Covid19 Part XIX-25,802 in ROI (1,753 deaths) 5,859 in NI (556 deaths) (21/07)Read OP

schmoo2k

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Highly effective treatments will win this. Not a vaccine

I firmly believe this

That will simply be an ongoing battle - vaccines will effectively eliminate it.

Polar101

Herd immunity not quite here yet:

Early findings from blood tests taken from more than 2,000 people in Dublin and Sligo in a Health Service Executive study over the past month indicate that the vast majority of the Irish public are still vulnerable to catching Covid-19.

Sample testing for antibodies against the disease in healthy people shows that less than 5 per cent of the population has been exposed to the disease, far short of building any herd immunity against future infection.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/publication-of-travel-green-list-delayed-as-tensions-grow-within-coalition-1.4308344

Azatadine

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53467022

Another potential tool.

is_that_so

Polar101 wrote: »

Herd immunity not quite here yet:



https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/publication-of-travel-green-list-delayed-as-tensions-grow-within-coalition-1.4308344

That's similar to the levels other countries have found in such testing.

Onesea

SeaBreezes wrote: »

Sigh. Thats 1200 excess ( unexpected,above average) deaths on top.of the 500 expected. In TWO MONTHS What did those 1200 people die of? Conspiracytheoryitis? The flu?

Two months? The 1700 figure is over 4 or 5 months no?

I see the trains are packed to capacity no masks etc.. Seen planet of images of the gal way Dublin train.
Irish government introducing laws and rules they cannot police.

plodder

Question. If it's the case that people with reduced symptoms produce less anti-bodies and they tend to lose them within weeks or months, does that not mean these sero-prevalence studies aren't an accurate measure of the number exposed to the virus and the percentage of the population exposed to the virus is likely to be much higher?

Non solum non ambulabit

Azatadine wrote: »

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53467022

Another potential tool.

Sounds very promising and relatively simple and safe.

There has been some really great news on treatments over the last week. I am starting to feel more positive again after a few tough weeks.

is_that_so

plodder wrote: »

Question. If it's the case that people with reduced symptoms produce less anti-bodies and they tend to lose them within weeks or months, does that not mean these sero-prevalence studies aren't an accurate measure of the number exposed to the virus and the percentage of the population exposed to the virus is likely to be much higher?

They are not done for absolute accuracy, merely to give a good indication of disease prevalence. It's been a low number everywhere, with a few exceptions.

TomSweeney

Non solum non ambulabit wrote: »

Sounds very promising and relatively simple and safe.

There has been some really great news on treatments over the last week. I am starting to feel more positive again after a few tough weeks.

Indeed, let's see if this cops governments on that seem determined to utterly destroy their societies, it's like they want to see hundreds of thousands/millions lose their homes and die of ****ing starvation on the streets ...

yosemitesam1

plodder wrote: »

Question. If it's the case that people with reduced symptoms produce less anti-bodies and they tend to lose them within weeks or months, does that not mean these sero-prevalence studies aren't an accurate measure of the number exposed to the virus and the percentage of the population exposed to the virus is likely to be much higher?

Yes, covid has most definitely spread much further than they suggest. T cell response or antibodies present only in mucous represent a large amount of the total infected.

Boggles

TomSweeney wrote: »

Indeed, let's see if this cops governments on that seem determined to utterly destroy their societies, it's like they want to see hundreds of thousands/millions lose their homes and die of ****ing starvation on the streets ...

This weekend, I went out for lunch, did a bit of furniture shopping and headed to the beach.

IF anything I over indulged.

plodder

is_that_so wrote: »

They are not done for absolute accuracy, merely to give a good indication of disease prevalence.

That doesn't answer the question though.

It's been a low number everywhere, with a few exceptions.

Right, that is why I was asking. I see also that only half the people selected did the test. You could speculate that the people most likely to return the test might be less likely to have been infected, as they might be more careful, rule followers etc.

plodder

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Yes, covid has most definitely spread much further than they suggest. T cell response or antibodies present only in mucous represent a large amount of the total infected.

Or maybe if some people are predisposed to be asymptomatic then they don't need to produce antibodies because they aren't badly affected in the first place..?

I remember reading that the people who have the most severe symptoms tend to have the highest level of anti-bodies, which is what you'd expect. They are the ones who need to develop immunity the most.

Johnny7136

Johnny7136 wrote: »

I'm a massive sceptic of all this. I've just read a little here and people are quoting numbers and death rates from other countries, how can any of the numbers be believed, people are dying with covid, not of covid.
I've read lots now for months on Twitter etc

My take on Florida / Texas.. There are testing huge amount of people that aren't sick. People are been tested up to 4 times hoping for a nagative result to be allowed back to work.

