious and not know it.
    Probably could go to level 4 at present, but still a bit soon to be rushing to level 3.


  • #5695
    Jim_Hodge
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Monster249 wrote: »
    This level 5 is not equal to last year's level 5. People are everywhere and retail parks are flooded. A lot less compliance so it's natural for it to see case decline stagnate.

    Fine. Not what I was posting about though.


  • #5696
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 6,775 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Jim_Hodge wrote: »
    That's the new cases in a day, not the total currently with the virus.

    That daily figure is only what it is because of the restrictions. Don't put the cart in front of the horse.

    Fair enough, but if we assume 7 days of 500 cases = 3,500 patients.

    5 million / 3.5k = 1 in 1,428 people

    ...meaning that in a town of 30,000 people, 21 people have the virus.

    Yes the number will be higher due to asymptomatics, perhaps 20% higher, but when you see these raw stats, no matter what way you cut it, we should be in Lv. 3 territory by early April.


  • #5697
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 939 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Fair enough, but if we assume 7 days of 500 cases = 3,500 patients.

    5 million / 3.5k = 1 in 1,428 people

    ...meaning that in a town of 30,000 people, 21 people have the virus.

    Yes the number will be higher due to asymptomatics, perhaps 20% higher, but when you see these raw stats, no matter what way you cut it, we should be in Lv. 3 territory by early April.

    You're actually partially correct, 500 a day is fine, well manageable, no threat to the health service. The issue is when you relax instead of those 500 causing another 400 to 500 cases, they cause 600, and then those 600 cause 720 and so on until you can't cope. Even at an r rate of 1.1 our health service can only manage for a limited amount of time.

    How do you manage inevitable exponential growth?


  • #5698
    thebiglad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭thebiglad


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Fair enough, but if we assume 7 days of 500 cases = 3,500 patients.

    5 million / 3.5k = 1 in 1,428 people

    ...meaning that in a town of 30,000 people, 21 people have the virus.

    Yes the number will be higher due to asymptomatics, perhaps 20% higher, but when you see these raw stats, no matter what way you cut it, we should be in Lv. 3 territory by early April.

    I start by pinning my colours to the mast - I want level 1 now!

    But unfortunately to follow your argument of 21 people. Your 21 people will meet 3 people each and they will go on to meet 3 people each and the virus will spread rapidly - this the basis of argument to lockdown and reduce contacts.

    However, what should also be considered is the likelihood that people end up hospitalised - as that number diminishes through the vaccination of vulnerable the numbers become irrelevant and acceleration of release from restrictions.

    It can also be mitigated with ventilation, hand sanitising etc etc so no excuse not to allow outdoor meeting.


  • #5699
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,819 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Russman wrote: »
    I genuinely think Ireland, and the individual counties, are just too small to go for regional lockdowns, sure you can be almost anywhere within 3 hours. There are too many settlements (from individual houses to towns and villages) where the nearest shop/garage/whatever is just over the nearby county border, and the next nearest is miles away. We don’t have the manpower to enforce county borders imho.

    Crookhaven the Charleville takes 3 hours and you haven't even left Cork!


  • #5700
    Rebelbrowser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,377 ✭✭✭Rebelbrowser


    snotboogie wrote: »
    Crookhaven the Charleville takes 3 hours and you haven't even left Cork!

    Yeah. Parts of North Cork are closer as the crow flies (let alone time wise by road) to South County Dublin than to South West Cork.


  • Advertisement
  • #5701
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 6,775 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You're actually partially correct, 500 a day is fine, well manageable, no threat to the health service. The issue is when you relax instead of those 500 causing another 400 to 500 cases, they cause 600, and then those 600 cause 720 and so on until you can't cope. Even at an r rate of 1.1 our health service can only manage for a limited amount of time.

    How do you manage inevitable exponential growth?

    Exponential growth is mitigated against via Lv. 3 restrictions / social distancing and the rest - as it was proven to be in October; and as it proved to be in many European countries over the past year. Yes, at some points, additional more severe measures are needed. But not to the extent that Ireland has imposed over the past year.

    I'd never argue for some free for all.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement