Relaxation of Restrictions, Part III - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

MrDavid1976

is_that_so wrote: »

Way back during the hypochondriac phase when it was 3% positive De Gascun pointed out that people had other things. Having symptoms or thinking you have symptoms and getting a negative result suggests you have something else.

Please define lots of evidence.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/expert-covid-19-false-negatives-not-a-failure-of-the-hse-but-rather-science-catching-up-with-new-virus-993997.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-13/false-negatives-raise-more-questions-about-virus-test-accuracy

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/86047

I would think (particularly after the smear test scandal) that there would be an abundance of caution. At the very least a response should encourage isolation, if someone is ill they should go to their GP, and of course retesting could be done if symptoms remain. Rather it was dismissive.

seamus

uli84 wrote: »

So it starts, people are being asked to return to work but don’t have anywhere/anyone to take care of the kids. i’m on a single mums fb group and same question every day... what a mess up

If you don't have anyone to mind your kids, you can't go back to work.

People need to take a hard line on this and push back on their employers. I know an essential worker who had to do this; they literally have nobody to mind their kids, no parents or siblings. So they've been at home since the end of March.

They cannot be fired for this, it's a breach of the equal status act. It would be prudent though for the government advice to include a note that employees must not be pressured to return to work if they do not have access to assistance for children or other dependents, or if they do not have access to transport.

is_that_so

MrDavid1976 wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/expert-covid-19-false-negatives-not-a-failure-of-the-hse-but-rather-science-catching-up-with-new-virus-993997.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-13/false-negatives-raise-more-questions-about-virus-test-accuracy

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/86047

I would think (particularly after the smear test scandal) that there would be an abundance of caution. At the very least a response should encourage isolation, if someone is ill they should go to their GP, and of course retesting could be done if symptoms remain. Rather it was dismissive.

Link 1 100 cases here and not false negatives, nothing was found but a system error glitch flagged their status as negatives.
Link 2 US testing - enough said.
Link 3 Spain and way back.

MrDavid1976

is_that_so wrote: »

Link 1 100 cases here and not false negatives, nothing was found but a system error glitch flagged their status as negatives.
Link 2 US testing - enough said.
Link 3 Spain and way back.

So you are saying no issues on false negatives? And if someone has symptoms and tests negative then happy days? No need to isolate.

seamus

MrDavid1976 wrote: »

He was asked a question on Monday about people with Covid symptoms who tested negative. There has been a lot of discussion and evidence of false negatives yet he said that if the test was negative then it is negative. That is irresponsible. What he should have said is that those with symptoms should be isolating (as they should with any virus).

The existence of symptoms does not follow that there is an infection.

If the advice was to isolate regardless of whether your test was positive or negative, then lots of people wouldn't even bother trying to get tested.
You'd also have a massive issue with essential workers and people awaiting other treatments - these people need a negative test to proceed. If we went with "a negative isn't a real negative" all of those people would have to continue isolating.

The reality is that the odds of a false negative are so small that it can be disregarded.

Rodin

MrDavid1976 wrote: »

So you are saying no issues on false negatives? And if someone has symptoms and tests negative then happy days? No need to isolate.

Of course there's been false negatives.
People in ICU who are clearly sick have had a negative test only for it to be positive later.

FintanMcluskey

Deleted User wrote: »

Only 389 cases have been admitted to ICU. How is that possible when we have more deaths?

The only explanation is that most of these people are so sick that ICU is a waste of time. For example, they're already on their deathbed.

The median age of deaths is above life expectancy.

LiquidZeb

LiquidZeb wrote: »

For the third time I quoted an article you attached a couple of days ago that said there was a rate of Kawasaki occurrence of 0.011-0.33% of cases. I fail to see how I'm attacking you unless you're the most sensitive soul who ever lived.

https://www.cesm-cv.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/kwasaki-y-covid19.pdf

This was the paper I posted the other day. It was a case report. Literally, like talking to a wall. Care to critique the lancet article rather than throw potshots. It is a discussion forum after all.

stephenjmcd

HSE hospital report out this morning.

As of 8pm last night there were 62 patients with confirmed covid in ICU.

Likewise as of 8pm there were 449 patients in acute hospitals with confirmed covid.

MrDavid1976

seamus wrote: »

The existence of symptoms does not follow that there is an infection.

If the advice was to isolate regardless of whether your test was positive or negative, then lots of people wouldn't even bother trying to get tested.
You'd also have a massive issue with essential workers and people awaiting other treatments - these people need a negative test to proceed. If we went with "a negative isn't a real negative" all of those people would have to continue isolating.

The reality is that the odds of a false negative are so small that it can be disregarded.

When we get out of this we need real behaviour change.

If someone is sick then they don’t go to the office and they certainly don’t go on public transport. They remote work when they can. If they can’t they take steps not to spread what they have.

I worked abroad and was sneezing at a meeting - I was informed very bluntly that I was a risk to people and should be home working. That is the way it should be.

