CoVid19 Part XII - 4,604 in ROI (137 deaths) 998 in NI (56 deaths)(04/04) **Read OP**

paw patrol

Pseudonym121 wrote: »

No median and average are different. Median is being used in order to keep the age high as average would yield a significantly lower age.

In research papers there’d always a reason you choose median vs average. The use of median instead of average is very calculated.

this is so important , the media should be calling the state out on this.

Its very sly behaviour of which we've seen a fair bit from the state during this. Keep the population ignorant of the real situation.

domrush

paw patrol wrote: »

this is so important , the media should be calling the state out on this.

Its very sly behaviour of which we've seen a fair bit from the state during this. Keep the population ignorant of the real situation.

See my post above, it would be scientifically inappropriate to use the mean here

paw patrol

domrush wrote: »

Median is typically used on a heavily skewed dataset, which is what we have here. The age of deaths is heavily weighted to older ages, it makes far more sense to use median than mean here.

There’s no conceiving going on here

it is deception.
they are reporting median to the population when they know a large chunk of people wouldn't really get it and confuse it with average.
they could give both in the interest of full disclosure but they don't.

this is done on purpose.

caveat emptor

Pseudonym121 wrote: »

No median and average are different. Median is being used in order to keep the age high as average would yield a significantly lower age.

In research papers there’d always a reason you choose median vs average. The use of median instead of average is very calculated.

Both numbers have their uses. Median much more useful in reporting on income as it is highly variable. Publish both numbers, job done.

Transparency has been improving but still gaps everywhere.

rusty the athlete

Kivaro wrote: »

The whole world needs to work together in this life/death battle.

I would merely add "in a coordinated and consistent way" to your last sentence. Unfortunately this has proved impossible for the human race, there are simply far too many political models where egos are more important than the national good, let alone knows the worldwide good.


I suppose if we could get something in place like incident reporting in civil aviation, in which most countries are bound to adhere to on pain of being totally isolated, then we would have an objective, standardized and consistent way of at least understanding common factors and re-occuring themes in the development of epidemics and pandemics. Even the likes of trump cant ignore aviation rules and directives.

ninebeanrows

Looking at the estimated progress of this.

Cases should peak c. 10 April, deaths should peak c. 17 April.

By 10 May we will see some reduction in the 'lockdown' gradually reopening of the economy but with significant social distancing rules etc. One person to a table etc.

By 10 June we can expect hotels etc to begin to open again......pubs to open if adhereing to strict measures and authorised by the HSE...., some flights beginning ….

By 10 July further relaxation of measures but still strict social distancing.....(message that we must halt the risk of a second peak)

Regarding flights I think we are going to have our temperatures taken on departure and arrival

FVP3

Pseudonym121 wrote: »

No median and average are different. Median is being used in order to keep the age high as average would yield a significantly lower age.

In research papers there’d always a reason you choose median vs average. The use of median instead of average is very calculated.

Median is much more useful in most cases. An in this case as well as outliers, high or low, can obstufcate the data. The median tells us that half of all deaths are 84 or older. Thats useful. However one or two younger deaths could push the average to 60 or lower. Thats less useful.

is_that_so

amadangomor wrote: »

Apparently not, Trumps popularity is very high at the moment:(

High for Trump, Bush was way higher after 9/11.

munsterlegend

Sleety_Rain wrote: »

Looking at the estimated progress of this.

Cases should peak c. 10 April, deaths should peak c. 17 April.

By 10 May we will see some reduction in the 'lockdown' gradually reopening of the economy but with significant social distancing rules etc. One person to a table etc.

By 10 June we can expect hotels etc to begin to open again......pubs to open if adhereing to strict measures and authorised by the HSE...., some flights beginning ….

By 10 July further relaxation of measures but still strict social distancing.....(message that we must halt the risk of a second peak)

Regarding flights I think we are going to have our temperatures taken on departure and arrival

You don’t envisage schools opening then?

Hrududu

This might have already been discussed. But on the figures from last night. We've tightened the restrictions on who gets tested. Now we've gone from 6% of those tested being positive to 15%. But thats still very low. Is there a dose going around with multiple similar symptoms? Are they tests giving some false negatives? Are people convincing themselves that they have symptoms that they don't?

bilston

Kivaro wrote: »

It is reprehensible to humanity that China is still dishonest with their reporting, and their attitude is despicable because the world was looking at their numbers initially on how to respond to the crisis. It is now presumed that China's numbers could be as high by a factor of 40 times of what they initially reported.

