Covid 19 Part XXII-30,360 in ROI(1,781 deaths) 8,035 in NI (568 deaths)(10/09)Read OP

BattleCorp

Martina1991 wrote: »

Chris Johns, A financial and economic columnist.

Who likely doesnt know what it takes to validate a test for national use that is reliable and accurate. Let alone the logistic work it takes to set up the transport and IT support necessary to process and report hundreds of thousands of tests a week.
And this is hoped to be done in a few weeks?

So what if he is a financial and economic columnist. Sounds like a decent enough idea to me to be honest. We are going to need a very large testing network this winter to help keep the economy going. If you got a cough or a sniffle this winter, you won't be allowed to go to work/school/whatever because you can't distinguish the symptoms of COVID-19 from the common cold too handy. And testing will help prevent the asymptomatic people from spreading it.

Test positive, isolate. Test negative, go about your business. Sounds sensible to me.

Will it be 100% - no. Is doing nothing better - no.

Always_Running

176 more cases this week compared to last from 10695 extra tests carried out.

Goldengirl

BringBackMick wrote: »

To look at the bigger picture about Phil Hogan and not shoot ourselves in the foot.

To look at the bigger picture with COVID and put out a clear message that we must live alongside COVID and not have kneejerk reactions every evening when the COVID case numbers are released and to have a clear roadmap and objectives.

Is he next in line for a ministerial post ?

Goldengirl

seanb85 wrote: »

Never claimed to be an expert, but there are lots of resources out there where the information can be found

https://nextstrain.org/narratives/ncov/sit-rep/2020-08-14

Your posts are intelligent , informative and sourced, always .
Nobody claims to be an expert here .

Martina1991

BattleCorp wrote:

Test positive, isolate. Test negative, go about your business. Sounds sensible to me.

It would be more like
Test positive: confirm with PCR
Test negative: significant possibility of false negative, go about your business thinking you're fine, and spread the virus.

Goldengirl

polesheep wrote: »

I'm no fan of FF but I would rather see O'Callaghan in charge instead of Martin. I feel he would be a steadier hand as well as being more assured.

I think that may well be why he was passed over for a ministerial post previously.

BattleCorp

Martina1991 wrote: »

It would be more like
Test positive: confirm with PCR
Test negative: significant possibility of false negative, go about your business thinking you're fine, and spread the virus.

And if you are not tested, you'll still go about your business thinking you're fine, and spread the virus.

I'm not saying abandon social distancing etc. I'm saying nationwide testing could be used in conjunction with social distancing etc.

speckle

Martina1991 wrote: »

They're not going to be reliable.

I was always told if you can't do something right, don't do it at all.

And

No result is better than a wrong result.

I get where you are coming from as normally a perfectionist... but in a eg a war triage situation or Italy for example choosing who gets full perfect treatment or who doesnt and might or even probably die,sometimes that has to be put aside. It goes against medical peoples training when the drugs/ventalators run out but decisions must be made even if not perfect. I hate that idea but public health is about saving the most lives possible.


In a perfect universe we would have enough money/time/resources/personel and we could all get PCR lab based tests and be followed through by perfevt contact tracing. But we must at least explore and dicuss other option before schools get going etc.
Once pregancy tests were medically based now ate at home with a follow up medically if positive.
These tests susposedly dectect the covid virus maybe not as early as pcr but in enough time before you are infectious to others. The may have a slightly higher rate of false negatives but that is balanced by the speed and because they are so cheap to produce by frequency one could use them at and the amount of people that can be covered.

caveat emptor

Longcovid sufferer organising and advocating for acknowledgement and better treatment.

https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1297313456765337603?s=20

ACitizenErased

The US FDA are constantly reviewing new testing methods, and recently approved the saliva test (developed by yale as far as I know). Europe (and us) don't seem to be doing much to approve new testing methods to make it easier. Maybe they are, but we never hear about it. We need to change the way we test if we want to get on with things. The current way of doing it requires far too many resources.

Goldengirl

JJayoo wrote: »

Two camps

A) Elderly Grandparents/parents still alive , family member currently undergoing treatment. Family memy with condition that would put them at risk.
= Taking this serious because yano I'd rather not take the chance

No vunerable family members = risk doesn't I.pact me directly = this virus bullsh1t is seriously messing up my social life.