If someone has symptoms of a virus then they should not be out spreading it. Maybe just maybe these lessons can reduce illness from other viruses into the future. And minimise the risks to society.

RandomName2

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

The median age of deaths is above life expectancy.

Median is a pretty useless measure.

Average is useful, and I'd guess the average age of people dying would be early 70s.

A lot of the deaths originate from old peoples' homes. It seems that there's no social distancing there or screening of care workers.

LiquidZeb

[Deleted User] wrote: »

https://www.cesm-cv.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/kwasaki-y-covid19.pdf

This was the paper I posted the other day. It was a case report. Literally, like talking to a wall. Care to critique the lancet article rather than throw potshots. It is a discussion forum after all.

And this is one of the quotes from the Google scholar link you posted about Kawasaki.

A very rough estimation of incidence based on data from Bergamo, Italy, and New York State and a lot assumption is between 0.011%(95% CI: 0.009-0.014%)-0.31%(95% CI: 0.2-0.47%) of infected children.

LiquidZeb

LiquidZeb wrote: »

And this is one of the quotes from the Google scholar link you posted about Kawasaki.

A very rough estimation of incidence based on data from Bergamo, Italy, and New York State and a lot assumption is between 0.011%(95% CI: 0.009-0.014%)-0.31%(95% CI: 0.2-0.47%) of infected children.

That isn't in the article I posted. It's fair enough to use that as a rebuttal but I didn't post that article.

Now may I get your opinion on the lancet article I posted?

LiquidZeb

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That isn't in the article I posted. It's fair enough to use that as a rebuttal but I didn't post that article.

Now may I get your opinion on the lancet article I posted?

No you're not reading what I'm saying. You put up a link to Google scholar. This was one of the articles attached. I can't see what you're failing to understand here.

is_that_so

MrDavid1976 wrote: »

So you are saying no issues on false negatives? And if someone has symptoms and tests negative then happy days? No need to isolate.

I don't believe so now but there have been in the past. Our alleged one was an IT issue. I presume so on a negative test because some of the symptoms can also indicate other things.

LiquidZeb

LiquidZeb wrote: »

No you're not reading what I'm saying. You put up a link to Google scholar. This was one of the articles attached. I can't see what you're failing to understand here.

OK. Let's forget about that paper. Let's "say" I posted it.

What do you make of the lancet paper I linked?

For your convenience:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31103-X/fulltext

Breezin

One lockdown for some.... from the Guardian today..

'Everyone's on top of you, sneezing and coughing': life inside Ireland's meat plants

Workers share Covid-19 fears over lack of social distancing, crowded accommodation and being forced to buy their own PPE

Nermal

Deleted User wrote: »

But it suits some agendas to pretend that only a tiny minority of people under 55 have any ill effects due to COVID-19.

Are you going to admit that it is in fact the case that only a tiny minority of people under 55 have any ill effects? That you're needlessly scaremongering?

Until you do that, why would anyone look at anything you post?

seamus

MrDavid1976 wrote: »

When we get out of this we need real behaviour change.

If someone is sick then they don’t go to the office and they certainly don’t go on public transport. They remote work when they can. If they can’t they take steps not to spread what they have.

I worked abroad and was sneezing at a meeting - I was informed very bluntly that I was a risk to people and should be home working. That is the way it should be.

If someone has symptoms of a virus then they should not be out spreading it. Maybe just maybe these lessons can reduce illness from other viruses into the future. And minimise the risks to society.

I agree. In fact, I think it should be a criminal offence for an employer to force employees to attend work while sick or to continually ignore an employee coming to work sick.

However, NPHET issuing a blanket "isolate for two weeks if you have any symptoms of any illness", wouldn't be helpful in dealing with this crisis and may only serve to cause confusion and delay treatments.

Ginger n Lemon

Nermal wrote: »

Are you going to admit that it is in fact the case that only a tiny minority of people under 55 have any ill effects? That you're needlessly scaremongering?

Until you do that, why would anyone look at anything you post?

I wouldnt treat that poster seriously, he suggested that early cancer screening makes very little difference. Goes to show the extent of medical knowledge there.

News update:

"GERMANY TO EASE BORDER CLOSURES

Berlin has announced plans to relax border restrictions as of Saturday, but said coronavirus-related checks will remain in place until at least June 15.

Interior Minister Horst Seehofer told reporters that all border crossings with Austria, Denmark, France, Luxembourg and Switzerland will be reopened as of Saturday."

Oh boy. Tony H would be fuming, countries opening borders? what the hell is this. THIS SATURDAY. We arent even in phase 1 yet until Monday...

Nermal

Nermal wrote: »

Are you going to admit that it is in fact the case that only a tiny minority of people under 55 have any ill effects? That you're needlessly scaremongering?

