Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

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

1…133134136138139…324

Comments

  • #4052
    Banana Republic 1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    iamwhoiam wrote: »
    I did laugh at the News . The HSE and NPHET have told us time and time to listen to the science
    Now the science tells us that outdoor transmission is 0.1% of cases
    But now Colm Henry tells us not to listen to science as it’s misleading !!

    Ask yourself how they tabulate these figures when the contact tracing system was and worthless, they had no clue until recently the amount of asymptotic cases there are and the fact that no outdoor activities are currently allowed.


  • #4053
    Responder XY
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 220 ✭✭Responder XY


    Faugheen wrote: »

    The article found that 20 percent of transmissions couldn't be identified. It does not say that 80 percent of transmissions were identified at source.

    If 20% of transmissions can't be identified - how does it not follow that 80% can be identified?

    Notwithstanding that, I agree that there has to be limitations to this study - but it is so overwhelming, it's very difficult not to see how there is any justification for retaining restrictions on outdoor activities any further, it has to be very very wrong to change the conclusion.

    Of course controls are needed to ensure that they don't move indoors, but it's simply not good enough any more to not allow some type of living to go on. People will do it anyway, much better if it's controlled.


  • #4054
    jackboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,292 ✭✭✭jackboy


    Faugheen wrote: »
    That data is misleading, just like it was misleading in the amount of cases and clusters in pubs and restaurants.

    It is genuinely impossible to say where trasmission truly occured because contact tracing never sought to find that out.

    It has been clear now for a very long time that outdoor transmission is not a significant risk. Even if the 0.1% is 0.5% that is still a tiny risk and worth strongly encouraging outdoor activities in other to minimise indoor gatherings.

    The scientists still against outdoor activities remind me of those who said masks didn’t work this time last year.


  • #4055
    appledrop
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 7,890 ✭✭✭appledrop


    iamwhoiam wrote: »
    I did laugh at the News . The HSE and NPHET have told us time and time to listen to the science
    Now the science tells us that outdoor transmission is 0.1% of cases
    But now Colm Henry tells us not to listen to science as it’s misleading !!

    Yep but remember now when it comes to the schools the data is a 100% correct.

    We have Colm Henry saying that can't just go by confirmed 'outbreaks' when looking at outdoor transmission.

    Sure we have been saying this for months in education sector that not just about the so called confirmed 'outbreaks' but no always shot down and told schools are safe.

    Even though we know in nearly every case they try and blame it on community transmission in schools.

    An absolute load of waffle at this stage.


  • #4056
    User1998
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,775 ✭✭✭✭User1998


    igCorcaigh wrote: »
    The end is in sight for the great Coronavirus pandemic of 2020/21.

    What would be criminal would be allowing the virus to spread in these last couple of months, just before our most vulnerable citizens have been vaccinated.

    What would be criminal would be refining residents to 5km of their home for almost three quarters of a year because of a virus with a survival rate of 99.99% for the majority of the population


  • Advertisement
  • #4057
    marno21
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,969 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Colm Henry is right. 0.1% of confirmed cases linked to outdoor transmission is misleading, because it doesn't account for cases marked as "community transmission", which could be indoor or outdoor for all we know. Contact tracing outdoor transmission would be very difficult, if not impossible in a system like ours which doesn't effectively trace genuine community transmission.

    It doesn't take from the fact that outdoor activities are much safer than indoor ones, and people should be encouraged to do stuff outdoors anyway. It would be much more useful to encourage people to meet outdoors instead of Gardai clearing groups meeting outdoors and effectively encouraging them to meet indoors (e.g. where they won't be seen).


  • #4058
    Sanjuro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,241 ✭✭✭Sanjuro


    funnydoggy wrote: »
    I just want to go back to work to be honest. That and the cinema :D

    God, I miss going to the cinema.


  • #4059
    funnydoggy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,065 ✭✭✭funnydoggy


    Sanjuro wrote: »
    God, I miss going to the cinema.


    I've seen some great films in the last year that I know would've been a million times better if they were watched in the cinema.


    The smell of popcorn, the trailers beforehand (controversial), the magic of it all.


    Ahhhh :o


  • #4060
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,132 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    marno21 wrote: »
    Colm Henry is right. 0.1% of confirmed cases linked to outdoor transmission is misleading, because it doesn't account for cases marked as "community transmission", which could be indoor or outdoor for all we know. Contact tracing outdoor transmission would be very difficult, if not impossible in a system like ours which doesn't effectively trace genuine community transmission.