And another ...c) No vulnerable family members but have the cop on to know something dangerous when they see it ongoing around the world , and read all the expert scientific advice for themselves instead of just accepting what camp a) or camp b) tell them they should believe . And follow the guidelines because they believe and / or hope that someone in charge is actually issuing advice for the greater good, not because they can't see the contradictions and flaws.

( I think you may have phrased yours a bit better , more concise , jayoo;) )

Goldengirl

Martina1991 wrote: »

Chris Johns, A financial and economic columnist.

Who likely doesnt know what it takes to validate a test for national use that is reliable and accurate. Let alone the logistic work it takes to set up the transport and IT support necessary to process and report hundreds of thousands of tests a week.
And this is hoped to be done in a few weeks?

If you had a wishlist to carry out all this mass testing , Martina , what would you be asking the government for ?

podgeandrodge

podgeandrodge wrote:

...From a US study (acknowledging I don't know if there are variances with quality of care between USA and Ireland):

"In a study of elderly Americans who moved to a nursing home for their final months or years of life, 65 percent died there within one year, according to an investigation by researchers at the San Francisco VA Medical Center and the University of California, San Francisco.

The average age of participants when they moved to a nursing home was about 83. The average length of stay before death was 13.7 months, while the median was five months. Fifty-three percent of nursing home residents in the study died within six months."

To me, it's fair to say that most people going to nursing homes don't spend many years there. I would imagine most residents are there for good.

gozunda wrote: »

What? Extrapolating from US study - does not make it 'fair to say" by any stretch of the imagination. Tbh I'm still trying yo figure out exactly what relevance a US study (a country with a lack of any universal health care system) got to do with anything here?

Tbh it looks like you are fishing for any argument pushing that older people are effectively expendable under the current pandemic as they are "going to die anyway' or wtte.

A quick search of place of death for older people in Ireland shows that annually - approx " (46%) of participant deaths occurred in hospital.
Other places included their own home (27%), a hospice (11%) and a nursing home (10%).

Another recent (pre pandemic) report found that just 12 % of older people spent time in a hospice and/or nursing homes (18%) prior to death

As explained previously many eldely people go to nursing homes for short periods of respite or periods of care following illness. From the literature and looking at this pre pandemic - there is no evidence of large scale rapid die off of elderly nursing homes.

Perhaps you might wish to do a bit more research before jumping to wishful thinking in an effort to bolster such rubbish.

Nothing I was referring to was about where most people die. It was in a response to a discussion on how long people generally stayed in nursing homes. So not clear on why you are talking about "place of death" here.

I quoted facts from a US study. Feel free to elaborate on why drawing conclusions from a study of nursing homes in the US is "not fair to say by any stretch of the imagination", I'm genuinely curious as to why.

As for accusing me of "fishing for any argument pushing that older people are effectively expendable under the current pandemic as they are "going to die anyway' " :rolleyes:

Again, your continuation of another subject - that a "report found that just 12 % of older people spent time in a hospice and/or nursing homes (18%) prior to death" is not what I was discussing. I have no doubt that it's perfectly possible that only 12% of the population spent time in such locations before dying. I was referring to those in nursing homes and the likely length of their stay there.

I think you have missed the point but feel free to continue to be outraged

Martina1991

Martina1991 wrote: »

Chris Johns, A financial and economic columnist.

Who likely doesnt know what it takes to validate a test for national use that is reliable and accurate. Let alone the logistic work it takes to set up the transport and IT support necessary to process and report hundreds of thousands of tests a week.
And this is hoped to be done in a few weeks?

Sensible people along with many scientists in Ireland such as Kingston mills are asking questions in relation to testing and it's current weaknesses. If we are to live with the virus testing at present is just not good enough. You say Chris Jones is not a testing expert. That doesn't mean he cannot see the big picture of how to solve problem. You seem to be involved in testing in Ireland or are aware of its processes. Great, but maybe you are too close and feel any questioning of the current testing regime is unwelcome and only for people who are also involved. Covid 19 will be here for years if not forever. Testing will evolve, maybe not much in the weeks or months ahead, but it seems clear mass testing will happen in Ireland in relation to covid 19 when science and infrastructure catch up in Ireland. Teachers are now asking for regular testing for themselves and pupils. The public are demanding more testing if we are to live the virus, tough if you don't like that.