I can't get over how gullable we all seem, out health service has never been run to a high standard, money wasted / bad decisions etc Yet now we trust everything they say.

George Lee on Rte is an expert on science and scaremongering now. He was always an economics man, crazy to listen to a word of that.

We didn't open the pubs this week because an estimated R number is too high. I don't believe that number can be produced with accuracy without testing the whole population. Iceland may have near the correct figure.

How accurate is the testing, god knows, I read today something like 170 brands of test kits have been recalled.

We're now all told to wear masks without any set standard of mask. Fair enough no inconvenience to majority of us wearing a mask for short periods, wearing a mask for 8 hours a day in work, no thanks.

Were told weeks ago dubs not welcome in Wexford etc now we've moved onto Americans, their the new enemy. People should be treated the same from anywhere, social distancing rules the same, if that even works, one meter / two metres, who knows.

We maybe have a bad flu. Likely top 10 worst flus in past 25 years.
The response to this is out of control, I was scared at first when we didn't know anything, the numbers just aren't there... But because we did so well blah blah blah.
I don't think so, people caught the flu at the same rate they would have caught any year.
People die, that's life. So many people die of pneumonia cold and flu every year, we don't shut the country

I read this in the style of a Hunter S Thomson novel in a effort to find meaning, but it still evades me

TomSweeney

Boggles wrote: »

This weekend, I went out for lunch, did a bit of furniture shopping and headed to the beach.

IF anything I over indulged.

I did similar, but it's coming, the 2nd lockdown - better believe it ..

What Username Guidelines

Santy2015 wrote: »

It’s 12 people including ICU in hospital. They’re not a separate number.

Definitely? I’ve been trying to figure that out but the numbers didn’t seem to match for me. Be great if it was one number.

harr

Only dipping in and and out of this thread and still can’t believe in the middle of July, 5 months into this crisis in Ireland people are still comparing it to a regular flu .

stephenjmcd

Santy2015 wrote: »

It’s 12 people including ICU in hospital. They’re not a separate number.

Fairly sure they're separate.
Vincents for example reporting a paitent in ICU with covid and not in the other figures.

Its been confusing the last few days as the wording even in press conferences seems to have changed but just based on that reporting I'd be pretty confident they're seperate

ShineOn7

MickeyLeari wrote: »

Yes. I think you need them outside also and in your own home.

Masks are mandatory outside from today?

stephenjmcd

john why wrote: »

Are masks mandatory from today?

Nope not yet

ShyMets

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Masks are mandatory outside from today?

No, masks have not been made mandatory outdoors.

Boggles

harr wrote: »

Only dipping in and and out of this thread and still can’t believe in the middle of July, 5 months into this crisis in Ireland people are still comparing it to a regular flu .

And car accidents.

lawrencesummers

90% of staff in the big shop I’m in aren’t wearing masks.
90% of customers are.

caveat emptor

harr wrote: »

Only dipping in and and out of this thread and still can’t believe in the middle of July, 5 months into this crisis in Ireland people are still comparing it to a regular flu .

It's amazing what can happen when your bank balance isn't where you though it would be and your. existence is dependent on "bums in seats"

screwed finances leads to screwed logic.

yosemitesam1

harr wrote: »

Only dipping in and and out of this thread and still can’t believe in the middle of July, 5 months into this crisis in Ireland people are still comparing it to a regular flu .

If you compare flu Vs covid on hospitalisation rates they are both very similar at circa 1%.
Allowing for the fact that the 1,700 deaths figure is higher than actual deaths CAUSED by covid and the fact that the antibody testing results just released underestimate the spread of the virus due to ignoring mucosal antibodies and t cells.
We are looking at an IFR of maybe two to three times that of a standard flu.
Covid could be very realistically compared to a bad flu strain and if a more detailed antibody/t cell survey was carried out, that may show it has spread substantially further already.

Plumbthedepths

lawrencesummers wrote: »

90% of staff in the big shop I’m in aren’t wearing masks.
90% of customers are.

Easy to wear a mask for 20/30 mins, different story for 8 hours.

xvril

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Easy to wear a mask for 20/30 mins, different story for 8 hours.

In Greece the staff in my hotel wore them all day in 32 degree heat and didn't complain.

Plumbthedepths

xvril wrote: »

In Greece the staff in my hotel wore them all day in 32 degree heat and didn't complain.

And?

xabi

xvril wrote: »

In Greece the staff in my hotel wore them all day in 32 degree heat and didn't complain.

You cant stand over either of those statements.

What Username Guidelines

harr wrote: »

Only dipping in and and out of this thread and still can’t believe in the middle of July, 5 months into this crisis in Ireland people are still comparing it to a regular flu .