    It doesn't take from the fact that outdoor activities are much safer than indoor ones, and people should be encouraged to do stuff outdoors anyway. It would be much more useful to encourage people to meet outdoors instead of Gardai clearing groups meeting outdoors and effectively encouraging them to meet indoors (e.g. where they won't be seen).
    The rationale for NHPET is any group is a risk and of course the much feared B.1.117 but once upon a time outdoors was still fine.


  • #4061
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Responder XY wrote: »
    If 20% of transmissions can't be identified - how does it not follow that 80% can be identified?

    Notwithstanding that, I agree that there has to be limitations to this study - but it is so overwhelming, it's very difficult not to see how there is any justification for retaining restrictions on outdoor activities any further, it has to be very very wrong to change the conclusion.

    Of course controls are needed to ensure that they don't move indoors, but it's simply not good enough any more to not allow some type of living to go on. People will do it anyway, much better if it's controlled.

    I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but it was also 'overwhelming' that very few clusters were traced back to pubs and restaurants (I know, indoor, but it's a similar comparison) and even the lobby groups finally got that message after what happened at Christmas. The scientists said it was likely that pubs and restaurants were a problem but the data didn't back it up because it didn't come under contact tracing. People slammed them for that and said 'look at the science' then too, and they turned out to be right.

    Again, I'll stress, it's highly, highly likely that transmission outdoors is low, but we have to be careful with data like this and not wave it around as if it's a pinpoint fact. Our absolutely shambolic contact tracing system means we truly don't know for sure.

    As someone who plays sport on a social level and hasn't played in a year and a half (injuries + pandemic shutdown), I'm mad to get back out and play again. I'm desperate to get back out and play again. I know I sometimes come across as someone who wants to stay locked down forever but I really don't. I'm just trying to point out that the government's response since the start of the pandemic is looking more and more shambolic as the weeks roll on and frustrations grow.


  • Advertisement
  • #4062
    funnydoggy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,065 ✭✭✭funnydoggy


    Faugheen wrote: »
    As someone who plays sport on a social level and hasn't played in a year and a half (injuries + pandemic shutdown), I'm mad to get back out and play again. I'm desperate to get back out and play again. I know I sometimes come across as someone who wants to stay locked down forever but I really don't. I'm just trying to point out that the government's response since the start of the pandemic is looking more and more shambolic as the weeks roll on and frustrations grow.



    No need to explain yourself or justify anything, we all want our own normality back. Hope your injury is OK and you get back playing as soon as :)


  • #4063
    TheDoctor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,990 ✭✭✭TheDoctor


    covidrelease wrote: »
    We also have increasing herd immunity through people who have had it.

    A normal country would be looking to Level 2 in May.

    Here in NPHET land however the best we can hope for is a downgrade from "precarious" to maybe "the next 2 weeks are crucial" and opening click and collect.

    NPHET land.

    That’s funny.


  • #4064
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    funnydoggy wrote: »
    No need to explain yourself or justify anything, we all want our own normality back. Hope your injury is OK and you get back playing as soon as :)

    Oh I'm grand now. Weekend I was due to come back last March was when everything was shut down and it hasn't come back since.


  • #4065
    funnydoggy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,065 ✭✭✭funnydoggy


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Oh I'm grand now. Weekend I was due to come back last March was when everything was shut down and it hasn't come back since.


    Okay now that's annoying :D


  • #4066
    blowitupref
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭blowitupref


    Rosita wrote: »
    Interesting to see 32 cases reported in Cork, 8 more than in Kildare. About a week ago people here were saying Cork should be opening up, while they wondered what was going on in Kildare. Shows how volatile it all is.

    32 daily cases or 315 cases in 14 days in a population of 543k is far from a volatile situation.


  • #4067
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    User1998 wrote: »
    What would be criminal would be refining residents to 5km of their home for almost three quarters of a year because of a virus with a survival rate of 99.99% for the majority of the population

    In what age groups is survival rate 99.99%?


  • #4068
    Rosita
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,147 ✭✭✭Rosita


    blowitupref wrote: »
    32 daily cases or 315 cases in 14 days in a population of 543k is far from a volatile situation.


    I did NOT say the situation in Cork is volatile. Read my post correctly or else leave it.


  • #4069
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    iamwhoiam wrote: »
    I did laugh at the News . The HSE and NPHET have told us time and time to listen to the science
    Now the science tells us that outdoor transmission is 0.1% of cases
    But now Colm Henry tells us not to listen to science as it’s misleading !!