Until you do that, why would anyone look at anything you post?

https://medium.com/data-in-the-time-of-corona/covid-19-age-in-ireland-92036dbbebba

60% of hospital admissions were younger than 65 years of age in Ireland. I can't find stats for under 55. But normal definition of elderly is greater than 65.

Is 60% a tiny minority of hospital admissions?

Caveat: This is from 01/04/20.

beggars_bush

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I wouldnt treat that poster seriously, he suggested that early cancer screening makes very little difference. Goes to show the extent of medical knowledge there.

News update:

"GERMANY TO EASE BORDER CLOSURES

Berlin has announced plans to relax border restrictions as of Saturday, but said coronavirus-related checks will remain in place until at least June 15.

Interior Minister Horst Seehofer told reporters that all border crossings with Austria, Denmark, France, Luxembourg and Switzerland will be reopened as of Saturday."

Oh boy. Tony H would be fuming, countries opening borders? what the hell is this. THIS SATURDAY. We arent even in phase 1 yet until Monday...

Our land border has never been shut during the pandemic

ixoy

Deleted User wrote: »

https://medium.com/data-in-the-time-of-corona/covid-19-age-in-ireland-92036dbbebba

Article is six weeks old though. Anything fresher?

ixoy

ixoy wrote: »

Article is six weeks old though. Anything fresher?

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm

There you go:

Caveat: 4 weeks ago, US data

COVID-19 isn't the big behemoth that people initially thought. However, the people underplaying it's actual effect is frustrating. The risk of a person suffering ill effects under the age of 65 isn't a tiny minority. If somebody would like to prove only a tiny minority suffer ill effects under the age of 65. Please do.

tobefrank321

Very interesting documentary last night on E4 about the South Korean approach and lessons to be learned.

South Korea never locked down even when they had a serious outbreak at one stage. The residents of one city voluntarily locked down though.

Even with the latest nightclub outbreak they haven't locked down. Life goes on as normal.

The key to the South Korean approach is their rapid contact tracing. They have suspended a whole load of privacy and data protection rules to achieve this though, but the people are happy to go along with it. The trade off seems to be, we (government) won't lock you down, but in return we want as much personal data as possible to enable rapid contact tracing - credit card data, mobile phone data and so on.

Would Irish people accept this trade off? If it meant keeping your job, many would, myself included.

Ginger n Lemon

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I wouldnt treat that poster seriously, he suggested that early cancer screening makes very little difference. Goes to show the extent of medical knowledge there.

News update:

"GERMANY TO EASE BORDER CLOSURES

Berlin has announced plans to relax border restrictions as of Saturday, but said coronavirus-related checks will remain in place until at least June 15.

Interior Minister Horst Seehofer told reporters that all border crossings with Austria, Denmark, France, Luxembourg and Switzerland will be reopened as of Saturday."

Oh boy. Tony H would be fuming, countries opening borders? what the hell is this. THIS SATURDAY. We arent even in phase 1 yet until Monday...

I never said that early cancer screening didn't make a difference. I said that a delay of a number of weeks would not make a huge difference to treatment regime/ mortality outcome. There is also the risk that at the time, there was some concern about immunocompromising patients during the beginning of an new pandemic.

How do you manage oncology/hematology patients if COVID-19 is endemic in a hospital?

FintanMcluskey

RandomName2 wrote: »

Median is a pretty useless measure.

Average is useful, and I'd guess the average age of people dying would be early 70s.

A lot of the deaths originate from old peoples' homes. It seems that there's no social distancing there or screening of care workers.

Well thats an interesting approach to suggest median is a useless measure and suggest a guess may be more accurate?
The mean (average) is 82. Also above life expectancy.

Early 70s mean(average)? Where did you see this

tobefrank321

Deleted User wrote: »

I never said that early cancer screening didn't make a difference. I said that a delay of a number of weeks would not make a huge difference to treatment regime/ mortality outcome. There is also the risk that at the time, there was some concern about immunocompromising patients during the beginning of an new pandemic.

How do you manage oncology/hematology patients if COVID-19 is endemic in a hospital?

A delay of weeks would not make too big a difference.

But we are now up on 3 months of a lockdown including without screening.

And one woman in Kerry who depends on regular screening was told even after they resume she could be waiting for 6 months for results.

I think you will agree that could potentially make a huge difference for some.

Its just not acceptable to suspend screening for longer than a couple of months.

As for covid 19 being endemic, we've been told covid 19 is almost at an all time low in terms of spread now. So either we now prioritise screening and oncology services or else someone is telling big fat porkies, and covid 19 is still endemic in hospitals.

The one thing covid 19 doesn't care about is government or HSE PR.

Colibri

No mammograms were carried out by BreastCheck last month and there was a 96% reduction in samples sent to CervicalCheck labs for analysis, following a decision to pause both cancer screening programmes due to Covid-19.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0510/1137590-breastcheck-cervicalcheck/

Things are apparently changing, but this is just heartbreaking.