China has just now started today to included asymptomatic positives to their results. In the past, they did not include them. It has been proven that asymptomatic carriers do pass on the virus, and this was also confirmed by China themselves today. They are going to great pains to point out that the source of new infections are being imported from overseas into China, and while that may be true, it may also be a mechanism for them to "correct" their initial reporting.
The whole world needs to work together in this life/death battle.

It's going to look a bit odd when all this is over than "only" 3,000 people in China died and potentially a quarter of million people died in the US and probably a similar amount across the whole of Europe.

JaimeLannister

paw patrol wrote: »

it is deception.
they are reporting median to the population when they know a large chunk of people wouldn't really get it and confuse it with average.
they could give both in the interest of full disclosure but they don't.

this is done on purpose.

The Median vs. Mean thing has been bothering me for a while. Using the Median will always serve to hide outliers. Which in this case will be younger folk as you are never going to have any outliers on the "older" end of the scale i.e. 150 or 170 y.o.

So won't it always give an artificially high number? Especially as the no. of deaths rises

quokula

Hrududu wrote: »

This might have already been discussed. But on the figures from last night. We've tightened the restrictions on who gets tested. Now we've gone from 6% of those tested being positive to 15%. But thats still very low. Is there a dose going around with multiple similar symptoms? Are they tests giving some false negatives? Are people convincing themselves that they have symptoms that they don't?

Not that many people have it and lots of people have common colds and flus that give similar symptoms.

crisco10

FVP3 wrote: »

Media is much more useful in most cases. An in this case as well as outliers, high or low, can obstufcate the data. The median tells us that half of all deaths are 84 or older. Thats useful. However one or two younger deaths could push the average to 60 or lower. Thats less useful.

100% this.

For the sample data set given earlier; 18, 24, 35, 52, 84, 86, 86,90, 92:

• The mean is 63. Not One of the sample set are within 10 years of that number.
• The median is 84, Five of the set are within 10 years of that number.

So which is the more representative??

loveall

Jan 22nd... I'd just lit my last smoke before flying out of a Spanish airport. An Italian guy came over with no English. I gathered he wanted a cigarette or a light and offered him both but he was insistent on "poco". Really insistent. Wasn't a hope I was giving him the cigarette from my lips and after an awkward few minutes he went away with nothing.
Still sticks out as being odd.

ninebeanrows

paw patrol wrote: »

it is deception.
they are reporting median to the population when they know a large chunk of people wouldn't really get it and confuse it with average.
they could give both in the interest of full disclosure but they don't.

this is done on purpose.

How is it deception, what utter trollop.

Example: We have 7 people die. There is a 35 year old with end stage cancer who caught the virus and died, the rest are in there 70s, 80s or 90s.

35 77 78 82 84 86 88

Median 82
Average 76

Which is more representative?

dublin99

Japanese experiment and micro droplet theory that virus can spread during conversation. This may explain the spread in say business meetings and over dinner.

Masks can reduce the risk.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vBvFkQizTT4

bilston

Sleety_Rain wrote: »

Looking at the estimated progress of this.

Cases should peak c. 10 April, deaths should peak c. 17 April.

By 10 May we will see some reduction in the 'lockdown' gradually reopening of the economy but with significant social distancing rules etc. One person to a table etc.

By 10 June we can expect hotels etc to begin to open again......pubs to open if adhereing to strict measures and authorised by the HSE...., some flights beginning ….

By 10 July further relaxation of measures but still strict social distancing.....(message that we must halt the risk of a second peak)

Regarding flights I think we are going to have our temperatures taken on departure and arrival

I think 10 May might be a bit optimistic to be honest, but I suppose that is a broad guide to what might happen. Probably the best we can hope for.

I think as well that even when restrictions are lifted, people may be reluctant for a while to go to hotels, restaurants, pubs, busy places in general.

Regards schools, they could in theory maybe be opened some time in June, but at that point I'd expect caution to win the day and they will probably remain closed until September.

But it all depends on how long the surge lasts.

ninebeanrows

munsterlegend wrote: »

You don’t envisage schools opening then?

I would have thought they'll be binned until September? Just guessing!

beolight

pc7 wrote: »

:(Are nursing homes in a position to give medicine to ease the discomfort of the patient? (like morphine or something?)

Palliative care yes but script needs to be done by Doctor. Will a Doctor answer a call at 2 in the morning?

