Covid 19 Part XXXIV-249,437 ROI(4,906 deaths) 120,195 NI (2,145 deaths)(01/05)Read OP

ninebeanrows wrote: »

Pretty much flat from last Wednesday. Not too bad but bump in announced cases likely tomorrow.

Queue RTE hysteria, best avoid all media for the next 24 hours while they wet themselves with glee and accuse the Government of "opening up too early" and "ignoring NPHETs advice"

Its pretty simple, more movement of people, numbers are going to go up, they should know what the threshold of "oh we're into bad territory again"
They keep quoting the reproductive number but that is always going to go up when people move around again, with more elderly and at risk populations vaccinated that has to build more tolerance into us being able to absorb a higher R number and higher percent of positives as long as the ratio of positive tests to hospitalizations stays somewhat reasonable.
That's the logic I thought they were going to use in "living with covid" but that seems to have gone out the window a long time ago.

Media are just going to **** themselves now when the numbers go up and pressure the government for more lockdowns, if they bend then pressure them to open up and on we go.

donalsim wrote: »

It took over a year to get 235,000 infections, but now with 1,000,000 with a vaccine or a prior covid infection and 100,000 being vaccinated every week we will suddenly will 578,000 infections in less than half a year, in the summer

Laughable science

Only took 1 month to get 100,000 infected.
It's was worst case modeling. Even Glynn doesn't envision us getting a 4th wave. Unless of course the public goes mad, like with Christmas.
Media will report those crazy figures but not the modelling showing how we can end up reducing cases as vaccinations increase. Media picking out all the negatives/worst case scenarios, no surprise there

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

That’s someone else quote. It all started because people won’t accept that new virus strain are new viruses and thus there is a real risk that the vaccines won’t at some stage work at all.

“Are you Kermit?
Are you Kermit?
Are you Kermit in disguise?”

I miss the auld soccer chants, wont be long now till fans are back in the stadiums.

Turtwig wrote: »

I will go down the rabbit hole.

Some of them will get awards for their coverage of this event. They'll be talking about it for decades to come. They've been nothing short of wind up merchants at times with little responsibility or empathy for the how their tweets might be received. Or how they are contextualising information.

The thing to really consider here is how responsible are they reporting on anything else? They didn't suddenly change their competence and behaviour because of COVID. Yes, the subject matter became different and a bit more complicated, some accommodation can be made for that, but I do wonder how reliable they were stuff we really took for face value and didn't question.

It's like when you read a magazine. It's filled with information with stuff you know very little about but that one area where you actually have knowledge on is riddled with errors. How much stock can you place in what you read elsewhere in the magazine? Given that you have no familiarisation with that subject matter.

Totally agree and have been saying this all along about people taking their opinions and statistics from less than reliable sources.
Anything on Twitter Facebook or other "fast" media needs to be checked before believing and spreading.
That is everyone's responsibility, not just the journalists.
If you spread a rumour that turns out to be Untrue or even a half truth, you are just as bad as the bots and trolls on those sites trying to pervert public opinion and destroy democracy.
Not saying Adam D but he has been sucked in by the personal tweeting of a disgruntled below average journalist.

Bowers understanding is compromised not only by his rudimentary grasp of what the public health team is trying to convey but by his prejudice, which can be seen all through this by his offhand minimising reporting.
Even at our worst in January he reported hospital numbers as ' stable' and 'improved'.
The way he has the notebook in front of him to prompt him, and watch how he
never answers the questions posed, but carries on with what he has obviously written down, ignoring everything else.
He never interviews a health care worker, probably too afraid he might be told what is really going on and it might go against his narrative.
All the other reporters interview the relevant sectors and are more open and unbiased.
For example, the education correspondent, she has even interviewed the children in special schools.
He is one example of a person who has been unable to rise to the challenge in this whole scenario and should be retired ASAP..

Turtwig wrote: »

The thing to really consider here is how responsible are they reporting on anything else? They didn't suddenly change their competence and behaviour because of COVID. Yes, the subject matter became different and a bit more complicated, some accommodation can be made for that, but I do wonder how reliable they were stuff we really took for face value and didn't question.

It has been a bit of an eye opener. There isn't a single Irish journalist I've been going to for accurate news & analysis of Covid developments, either at home or abroad, and like you say who knows how good their reporting has been for other stuff.

The biggest news of the past few days in my opinion was the CDC report on transmission. Even Brian MacCraith mentioned it, and I didn't see one single Irish reporter picking up on it or tweeting about it. Just parroting whatever they were told at the press conference, and often badly interpreted parroting.

donalsim wrote: »

It took over a year to get 235,000 infections, but now with 1,000,000 with a vaccine or a prior covid infection and 100,000 being vaccinated every week we will suddenly will 578,000 infections in less than half a year, in the summer

Laughable science

It took only about 3 months to get 135,000 approx of those 235,000

donalsim wrote: »

That's only 45,000 a month average, NPHET are forecasting 96,333 a month average

15% of the country pcr infected in 178 days

Nowhere in the world has had that confirmed infection rate

And of course you do realise why the projected figures were averted. Does it have to be restated or do we accept that you're just banging the old drum.

Faugheen wrote: »

It's the reporters fault people are lazy?

I'd like to see you live-tweet something and use 'Tweet 1 of 4' etc. He was tweeting in real time of Philip Nolan giving his presentation.

Well then maybe he should not be live tweeting everything, should he? It's a common thing to see on twitter. Maybe he should be more focussed, listening properly and asking important questions - and then tweet in a proper capacity later.

But then, it's all about getting the headline out first nowadays. For the retweets, like. And people still expect high standards!

His fault, no one else's.

Given the seasonal nature of covid last year, last year being the only real example, the statistics modelling may be way off.

Wonder what parameters were considered..

Vaccinations
Natural immunity
Seasonal reduction in numbers.

Or just the potential exponential growth factor.

What are the % figures in relation to asymptomatic spread v symptomatic.

Personally in no mad rush to escape lockdown. Lucky enough for me it's not too bad. Still the info tonight seemed a little heavy and the intent repetition about statisticians being involved.