It's clearly far more serious than a regular flu, but I do think there is some merit in comparisons with how it behaves in the general population but not necessarily it's health impact on an individual.

We were originally told 100% of people were susceptible and if everyone in Ireland got it, we could see 85,000 deaths. The comparisons with flu or other previous pandemics can be useful, as we can see Sweden are trending down with a more liberal approach, and they're not seeing massive levels of mortality when compared to the original projections. I'm by no means saying Sweden's approach is correct, but rather an interesting dataset to compare to, especially when you see their excess deaths are still lower than previous bad flu seasons.

When we see new flu strains or pandemics, there are more susceptible than usual seasons, but it's unlikely that it continues until everyone is infected.

Looking at South Africa and Australia (southern temperate regions) they had relatively small spikes in March and April that then died down, but are now seeing a resurgence. Their flu season starts around now, and it could be posited that March/April were imported cases that didn't take hold locally due to seasonality, but are now seeing a natural increase. Consider if each country tested as much for flu as they did Covid, you'd certainly find cases of flu all year round as it never goes away, but from a population level, you'll see peaks/troughs at somewhat expected times. Similar seasonality comparisons can be made in many countries, or looking from north to south in the US, albeit seasonally it's offset from usual months.

Having said all that, there are outliers that can disprove this - Israel, Iran, etc, and as frustrating as it may be, it's all a waiting game to embiggen the datasets everywhere.

Call me Al

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

If you compare flu Vs covid on hospitalisation rates they are both very similar at circa 1%.
Allowing for the fact that the 1,700 deaths figure is higher than actual deaths CAUSED by covid and the fact that the antibody testing results just released underestimate the spread of the virus due to ignoring mucosal antibodies and t cells.
We are looking at an IFR of maybe two to three times that of a standard flu.
Covid could be very realistically compared to a bad flu strain and if a more detailed antibody/t cell survey was carried out, that may show it has spread substantially further already.

The covid hospitalisation rate is much higher than 1%.
Eta do you have data re any of the rest if your assertions?

caveat emptor

xvril wrote: »

In Greece the staff in my hotel wore them all day in 32 degree heat and didn't complain.

People need to man up.

Masks are going to people's best friend this winter.

AlmightyCushion

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

If you compare flu Vs covid on hospitalisation rates they are both very similar at circa 1%.
Allowing for the fact that the 1,700 deaths figure is higher than actual deaths CAUSED by covid and the fact that the antibody testing results just released underestimate the spread of the virus due to ignoring mucosal antibodies and t cells.
We are looking at an IFR of maybe two to three times that of a standard flu.
Covid could be very realistically compared to a bad flu strain and if a more detailed antibody/t cell survey was carried out, that may show it has spread substantially further already.

How many flu strains have killed over 1,000 people between March and July when the country has spend most of that time locked down? It is not comparable to a bad flu strain.

caveat emptor

xabi wrote: »

You cant stand over either of those statements.

It's an Internet forum.

Nobody can stand over anything. People on here have 2 wives, 3 girlfriends, 4 horses and none of them tested positive.

Conspiracy? definitely.

Call me Al

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

How many flu strains have killed over 1,000 people between March and July when the country has spend most of that time locked down? It is not comparable to a bad flu strain.

I don't know of a flu hitting Ireland recently that has killed 13% of those 65-74 who have caught it, eta... as has happened in ireland with Covid.

SeaBreezes

Onesea wrote: »

Two months? The 1700 figure is over 4 or 5 months no?

I see the trains are packed to capacity no masks etc.. Seen planet of images of the gal way Dublin train.
Irish government introducing laws and rules they cannot police.

Nope. 2 months.

Boggles

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

How many flu strains have killed over 1,000 people between March and July when the country has spend most of that time locked down? It is not comparable to a bad flu strain.

Miami-Dade with a population of nearly 3 million is running at nearly 120% ICU capacity.

When was the last time the flu did that in July in Florida?

It's not a flu.

bb1234567

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

If you compare flu Vs covid on hospitalisation rates they are both very similar at circa 1%.
Allowing for the fact that the 1,700 deaths figure is higher than actual deaths CAUSED by covid and the fact that the antibody testing results just released underestimate the spread of the virus due to ignoring mucosal antibodies and t cells.
We are looking at an IFR of maybe two to three times that of a standard flu.
Covid could be very realistically compared to a bad flu strain and if a more detailed antibody/t cell survey was carried out, that may show it has spread substantially further already.

You have simply made up a lot of bull**** here. IFR is believed to be 0.65%, this is the official estimate released by WHO a few days ago . It is a consensus agreed upon by 1300 international scientists after examining hundreds of studies . But yeh I'm sure you're right and the thousands of scientists have it all wrong here. I'm sure all these highly educated people have completely neglected to consider that some countries may over count deaths and that antibody testing may not be totally accurate, absolutely may have gone completely over their heads so it's a good thing we have you around to keep us informed.

