Dublin is NOT significantly more infected than any other county.

DeVore

I'm not suggesting Dubs go to Connemara or anywhere else.

I'm suggesting NO ONE goes ANYWHERE.


Stay in. Wash your hands.

begbysback

If the healthcare numbers are removed then it would make sense to remove the nursing home numbers too.

DeVore

From the previous page:

I removed them because

1. right now they are far to busy to be going anywhere.

2. they dont just treat Dubliners, people are shipped to Dublin for treatment from all over the country and these health care workers got infected treating everyone so it seems a little "mean" to put them into Dublin numbers and then try to insinuate Dublin needs to be quarantined.

3. They are considerably more aware of the vectors of transmission and far less likely to break social measures.

timsey tiger

It's just weak. You always need to compare like with like. If you wish to remove health care workers, that's fine, but you then need to remove them all.

More interesting, would be to see if you could compare Dublin to other urban areas, though the granularity of the data we are fed probably makes such an exercise highly speculative.

recyclebin

If you are a nurse and you live in Kildare and work In Dublin and you get it, are you classified as Kildare or Dublin?

DeVore

Just to be clear, I think the idea of splitting up our country into "Dublin" and "Not Dublin" is harmful, shortsighted, wrong headed and, in short, ABSOLUTELY ****ING LUDICROUS.

I just wanted to show its also not strongly supported by data.

.
.
ps: the numbers for some counties are so small that if one nursing home got a cluster there, it would rocket to the top of the list.

THIS ISNT GREAT DATA, but its the best we have and so speaking against it is EVEN MORE DUMB then relying on it.

begbysback

DeVore wrote: »

Just to be clear, I think the idea of splitting up our country into "Dublin" and "Not Dublin" is harmful, shortsighted, wrong headed and, in short, ABSOLUTELY ****ING LUDICROUS.

I just wanted to show its also not strongly supported by data.

Then can we not just do “Dublin” and “Culchies”?

Ficheall

Have the healthcare workers from the other counties also been removed?

ednwireland

DeVore wrote: »

A very good point, and one I agree with BUT STILL a question was asked on RTE 6 One news as to whether Dublin should be locked down while the rest of the country is released.

What I'm showing here is that that was not based on ANY data and even using the "foggy" data we have at the moment certainly does NOT point in that direction.

that should happen all the time IMO :eek::D;)

begbysback wrote: »

Then can we not just do “Dublin” and “Culchies”?

like the rest of the time

begbysback

cdeb wrote: »

That's not what he said though.

Take one person from Dublin and one person from Cavan, and they have an equal chance of being infected.

The fact that there are more people in Dublin to meet is irrelevant, but seems to be part of your argument.

As an addendum, I have a special hatred for people who use the word "math"...

Same here, can’t understand people who round to 3 decimal places.

timsey tiger

I'm not aware of a Dublin vs the rest of the country split in this. The real danger is for Counties with small numbers that people get complacent.

timsey tiger

Wibbs wrote: »

Not simply at all and quite obviously not. You're more likely to meet someone who is infected in Dublin than you are in Cavan, "because Dublin is... wait for it... bigger" and has a higher population density. So for all your understanding of % and "math" yet again wood for the trees thinking on display. And I've not seen any loss of "social cohesion" of late.

Lol dublin isn't bigger than Cavan

krissovo

What we really need is the data from the contract tracing as that will normalize the figures. Singapore published these figures and it was contained quite quickly as people knew where the danger areas were.

Fr_Dougal

begbysback wrote: »

Then can we not just do “Dublin” and “Culchies”?

What about the culchies living in Dublin?

Still waters

Pointless thread is true to name

DeVore

No. This list is without ANY healthcare workers being removed.

My point what that if you accept the assumption that 2/3rds of them are in Dublin (where most of the big hospitals, the busiest hospitals and the front line hospitals are) then the numbers normalise further. This is a very rough metric, and I dont have distribution numbers for infected hospital staff but I would not imagine it would move the other counties by much except perhaps Cork.

The list as published in the OP does NOT have the healthcare workers removed.

Wibbs

DeVore wrote: »

A very good point, and one I agree with BUT STILL a question was asked on RTE 6 One news as to whether Dublin should be locked down while the rest of the country is released.

What I'm showing here is that that was not based on ANY data and even using the "foggy" data we have at the moment certainly does NOT point in that direction.

Ah yeah we're in full agreement there D. Locking down Dublin is a daft idea. What about Cork, Galway, Waterford etc. Go Escape from New York on them too? Somebody must have been at the sherry on the RTE News and their Bumper Book of Silly Questions was down to the last page.

timsey tiger wrote: »

Lol dublin isn't bigger than Cavan

LOL we're talking about population size. LOL.

KyussB

As others have said, the logic of removing healthcare workers doesn't make sense. They still live in Dublin.

If we're going to talk about cases per head, figure these statistics, then:
Ireland has the 12th highest cases per head in the world, and the 10th highest deaths per head in the world.

We're actually doing a pretty bad job. We bungled our opportunity to stop a major outbreak - i.e. we have been reactive rather than proactive - we knew we should have been doing a lot more, to stop originating cases.

Pessimism and cynicism is often useful and a good thing, optimisim is often bad and misleading. The former would have had us take proper preventative measures to stop originating cases, the latter is part of why we didn't. Be appropriately cynical in evaluating things.

begbysback

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

What about the culchies living in Dublin?

Dulchies?

Wibbs

Vectors for infection are going to be highest in high people density environments, so cities are going to be worse than the countryside*, apartments worse than houses, shops, public transport rather than private, office buildings and the like, schools, care homes and obviously hospitals, anywhere you have a high footfall of people indoors with shared areas and surfaces. That they took their sweet time shutting down NCT centres is another WTF added to the list as far as our government goes. That could have easily started a cluster and anywhere in the country too.

When this is done and dusted I'll bet our low population density is going to be one factor we can be grateful for, but it will also show a lack of good management, because even with that major advantage we're still higher in deaths per million than other countries without that advantage.

As KyussB notes we're really not doing a great job at all. If we were to look at a nation that did do a better job, even after a false start, like the Czechs and roughly applied their figures to ours, we should be at around 50-60 deaths, not over 200.



*though you could have an asymptomatic spreader in a village post office that infects a load of people and causes a cluster.

GreeBo

DeVore wrote: »

I removed them because

1. right now they are far to busy to be going anywhere.

They have families though...and neighbours, relatives, they go to shops and buy petrol too.
I think you are trying to make the point that you are less likely to meet a Dublin healthcare worker outside of Dublin? Im just not sure of the relevance of that point though!

DeVore wrote: »

2. they dont just treat Dubliners, people are shipped to Dublin for treatment from all over the country and these health care workers got infected treating everyone so it seems a little "mean" to put them into Dublin numbers and then try to insinuate Dublin needs to be quarantined.

So? How does this change the fact that Dulbin has a higher infection rate?
Are you trying to distinguish between people *from* Dublin and people *in* Dublin?
If so, why?

DeVore wrote: »

3. They are considerably more aware of the vectors of transmission and far less likely to break social measures.

And yet we have a huge percentage of infected healthcare workers, in Dublin...

Maybe if you can elaborate more on what point you were trying to make,coz I think you have lost most of your audience!

ixoy

KyussB wrote: »

If we're going to talk about cases per head, figure these statistics, then:
Ireland has the 12th highest cases per head in the world, and the 10th highest deaths per head in the world.

Is everywhere using the same metrics though? For example, France recently didn't count nursing home deaths which make up a huge chunk of our numbers. Some don't count deaths caused by secondary conditions that were triggered by COVID-19.
In terms of cases per head, the barometer for testing can fare greatly too - there's no common standard for testing (and of course others could be equally as far behind in getting test results for people seeking them).

Wibbs

KyussB wrote: »

We're actually doing a pretty bad job. We bungled our opportunity to stop a major outbreak - i.e. we have been reactive rather than proactive - we knew we should have been doing a lot more, to stop originating cases.

That can be laid at the feet of the government and the HSE. Both were slow to react and when they did have slavishly followed the WHO recommendations. In my opinion because of old style Irish civil service management "thinking" where pass the buck to save your own arse is the order of the day at the upper levels and a sideorder of tugging the forelock to an external authority. The health minister not so long ago stated the HSE wasn't fit for purpose and that hasn't changed.

Saying we're doing better than somewhere Britain is a pointless exercise. They screwed up. Or saying we're better than Spain and Italy. They both screwed up and were hit much harder and earlier. We had a lead time and should have been looking to why they made mistakes and look to nations like Taiwan, the Czech Republic, Korea, Germany, where they've done a far better job and copy them. We haven't done that and we're not doing that and people have died and will die because of their laggardly incompetence. Heads should roll, but they won't.

GreeBo

DeVore wrote: »

A very good point, and one I agree with BUT STILL a question was asked on RTE 6 One news as to whether Dublin should be locked down while the rest of the country is released.

What I'm showing here is that that was not based on ANY data and even using the "foggy" data we have at the moment certainly does NOT point in that direction.

Is it not based on your own stats that show, including healthcare workers (i.e. also people in Dublin) the infection rate is much higher than other counties?

KyussB

ixoy wrote: »

Is everywhere using the same metrics though? For example, France recently didn't count nursing home deaths which make up a huge chunk of our numbers. Some don't count deaths caused by secondary conditions that were triggered by COVID-19.
In terms of cases per head, the barometer for testing can fare greatly too - there's no common standard for testing (and of course others could be equally as far behind in getting test results for people seeking them).

No, the standard of metrics vary - I think that here in Ireland we are only testing priority groups, which would partially blind us to community transmission - something which is important/relevant to the Dublin figures, in particular.

The places where the metrics vary worse than here, may be more likely in the 10+ countries that are doing worse than Ireland (including France), because they'd be getting overwhelemed more - but we don't know, just have to go with the metrics we've got.

ixoy

GreeBo wrote: »

Is it not based on your own stats that show, including healthcare workers (i.e. also people in Dublin) the infection rate is much higher than other counties?

It's higher but I think the point being made is that, since there's a disproportionate amount of health workers in Dublin and since those health workers are less likely to pass on the disease (since they know better about social distancing, etc), then you're not that much more likely to get infected from Random Citizen X.

DeVore

GreeBo wrote: »

Is it not based on your own stats that show, including healthcare workers (i.e. also people in Dublin) the infection rate is much higher than other counties?

Not in the instance of "people from Dublin not being allowed travel, while other counties are". That was the point I was really addressing (sorry, I realise now I didnt make that as clear as I could have in the OP).
The suggest was made on the 6-One news that Dublin be stopped from travelling and left in lockdown while the rest of the country wasnt (it was a question to the CMO).
My point is that if you leave all the (exhausted and busy) medical people out of it, Dublin is not significantly different in terms of per-capita infections.

I'm not suggesting Dubliners head off to Kerry for the weekend, in fact I'm suggesting that NO ONE DOES. I'm also saying there is little evidence to treat Dublin differently (as Twitter has been very vocal about today with some pretty nasty comments from non-Dubliners).

We're in this together. There isnt a sizeable difference in infection rates. We should all stay home. Wash your hands.

GreeBo

ixoy wrote: »

It's higher but I think the point being made is that, since there's a disproportionate amount of health workers in Dublin and since those health workers are less likely to pass on the disease (since they know better about social distancing, etc), then you're not that much more likely to get infected from Random Citizen X.

They might be less likely to travel, but they are also more likely to be infected....do they cancel each other out? who knows.

Its the whole Risk Vs Exposure = Danger function
Lower exposure since they dont travel, but higher risk due to their infection rate.

GreeBo

DeVore wrote: »

Not in the instance of "people from Dublin not being allowed travel, while other counties are". That was the point I was really addressing (sorry, I realise now I didnt make that as clear as I could have in the OP).

Finally, something we agree on!

The suggest was made on the 6-One news that Dublin be stopped from travelling and left in lockdown while the rest of the country wasnt (it was a question to the CMO).
My point is that if you leave all the (exhausted and busy) medical people out of it, Dublin is not significantly different in terms of per-capita infections.

Arguably a tired and stressed healthcare worker is exactly who would want to take a break from it all....

I'm not suggesting Dubliners head off to Kerry for the weekend, in fact I'm suggesting that NO ONE DOES. I'm also saying there is little evidence to treat Dublin differently (as Twitter has been very vocal about today with some pretty nasty comments from non-Dubliners).

We're in this together. There isnt a sizeable difference in infection rates. We should all stay home. Wash your hands.

The whole idea of treating different parts of the same country differently is nonsense to me anyway.
I think the US is a good example of that.

TheChizler

DeVore wrote: »

My point is that if you leave all the (exhausted and busy) medical people out of it, Dublin is not significantly different in terms of per-capita infections.

The infected medical people should be self isolating the same as anyone else, they effectively become part of infected Joe public once they know they're infected. It's not a fair comparison to say they're different because of the nature of their work when they're not working.

The asymptomatic medical workers are the ones who should be removed from figures if you want the argument to make sense, but they're no way of knowing that number.