Not sure if many of them have syringe drives so would need to be administered manually ( increasing risk to nurse)

is_that_so

Hrududu wrote: »

This might have already been discussed. But on the figures from last night. We've tightened the restrictions on who gets tested. Now we've gone from 6% of those tested being positive to 15%. But thats still very low. Is there a dose going around with multiple similar symptoms? Are they tests giving some false negatives? Are people convincing themselves that they have symptoms that they don't?

They did say that flu' testing delivers 40% positives and expected this to be "well north" of 6% but given how new it is nobody knows what it should be. As they keep saying testing is for the public, not the individual. If you think you have symptoms you self-isolate. They mentioned a spike in flu' about a week ago a little before they changed the definition.

crossman47

caveat emptor wrote: »

Both numbers have their uses. Median much more useful in reporting on income as it is highly variable. Publish both numbers, job done.

Transparency has been improving but still gaps everywhere.

No. Median is appropriate in this case as a number of posters have pointed out and posting two figures would really confuse people. There was an old joke about the farmer who said all Irish farmers were above average!

Wibbs

Well H there are a lot of doses that would have similar symptoms. I had that dose that was doing the rounds in January and if I had it today and reported the same symptoms(fever, raging sore throat at first, dry non productive cough, a little breathless, fatigue, headache, but no stuffed nose or snotters) I'd be told to isolate now and be tested no questions asked and I'd reckon most GP's would be pretty confident I'd have Covid 19.

But I reckon this is much more of it

Hrududu wrote: »

Are people convincing themselves that they have symptoms that they don't?

From the usual hypochondriacs, to just folks who are understandably anxious. Anxiety can have a rake of physical symptoms, tightness in chest, feeling like you can't "catch a breath", chest pain, feeling feverish, headache, fatigue, feeling faint.

Sober Crappy Chemis

crisco10 wrote: »

100% this.

For the sample data set given earlier; 18, 24, 35, 52, 84, 86, 86,90, 92:

• The mean is 63. Not One of the sample set are within 10 years of that number.
• The median is 84, Five of the set are within 10 years of that number.

So which is the more representative??

Standard deviation.

amadangomor

Sleety_Rain wrote: »

How is it deception, what utter trollop.

Example: We have 7 people die. There is a 35 year old with end stage cancer who caught the virus and died, the rest are in there 70s, 80s or 90s.

35 77 78 82 84 86 88

Median 82
Average 76

Which is more representative?

This 100%

paw patrol

Sleety_Rain wrote: »

How is it deception, what utter trollop.

Example: We have 7 people die. There is a 35 year old with end stage cancer who caught the virus and died, the rest are in there 70s, 80s or 90s.

35 77 78 82 84 86 88

Median 82
Average 76

Which is more representative?

report both.

Fakediamond

caveat emptor wrote: »

Retired Doctor on radio 4 uk calling for government to enable people to die at home as comfortably as possible as they wouldn't be eligible for ventilator. He will not go to hospital as is very old. Horrific thought but he was fairly convinced this will be a reality there. Advised people to write wishes down so family can act on them.

https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1245184337970180096?s=20

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000gzth

There was an NHS consultant on Channel 4 news the other night and he was clear that they would be having the conversation re preparing older people for a comfortable death soon after admission. They won’t have the resources to aggressively treat older people with the virus, and not a hope of them getting a ventilator. I’m just now thinking that will probably apply to any age related medical condition at the moment, they won’t have the beds or staff to treat old people for anything much and they will just “make them comfortable”. No wonder they’re so keen on cocooning :eek:

For those that want sources, I think it was on Monday night’s programme.

tobefrank321

murpho999 wrote: »

Why are you banging on about flights?

What nationalties were these 4 cases? I bet they were Irish.

Also, where had they traveled from? I bet from loads of different places.

What about the remaining 280 cases from today? All community based and that's the big problem now.

All community cases stemmed originally from overseas travel, whether it was direct or indirect contact. The government don't even know where hundreds of people were infected which is also worrying. It could be here, it could be abroad. It could be from someone returning from abroad.

We can spend the next two weeks in lockdown, but that will only slow down community transmission for those two weeks. If we don't put restrictions on those coming in and quarantine people for 2 weeks before they enter the community, we will back to square one and forced into more lockdowns, only this time very severe ones that will collapse the economy.

Its amazing how with fairly simple steps like limiting people coming here except for very good reasons such as Irish stranded abroad or doctors returning home, it can have a positive knock-on effect in terms of lockdowns and the economy.