    Data =/= Science.

    It is the interpretation, hypothesising and testing the observations on data that is science.

    Now from the data, 0.1% of cases were outdoor, 79.9% indoor and the remainder unknown. The 80% were the easier to identify, the 20% the harder, meaning on the balance of probabilities outdoor would be higher in the unknown has these are the difficult ones to find. We can say with certainty that the true proportion of outdoor transmissions are somewhere between 0.1% and 20%, with it likely to be far closer to 0.1%, but greater than 0.1%.


  • #4070
    Eod100
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,664 ✭✭✭✭Eod100


    https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1379505103498002433?s=19


  • #4071
    TheDoctor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,990 ✭✭✭TheDoctor


    Eod100 wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1379505103498002433?s=19

    That’s some number!


  • Advertisement
  • #4072
    wadacrack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,172 ✭✭✭wadacrack


    Eod100 wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1379505103498002433?s=19

    Did'nt know that was even possible given the fact PCR tests can give false positives


  • #4073
    Away With The Fairies
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,077 ✭✭✭Away With The Fairies


    Messi19 wrote: »
    I'm surprised you have time to ask such questions with all the reporting you've seemingly been doing

    Yeah perfectly ok to vaccinate a GP's childminder and pass them off as a healthcare assistant


  • #4074
    Deeper Blue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,040 ✭✭✭Deeper Blue


    Eod100 wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1379505103498002433?s=19

    So only 11 cases from 16,100 tests. Great stuff


  • #4075
    gctest50
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,534 ✭✭✭gctest50


    wadacrack wrote: »
    Did'nt know that was even possible given the fact PCR tests can give false positives


    Even Kirstie McGrath returned a false positive result :

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40259516.html

    of all the tests to mess up on


  • #4076
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 10,049 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    wadacrack wrote: »
    Did'nt know that was even possible given the fact PCR tests can give false positives

    Once the correct protocols are in place the false positive rate is tiny. And here is the proof


  • #4077
    hmmm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,192 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Faugheen wrote: »
    People reading into that data in the Irish Times need to remember that it's 0.1% of cases that can be identified as the source of the transmission.

    Up until last week, there was no retroactive contact tracing.
    You'd swear we were the only country in the world with Covid.

    Lots of countries have done retroactive contact tracing. The earliest I remember was China in April 2020 where they analysed 7,324 cases and could only find 2 which involved outdoor transmission.

    Our reluctance to accept that outdoor transmission is substantially less likely, and our reluctance to tell people and businesses to go outside, has been the biggest wasted opportunity for me of this entire pandemic. Even now we're putting all this energy into airport quarantine in hotels, where if we put half as much effort into encouraging people to only meet outside it would have a much bigger impact.


  • #4078
    PTH2009
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,587 ✭✭✭✭PTH2009


    Very positive and encouraging news today but reckon something will come along to derail it

    NPHET will still be as cautious as ever and a time will come when the government have to reject their advice


  • #4079
    TheDoctor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,990 ✭✭✭TheDoctor


    PTH2009 wrote: »
    Very positive and encouraging news today but reckon something will come along to derail it

    NPHET will still be as cautious as ever and a time will come when the government have to reject their advice

    Colm Henry is charging to the podium as we speak


  • #4080
    covidrelease
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 229 ✭✭covidrelease


    hmmm wrote: »
    You'd swear we were the only country in the world with Covid.

    Lots of countries have done retroactive contact tracing. The earliest I remember was China in April 2020 where they analysed 7,324 cases and could only find 2 which involved outdoor transmission.

    Our reluctance to accept that outdoor transmission is substantially less likely, and our reluctance to tell people and businesses to go outside, has been the biggest wasted opportunity for me of this entire pandemic. Even now we're putting all this energy into airport quarantine in hotels, where if we put half as much effort into encouraging people to only meet outside it would have a much bigger impact.

    Sadly it's NPHET way or no way. Absolutely no reason not to revert to 15 outdoors for pubs and restaurants immediately.

    Yet these clowns whine on about the precarious situation, the new virus and of course the variants.


  • Advertisement
  • #4081
    FintanMcluskey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,904 ✭✭✭FintanMcluskey


    Eod100 wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/paulreiddublin/status/1379505103498002433?s=19

    Excellent stuff.

    If someone told me 12 months ago we would have the nursing home patients & HCW’s vaccinated, and see case rates among the vulnerable so low & still be in level 5 say pull the other one.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement