has covid 19 been blown out of all proportion?

is_that_so

Balf wrote: »

Can you post up a link to the membership of NPHET, so we can see how many members are not healthcare professionals? Outside of a token HSE funded " patient representative" will there be any?

Can you link the CMO statement you refer to? Because the usual line has been about needing to balance the impact on different kinds of healthcare service, not really the general economy.

That's the link to NEPHT members.

https://www.gov.ie/en/collection/4abdb7-minutes-of-national-public-health-emergency-team-nphet-meetings-2019/?referrer=/national-patient-safety-office/patient-safety-surveillance/antimicrobial-resistance-amr-2/public-health-emergency-plan-to-tackle-cpe/nphet-press-releases-minutes-of-meetings/

That CMO "statement" was during a briefing but don't ask me which one but it was very early on and I'd say he has repeated it. It was the along the lines of doing things at the right time and being aware of the economic cost. If I find a link I'll post it.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Well said. Cocoon is easy to say when you are 40, living with your family and going to work every day. Think of a 75 year old active widow with no major conditions, who now cannot see their children or grand children, cannot meet friends, go to shops and are living alone. Now tell them they must live like that for the next year or 2. If I was in that position for anything more than 6 months or so I'd prefer to get out and live and take whatever risk was there. At that age you may well get sick and die of something else anyway. The thought of doing so without living while you can would drive me crazy

Jesus you sound like everyone else is having a ball.

They aren't.

HeidiHeidi

is_that_so wrote: »

That's the link to NEPHT members.

https://www.gov.ie/en/collection/4abdb7-minutes-of-national-public-health-emergency-team-nphet-meetings-2019/?referrer=/national-patient-safety-office/patient-safety-surveillance/antimicrobial-resistance-amr-2/public-health-emergency-plan-to-tackle-cpe/nphet-press-releases-minutes-of-meetings/

That CMO "statement" was during a briefing but don't ask me which one but it was very early on and I'd say he has repeated it. It was the along the lines of doing things at the right time and being aware of the economic cost. If I find a link I'll post it.

I also can't provide a direct link, but clearly remember that being said by the CMO (and possibly Simon Harris) at the start of this whole thing.

lozenges

A few facts:

1. The virus is spread by human-human contact
2. Human-human contact has been significantly restricted in the past 6 weeks
3. Number of deaths is many times lower than the original worst case estimate (i.e. if no restrictions were implemented)

It boggles the mind that some people appear to genuinely believe that these are in no way contingent on each other.

VinLieger

growleaves wrote: »

Zero proof of that. I don't believe it.

Lol good for you, you john waters eque contrarian.

Ohh look cus you dont believe in it the virus magically went away.....

Is that how it works?

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Jesus you sound like everyone else is having a ball.

They aren't.

Way to complexly misrepresent what I said

BloodBath

growleaves wrote: »

Lads and ladies,

Correlation is not causation is one the first things you learn in a university science class.*

You choose to believe the lockdown saved 85,000 lives without proof, without even the beginning of a scientific investigation into the measures. You have that choice. I won't believe it unless I am shown proof and that is an objective position.

* Especially relevant for measures that haven't been tried before and are purely theoretical.

Sounds like something a flat earther would say.

Boggles

Is fire not hot unless you touch it?

Hmmmmmmmmm. Science.

growleaves

lozenges wrote: »

A few facts:

1. The virus is spread by human-human contact
2. Human-human contact has been significantly restricted in the past 6 weeks
3. Number of deaths is many times lower than the original worst case estimate (i.e. if no restrictions were implemented)

It boggles the mind that some people appear to genuinely believe that these are in no way contingent on each other.

Er I didn't say "in no way contingent", I said I wanted to see proof that 100,000 deaths had been prevented.

Most people have already stated they believe it without evidence. They have no desire to even consider the question. That boggles my mind.

growleaves

There are a number of other factors involved - too many to go into on a blog post. So it isn't as simple as you make it seem lozenges.

growleaves

BloodBath wrote: »

Sounds like something a flat earther would say.

Sorry but its one thing to deride people who won't accept scientific evidence and put weird conspiracy theories in their place (flat earthers).

Its quite another to say we don't need scientific evidence and we don't want it.

What many boards posters don't seem to realise is that the cause-and-effect assumption you're making is the starting point of a scientific inquiry - not the conclusion.

princereingold

growleaves wrote: »

Er I didn't say "in no way contingent", I said I wanted to see proof that 100,000 deaths had been prevented.

Most people have already stated they believe it without evidence. They have no desire to even consider the question. That boggles my mind.

Where is all the testing?
I think croake park closed before any tests.
Quayside centres unmanned.
Exhibition centre near swords closed.
Of the 18 hospitals testing ,i dont know any.

7000 tests per day? How?

noodler

growleaves wrote: »

Zero proof of that. I don't believe it.

You are mad

facehugger99

lozenges wrote: »

A few facts:

1. The virus is spread by human-human contact
2. Human-human contact has been significantly restricted in the past 6 weeks
3. Number of deaths is many times lower than the original worst case estimate (i.e. if no restrictions were implemented)

It boggles the mind that some people appear to genuinely believe that these are in no way contingent on each other.

You confusing correlation with causation - it's quite common.

There is no evidence to suggest the restrictions have reduced death numbers as you suggest. However, there is a growing body of evidence to suggest the original estimates were ridiculously over-estimated.

eddie73

Has much this virus been blown out of proportion in Ireland depends on what you compare it against.

Against the more severely effected countries, you could say we are at a place that would suggest so.
Against the predictions and warnings of worst case scenarios it has been blown out of proportion also.

But, blown out of proportion is probably the wrong wording here.

We are not at the critical level due to restrictions.
We are not at the critical level, YET.

I think one of the worst things we could do were to go back out as if nothing had happened.
If there is an awareness of social distancing put in place and people go back to work with this in mind, we should hopefully keep the numbers at a less impossible level for the health system to deal with.

I also think that people should consider that the fatality rate of this is being kept from sky rocketing by the fact that the hospitals are not yet completely over run. Once this happens, the doctors start playing favorites with who lives and who dies.

We have another 15 months of playing a very patient game here.

manniot2

lozenges wrote: »

A few facts:

1. The virus is spread by human-human contact
2. Human-human contact has been significantly restricted in the past 6 weeks
3. Number of deaths is many times lower than the original worst case estimate (i.e. if no restrictions were implemented)

It boggles the mind that some people appear to genuinely believe that these are in no way contingent on each other.

What happens when we re-open? Or do you suggest we stay locked down until a vaccine which is years away?

kowloon

It must be frustrating to be a policymaker for this kind of thing; do a good job and people will say it was unnecessary, don't force any measures and the same people are out for blood because nothing was done. It seems we have a large number of gobshytes who lack the capacity to understand the relationship between actions and consequences.

HeidiHeidi

hopalongcass wrote: »

Genuine issue i'd appreciate if someone could explain to me about this whole thing,we are getting infection rates and death rates on a per daily basis but as was proved in the case of Mary Lou it takes a while to get results back,so are the rates of deaths and infections from previous days averaged out?

How are they proving so many are infected/dying per day?when they haven't got tests that come back that fast.

The figures given by the CMO at the daily briefing are for deaths/cases confirmations notified to them in the previous 24 hours.


So the deaths will have occurred on various dates in the preceeding weeks.


They are trying to get notifications speeded up so that the information is more up to date.


They do occasionally show deaths by the date they occurred, but because there is a delay in notifications, the most recent dates are of necessity inaccurate, so I suspect that's why they don't routinely use that measure.

ETA - oh, the post to which I was replying disappeared in the time I took to type the reply!

Jizique

kowloon wrote: »

It must be frustrating to be a policymaker for this kind of thing; do a good job and people will say it was unnecessary, don't force any measures and the same people are out for blood because nothing was done. It seems we have a large number of gobshytes who lack the capacity to understand the relationship between actions and consequences.

I agree completely - but does anyone know what is going on at the CitiWest exhibition center that was hyped up on the news 2 weeks ago?

hopalongcass

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

The figures given by the CMO at the daily briefing are for deaths/cases confirmations notified to them in the previous 24 hours.


So the deaths will have occurred on various dates in the preceeding weeks.


They are trying to get notifications speeded up so that the information is more up to date.


They do occasionally show deaths by the date they occurred, but because there is a delay in notifications, the most recent dates are of necessity inaccurate, so I suspect that's why they don't routinely use that measure.

ETA - oh, the post to which I was replying disappeared in the time I took to type the reply!

Had moved the post to the other thread thought this one was dead,so you are saying they aren't really accurate on a per daily basis?

Plumbthedepths

growleaves wrote: »

Er I didn't say "in no way contingent", I said I wanted to see proof that 100,000 deaths had been prevented.

Most people have already stated they believe it without evidence. They have no desire to even consider the question. That boggles my mind.

I have a very large rock in my garden that I call my 'anti bear' rock. I have never been attacked by a bear in my garden so clearly it works.

HeidiHeidi

hopalongcass wrote: »

Had moved the post to the other thread thought this one was dead,so you are saying they aren't really accurate on a per daily basis?

They are figures for notifications.


The numbers of deaths can't be accurate on a daily basis, because deaths are not necessarily reported on the date they happen.

The numbers of cases confirmed depend on the time it takes to get a test through the system and a result returned (I don't know what that is currently, I think it varies depending on the testing location and status of the person being tested)

hopalongcass

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

They are figures for notifications.


The numbers of deaths can't be accurate on a daily basis, because deaths are not necessarily reported on the date they happen.

The numbers of cases confirmed depend on the time it takes to get a test through the system and a result returned (I don't know what that is currently, I think it varies depending on the testing location and status of the person being tested)

But does anyone know how fast they can bring a test result back,you would have thought Mary Lou would have access to the best medical care and she said it took 2 weeks.

HeidiHeidi

hopalongcass wrote: »

But does anyone know how fast they can bring a test result back,you would have thought Mary Lou would have access to the best medical care and she said it took 2 weeks.

Frontline health workers would be a much higher priority, as would (currently) nursing and residential home residents and workers.


I remember someone on a daily briefing saying a few days ago that the time for a test varies around the different testing centres.

accensi0n

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Supplying food for your dinner table.

Popcorn?

facehugger99

Jizique wrote: »

does anyone know what is going on at the CitiWest exhibition center that was hyped up on the news 2 weeks ago?

We have pissed away millions on a facility that's sitting empty.

A small footnote to the billions already wasted - but sure some hysteria-merchants on Facebook are happy which is the main priority for Government apparently.

facehugger99

facehugger99 wrote: »

We have pissed away millions on a facility that's sitting empty.

A small footnote to the billions already wasted - but sure some hysteria-merchants on Facebook are happy which is the main priority for Government apparently.

It's quite unique for an irish government to be critised for being over-prepared

Ash.J.Williams

Balf wrote: »

Would we handle Covid 20 like this?

I doubt it, if there's any sense in the world.

i'd say covid 20 is out there but hasnt been identified yet

Pinch Flat

facehugger99 wrote: »

However, there is a growing body of evidence to suggest the original estimates were ridiculously over-estimated.

The death rates per 100,000 seem to vary. Perhaps it's the mutations (there appears to be 20) but even a modest estimate of a 1.7% morality rate on a population of 4,900,000 (round numbers) would equate to 85,000 dead.

I think the measures are appropriate. Our health system would have been quickly overwhelmed. We had the lowest ICU beds per population in Europe and essentially no primary health care system. It would have been carnage if left run unrestricted.

Alf Veedersane

facehugger99 wrote: »

We have pissed away millions on a facility that's sitting empty.

It's not empty.