So yeh, it can be said with almost total confidence that you are completely wrong . Comparisons to flu are just distracting and tired subject matter in the thread at this stage when there is almost a definitive figure agreed upon globally that places it at 6.5x more dangerous than a flu, it is no longer a debate of any validity whatsoever. So please stop !

schmoo2k

lawrencesummers wrote: »

90% of staff in the big shop I’m in aren’t wearing masks.
90% of customers are.

= 82% of folks are wearing masks (assuming 90 customers and 10 staff).

yosemitesam1

Call me Al wrote: »

The covid hospitalisation rate is much higher than 1%.
Eta do you have data re any of the rest if your assertions?

The antibody survey is giving an estimate of just under 5% of the population being infected. This is underestimating the total infections quite considerably as a large proportion of infections only generate a t cell or mucosal antibody response.

ShineOn7

xabi wrote: »

You cant stand over either of those statements.

Why can't they?

I rode Scarlett Johansson last night

Prove me wrong

is_that_so

bb1234567 wrote: »

You have simply made up a lot of bull**** here. IFR is believed to be 0.65%, this is the official estimate released by WHO a few days ago . It is a consensus agreed upon by 1300 international scientists after examining hundreds of studies . But yeh I'm sure you're right and the thousands of scientists have it all wrong here.

Squabbling over the IFR encourages people to overlook this bigger issue. When health systems melt down it will be higher with all the other attendant problems for the system itself and wider society.

yosemitesam1

bb1234567 wrote: »

You have simply made up a lot of bull**** here. IFR is believed to be 0.65%, this is the official estimate released by WHO a few days ago . It is a consensus agreed upon by 1300 international scientists after examining hundreds of studies . But yeh I'm sure you're right and the thousands of scientists have it all wrong here.

That 0.65% will drop just as the 3% figure was revised downwards.
It was apparent for a long time the 3% fatality rate was very wrong before it was revised downwards by WHO and this will probably be no different

ShineOn7

bb1234567 wrote: »

You have simply made up a lot of bull**** here. IFR is believed to be 0.65%, this is the official estimate released by WHO a few days ago . It is a consensus agreed upon by 1300 international scientists after examining hundreds of studies . But yeh I'm sure you're right and the thousands of scientists have it all wrong here.

Let's presume what WHO are saying is true (a huge stretch in itself);

That's still 6 times more lethal than the Flu

Flu's mortality rate = 0.1%

theballz

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Why can't they?

I rode Scarlett Johansson last night

Prove me wrong

is_that_so

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

The antibody survey is giving an estimate of just under 5% of the population being infected. This is underestimating the total infections quite considerably as a large proportion of infections only generate a t cell or mucosal antibody response.

It can't test for what it's not looking for. It's an indicator. Personally reckon people get too obsessed with this when it's treatments and ultimately a vaccine we still need regardless. Do you have a link to data that shows this underestimation?

Call me Al

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

The antibody survey is giving an estimate of just under 5% of the population being infected. This is underestimating the total infections quite considerably as a large proportion of infections only generate a t cell or mucosal antibody response.

I know exactly what you're saying.
I'm asking you to show where there's evidence of a spread of the disease that's greater than 5% of the population.
Also everything else you claim.
For reference a link to Epidemiology of COVID-19 in Ireland from 17/7 was shared here yesterday I think.

Charles Babbage

bb1234567 wrote: »

You have simply made up a lot of bull**** here. IFR is believed to be 0.65%, this is the official estimate released by WHO a few days ago . It is a consensus agreed upon by 1300 international scientists after examining hundreds of studies . But yeh I'm sure you're right and the thousands of scientists have it all wrong here.

And while better understanding and treatment will reduce thus a bit, to 0.4% say, this is still an order of magnitude higher than flu. Anyone who says that it us like flu is simply trying to disrupt rational discussion.

GooglePlus

I've had a test ordered by my GP, so just waiting on contact by the HSE with an appointment.

Does anyone know if there's a testing location in the city centre within walking distance near Stephens Green?

I don't drive and I can't be getting public transport if I might have this thing?

theballz

GooglePlus wrote: »

I've had a test ordered by my GP, so just waiting on contact by the HSE with an appointment.

Does anyone know if there's a testing location in the city centre within walking distance near Stephens Green?

I don't drive and I can't be getting public transport if I might have this thing?

HSE can arrange transportation for you if required. Let your GP know that is the case, he may need to inform them of that.

When I got tested, I simply received a text with a time, date and venue.