So yes I will keep banging on about flights. I know you are perfectly ok with people coming in unscreened, with no temperature checks from hot spots or quarantine and allowed back into the community, which in turn will cause more local transmission and community cases. This kind of liberal approach has been shown to be a failure. When you impose restrictions you have to impose restrictions on those who enter the country, otherwise you are wasting your time and we will be back to square one every couple of weeks.

amadangomor

dublin99 wrote: »

Japanese experiment and micro droplet theory that virus can spread during conversation. This may explain the spread in say business meetings and over dinner.

Masks can reduce the risk.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vBvFkQizTT4

The South Korean expert would agree, said that's why so many people in the happy clappy church there got infected.

Edit:Link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drzDKsX4894

sydthebeat

paw patrol wrote: »

report both.

You've already said the public would have trouble understanding the median... So now you want to give them the mean AND the median

old_aussie

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

Trump at last admits that this is not the flu and that the coronavirus is far more viscous. Three month too late, but I suppose better late than never. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile in South America, Brazil’s president Jair Bolsonaro has tried to reassure his citizens over the threat of coronavirus by claiming Brazilians can bathe in excrement “and nothing happens”. And he admits that he believes himself to be South America's 'Trump'.

The world has had enough of these dangerous right wing populist clowns..

Brazil’s president Jair Bolsonaro is a nut case.

He makes Trump look like a genius

Brazil's population to be wiped out and Brazil shut off from the rest of the world.

Logan Roy

loveall wrote: »

Jan 22nd... I'd just lit my last smoke before flying out of a Spanish airport. An Italian guy came over with no English. I gathered he wanted a cigarette or a light and offered him both but he was insistent on "poco". Really insistent. Wasn't a hope I was giving him the cigarette from my lips and after an awkward few minutes he went away with nothing.
Still sticks out as being odd.

Looking forward to the movie

voluntary

There are two cases involving nursing homes where doctors are very concerned over delays in Covid-19 test results, writes Health Correspondent Fergal Bowers.

In the first case a swab was taken from a nursing home resident on 23 March.

The patient died last night in the nursing home and their doctor said that as a test result had not yet come through - positive or negative - the patient will now have to be treated as a positive case by the funeral home, with strict precautions as set out in recent guidelines.

In a second case, also in a nursing home, the swab was taken on 24 March. The patient was later transferred to a Dublin hospital and is now very ill.

The results of that swab also remain unavailable.

Why this huge delay in returning test results? Over 9 days waiting for results? Not enough labs or are we missing some chemicals to perform these tests?

is_that_so

sydthebeat wrote: »

You've already said the public would have trouble understanding the median... So now you want to give them the mean AND the median

Too much choice just adds to your stress levels!

stephenjmcd

I know this has been debated time and time again but the question was asked of Gavan Reilly on Twitter if the ICU numbers are current or total and this was his reply. He is usually extremely reliable when it comes to stats amongst other things so it does look like it's the total through since the start not the current as some have reported and some on here insist it as being.

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1245268916160606208?s=19

JaimeLannister

JaimeLannister wrote: »

The Median vs. Mean thing has been bothering me for a while. Using the Median will always serve to hide outliers. Which in this case will be younger folk as you are never going to have any outliers on the "older" end of the scale i.e. 150 or 170 y.o.

So won't it always give an artificially high number? Especially as the no. of deaths rises

Mean with 95% confidence interval would be the most meaningful data. Would be something like 60 (58-70). What this would tell us is the the mean is 60 in observed deaths, but also due to more older than younger patients the mean is more likely to skew higher than lower as more data is added. As more data is added, both the mean and associated confidence interval would change

is_that_so

voluntary wrote: »

Why this huge delay in returning test results? Over 9 days waiting for results? Not enough labs or are we missing some chemicals to perform these tests?

The latter seems to be the issue, but it's a worldwide one.

Wibbs

tobefrank321 wrote: »

When you impose restrictions you have to impose restrictions on those who enter the country, otherwise you are wasting your time.

+1. At the very least temperature testing at points of entry but further, mandatory 14 day self quarantine with penalties for breaking that. This will slow the transmission.

Make it compulsory for mask wearing in public places. This will slow the transmission.

Continued "Cocooning" of the elderly and those at risk. This will slow the transmission.

Continued social distancing. This will slow the transmission.

Keep the schools closed until September. Ditto for pubs and restaurants. This will slow the transmission.

Keep the present "lockdown" in place until ICU numbers start to level out, but then start relaxing them in stages. This will slow the transmission.

Logan Roy

paw patrol wrote: »

report both.

Reporting both would be a recipe for disaster as they start being used interchangeably. I'd imagine a significant proportion of the people hearing the term median actually think it means average.