Goldengirl

speckle wrote: »

I get where you are coming from as normally a perfectionist... but in a eg a war triage situation or Italy for example choosing who gets full perfect treatment or who doesnt and might or even probably die,sometimes that has to be put aside. It goes against medical peoples training when the drugs/ventalators run out but decisions must be made even if not perfect. I hate that idea but public health is about saving the most lives possible.


In a perfect universe we would have enough money/time/resources/personel and we could all get PCR lab based tests and be followed through by perfevt contact tracing. But we must at least explore and dicuss other option before schools get going etc.
Once pregancy tests were medically based now ate at home with a follow up medically if positive.
These tests susposedly dectect the covid virus maybe not as early as pcr but in enough time before you are infectious to others. The may have a slightly higher rate of false negatives but that is balanced by the speed and because they are so cheap to produce by frequency one could use them at and the amount of people that can be covered.

My understanding of these tests , and am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong , is that they only pick up the body's response to being ill from the virus , so will not be sensitive enough to pick up what virus is causing the infection, or pick it up in early stages when the person may still be transmitting the virus to others.
That is a recipe for people getting tests that lull them into a false sense of security or maybe the opposite depending on the result.
I would like more funding put in to bring our present testing up to the levels required if possible and also more funding for faster and more efficient tracing, ideally .

MerlinSouthDub

Martina1991 wrote: »

It would be more like
Test positive: confirm with PCR
Test negative: significant possibility of false negative, go about your business thinking you're fine, and spread the virus.

Quite right.

One of the big issues with these tests, as I understand it, is that the false positive rate is quite high. If you get lots of false positives through mass testing the population, all of these people will need to get a PCR test, and thereby overload the PCR testing system.

It would be great if there was a reliable rapid test for mass use, but there isn't.

Chris John's article shows no evidence that he's researched the issue at all, I'm surprised it was published.

Goldengirl

ACitizenErased wrote: »

The US FDA are constantly reviewing new testing methods, and recently approved the saliva test (developed by yale as far as I know). Europe (and us) don't seem to be doing much to approve new testing methods to make it easier. Maybe they are, but we never hear about it. We need to change the way we test if we want to get on with things. The current way of doing it requires far too many resources.

Those saliva tests still have to be analysed , unless they are reagent strips which we have been discussing the accuracy of here . It is just an easier method of gathering samples from for example , children .

Martina1991

Goldengirl wrote:

If you had a wishlist to carry out all this mass testing , Martina , what would you be asking the government for ?

The answer to that question goes far beyond Covid testing, and cannot be addressed in a matter of weeks.

There needs to be more investment at third level for incoming laboratory staff. Too many garduates are going into pharmaceuticals, post grad med, research rather than working in hospital labs because the money and conditions continue to deteriorate and have done for years.

A lab aide (who only needs a LC qualification) earns more than a newly qualified Medical Scientist, who has done 4/5 years to earn their degree and will work on their own on call with serious responsibility for patient care.

Hospital labs get a miniscule fraction of the hospital bugdet yet diagnostic tests are central to patient care, as well as patient samples from GPs. Workload increases every single year and posts from retiring staff are not filled.

Covid testing was thrown into the mix, with no investment other than, here's some money, just get it done and get it done by next week. I think it was St. Vincents that set up their Covid area in a converted store room.

Now every Tom, Dick and Harry are giving their 2 cents worth about testing despite not knowing a thing about it a few months ago.

Why dont we just test everyone every week. Then we can go to the pub and everything will be fine. Why has no one thought of that. Just add a drop of spit to a piece of paper, job done. Cheap, easy, simple.

I'm not trying to s*it on every new test that is reported on. If it works, great. But i have yet to see any reliable reputable test that is not just used in research labs, and not promoted by the people who are selling it.

Gruffalux

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

. If you get lots of false positives through mass testing the population, all of these people will need to get a PCR test, and thereby overload the PCR testing system.

.

What is going to happen to the PCR testing system in Octoberish when all the people with colds and flus are going to have to be tested for Covid before going back to school or work ?