Fakediamond

Hector Savage wrote: »

They're saying here in Spain it won't peak till late May/early June .....


F*ck this sh!t, really considering suicide as a viable option at this stage ...

Come on now, that is a permanent “solution” to a temporary problem. It’s a tough time, no doubt, but we to hang on to our hopes and dreams and make plans for when this is over. There will soon be medication to treat this and we will be allowed to have a more normal life then. Just hang on in there, stay in touch with family and friends via social media and get a routine going for yourself. It’s gonna be ok..

old_aussie

sydthebeat wrote: »

You've already said the public would have trouble understanding the median... So now you want to give them the mean AND the median

Don't be so mean to the lad.

is_that_so

Deleted User wrote: »

Mean with 95% confidence interval would be the most meaningful data. Would be something like 60 (58-70). What this would tell us is the the mean is 60 in observed deaths, but also due to more older than younger patients the mean is more likely to skew higher than lower as more data is added. As more data is added, both the mean and associated confidence interval would change

And after that first sentence 3/4 of viewers have changed channel!
KISS principle applies here all the way.

Talisman

Pseudonym121 wrote: »

No median and average are different. Median is being used in order to keep the age high as average would yield a significantly lower age.

In research papers there’d always a reason you choose median vs average. The use of median instead of average is very calculated.

You're wrong. The mean isn't used because it is skewed by outliers, particularly where age is concerned.

For example, for a sample set [14, 25, 36, 45, 47, 65, 76, 95, 104].
The mean average is 56.33 -> 56.
The median is 47.

The median tells you the middle value -> half the values are above and below.

YFlyer

On Pat Kenny Show the professor says women are more dirty than men having more viruses on their skin.

Fakediamond

Hrududu wrote: »

This might have already been discussed. But on the figures from last night. We've tightened the restrictions on who gets tested. Now we've gone from 6% of those tested being positive to 15%. But thats still very low. Is there a dose going around with multiple similar symptoms? Are they tests giving some false negatives? Are people convincing themselves that they have symptoms that they don't?

Everyone with a cold or chest infection was being referred for testing, sometimes at the insistence of employers. This has been tightened up considerably now.

is_that_so

old_aussie wrote: »

Brazil’s president Jair Bolsonaro is a nut case.

He makes Trump look like a genius

Brazil's population to be wiped out and Brazil shut off from the rest of the world.

I know someone who voted for him and was delighted he won, must check in with them when this is over.

caveat emptor

FVP3 wrote: »

Media is much more useful in most cases. An in this case as well as outliers, high or low, can obstufcate the data. The median tells us that half of all deaths are 84 or older. Thats useful. However one or two younger deaths could push the average to 60 or lower. Thats less useful.

Useful to who. It would also tell you there were one or two younger deaths. Which could be very useful to someone who is younger.

I take your point though.

Full transparency needed. Anonymised data a la Singapore would be best. Then we could actually see what's going on and it wouldn't violate anyones privacy.

Average age in Singapore is 40. You could also see if / when it changes etc. Median would be very slow to change.

https://www.againstcovid19.com/singapore/

crisco10

crisco10 wrote: »

100% this.

For the sample data set given earlier; 18, 24, 35, 52, 84, 86, 86,90, 92:

• The mean is 63. Not One of the sample set are within 10 years of that number.
• The median is 84, Five of the set are within 10 years of that number.

So which is the more representative??

For this data 95% confidence interval for mean is 63 (39.4-86.6)
For median is 84(26.5-89.0).
Based on this the mean is more accurate. Would be interesting to run the stats on actual numbers though

Rob A. Bank

paw patrol wrote: »

I don't get this attitude , why is trump singled out for something that is 3 months too late...?

go back 3 months and you'll find the only people in the west concerned about this were people like alex jones. Others in the US with like governors etc who have direct local power - were actually encouraging people to get out and socialise
Putin was bothered by it but only end of jan . Outside of asia he was probably the first to act.

Until quite recently we weren't sure it would even get to Ireland....but as you know - skiers gotta ski.

So you believe Trump did a good job ? :eek:

The World Health organization was informed about the beginning of the outbreak on December 31st 2019. Taiwan started it's mitigation efforts immediately.

In 2018, the Trump administration fired the government’s entire pandemic response chain of command, including the White House management infrastructure. If they had been around they would have sprung into action at the first whiff of a dangerous virus outbreak in China.

You must have been living under a stone not to realize that Trump has fu*ked up royally, in his management of this dangerous virus pandemic.

Mehan2000

Iran’s deaths are low enough compared to Spain at that stage... hiding numbers ?