ACitizenErased

https://twitter.com/higginsdavidw/status/1297547159836004353?s=21

speckle

Goldengirl wrote: »

My understanding of these tests , and am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong , is that they only pick up the body's response to being ill from the virus , so will not be sensitive enough to pick up what virus is causing the infection, or pick it up in early stages when the person may still be transmitting the virus to others.
That is a recipe for people getting tests that lull them into a false sense of security or maybe the opposite depending on the result.
I would like more funding put in to bring our present testing up to the levels required if possible and also more funding for faster and more efficient tracing, ideally .

They pick up the viral dna of covid 19 specifically. Pcr (not using lab/medical speak/levels) pick up say when you get to 30 virus cells in your body and you test is postive saliva strip picks it up at 40 slightly later. The strip is in a plastic thingy thats a bit like a cross between a pregancy test and diabetic blood sugar monitor.

will repose links on a minute on mobile.

JJayoo

JJayoo wrote: »

Two camps

A) Elderly Grandparents/parents still alive , family member currently undergoing treatment. Family memy with condition that would put them at risk.
= Taking this serious because yano I'd rather not take the chance

No vunerable family members = risk doesn't I.pact me directly = this virus bullsh1t is seriously messing up my social life.

There is a few others.

C: looking for the inheritance early.

Let's try make some financial/political gains out of this and the morons that follow us.

E: The conspiracy theorists or other gritters that I listen to and repeat religiously as I'm such a free independent thinker, have told me this is just a hoax/way for the illuminati to control us and make everyone gay mixed race lefties.

F: i'm just a sociopathic c*nt and my portfolio is being affected, and my taxes are going to people affected by this.

Martina1991

Goldengirl wrote:

I would like more funding put in to bring our present testing up to the levels required if possible and also more funding for faster and more efficient tracing, ideally .

I would agree with this.
Our solution shouldnt be just to keep looking for something faster and cheaper. Thats too short sighted and could cause major problems.

We should invest and improve in the systems we have worked hard to implement and perfect them.

I dont mean to go off topic, but when the cervical check service was overwhelmed, we outsourced our patient care to the U.S.

There was a third level course set up specifically for trained scientists to work in cervical cytology but wasn't used and therefore discontinued. The Academy of Medical Laboratory Science (AMLS) (among others) warned the government to not outsource but they didn't listen to the people who work in the field.

Ireland cannot continue to cut corners, ignore the people who work in laboratory sciences and compromise patient care.

polesheep

ACitizenErased wrote: »

https://twitter.com/higginsdavidw/status/1297547159836004353?s=21

That's an astonishing level of ignorance among young people. They must be getting all of their information from social media. If so, there are serious issues ahead.

polesheep

polesheep wrote: »

That's an astonishing level of ignorance among young people. They must be getting all of their information from social media. If so, there are serious issues ahead.

Plenty of older people too going by some on here, or just willfully ignorant.

Martina1991

Gruffalox wrote:

What is going to happen to the PCR testing system in Octoberish when all the people with colds and flus are going to have to be tested for Covid before going back to school or work ?

Laboratory analysers can perform testing for various viruses at the same time.

One swab can test for Covid, different strains of influenza and other respiratory viruses.

is_that_so

Goldengirl wrote: »

If you had a wishlist to carry out all this mass testing , Martina , what would you be asking the government for ?

The CMO said it was really not an effective use of resources. Even a cheap one would also be hugely costly.

ACitizenErased

polesheep wrote: »

That's an astonishing level of ignorance among young people. They must be getting all of their information from social media. If so, there are serious issues ahead.

It shows young people believe it is far deadlier than it actually is. That’s all people are seeing on the internet, on RTE, particularly.

Non solum non ambulabit

JJayoo wrote: »

Two camps

A) Elderly Grandparents/parents still alive , family member currently undergoing treatment. Family memy with condition that would put them at risk.
= Taking this serious because yano I'd rather not take the chance

No vunerable family members = risk doesn't I.pact me directly = this virus bullsh1t is seriously messing up my social life.

And 80% of people in the middle who understand the risk and are trying their best to reduce risk for all and live a balanced life with the virus.

polesheep

DubInMeath wrote: »

Plenty of older people too going by some on here, or just willfully ignorant.

The survey demonstrated that over 35s had much better knowledge of the facts.