Covid 19 Part XXIV-37,063 ROI (1,801 deaths) 12,886 NI (582 deaths) (02/10) Read OP

Funsterdelux

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Are you a mod ?

In fairness it happened late night/early morning. It could easily be missed

caveat emptor

caveat emptor wrote: »

TBH I couldn't see the issue with why people were getting worried about a flu in wuhan but I suppose each to their own.

The future is SARS-CoV2 being endemic in the same way as the HCoV variants. And in all probability, no more serious either when it is no longer a novel virus and the bulk of have a level of "resistance", either natural or promoted through a vaccine

What Username Guidelines

Any chance a mod could either ban reinfection talk completely, or alternatively ban people complaining about it? It's such a useless back and forth.

I find it an interesting aspect of it all, I'm not a doom monger, nor do I want to be in lockdown forever, just find the studies interesting. Yet any time there is a post about it, it gets nothing but abuse and the usual "you're probably pulling yourself to the thought of negative news".

If posters have such an issue with it, you can scroll right by the post you know.

big syke wrote: »

Still out of 32 million detected reported cases only 15 (even taking into account the 2 cases that have extremely close reinfection periods) cases have been confirmed.

For this to be any concern surely at least what 1/3 so 10+ million more reported reinfections would have to be reported.

Is it that massively under-detected????

Doubt it

True, but it's still interesting that it's being tracked and interesting that people are being reinfected quite quickly, although I agree the close ones are likely same infection unless different genomes sequenced. I can't see it being a big concern or issue myself, as the high number of healthcare workers worldwide are for the most part probably back at work and exposed to potential reinfections and we're not seeing that yet.

CalamariFritti

Funsterdelux wrote: »

Are they the same ones that are pro lockdown?

I dont know. They seem to be but I dont really want to make it about 'sides' or people. I am trying to look at facts and data. I am not dogmatic I think. If facts and data indicate otherwise I would support whatever that is.

So for now I go with our response is disproportionate and counterproductive and our 'guys in charge' seem to be ignoring their own data. As for the reasons, who knows.

Goldrickssan

Since the initial spread with the mountains of hospital admissions, has anyone done a review of the hospitalisation/ICU/Death rate for say the last 2 months?

Media keep using the original percentages which are clearly completely wrong.

caveat emptor

Deleted User wrote: »

The future is SARS-CoV2 being endemic in the same way as the HCoV variants. And in all probability, no more serious either when it is no longer a novel virus and the bulk of have a level of "resistance", either natural or promoted through a vaccine

That's a mighty big bet batman and you wouldn't happen to know how many years it'll take to weaken before it won't be able to overwhelm our health services and lead to other unconnected deaths due to capacity constraints?

is_that_so

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I dont understand why so much is made of the reinfected thing.

I dont think its in any way surprising that people get reinfected. People get reinfected with other coronaviruses all the time. It would be a surprise if people weren't getting reinfected in my opinion.

Which makes it all the more puzzling why the people who are on about reinfections seem to be the same ones that want to hold out for a vaccine.

It is important to understand how common this actually is as it advances our knowledge of this virus. What you're talking about is scientific study being dubbed fact through the media, which is leading to all manner of panic and beliefs.

Oranage2

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Are you a mod ?

No, why do you ask?

JP Liz V1

Widdensushi wrote: »

For being golden girls Dorothy's Stanley, too much back and forth, I presume the comment above is a mistake and was meant for the Cork thread, replying to you as the discussion was there also

Sorry I was asking why the thread ban on ACE, take too long to read back

MOR316

The next 10 posts are critical

JP Liz V1

caveat emptor wrote: »

TBH I couldn't see the issue with why people were getting worried about a flu in wuhan but I suppose each to their own.

Let it stay there, ffs China has given enough already

Widdensushi

MOR316 wrote: »

The next 10 posts are critical

Critical of what, snitches or mods?

Wolf359f

Goldrickssan wrote: »

Since the initial spread with the mountains of hospital admissions, has anyone done a review of the hospitalisation/ICU/Death rate for say the last 2 months?

Media keep using the original percentages which are clearly completely wrong.

Media and government are just using the stated % as per WHO guidelines. It would make more sense if countries came to their own conclusions. They could state now with decent testing we believe that under 65 will have this % hospitalised and over 65 this % etc...

In contrast since the start in Ireland ~10% needed hospital, in the UK, that was ~33%
Very hard for the WHO to give accurate stats if the figures differ that much based on who gets tested.

caveat emptor

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I dont understand why so much is made of the reinfected thing.

I dont think its in any way surprising that people get reinfected. People get reinfected with other coronaviruses all the time. It would be a surprise if people weren't getting reinfected in my opinion.

Which makes it all the more puzzling why the people who are on about reinfections seem to be the same ones that want to hold out for a vaccine.

I'm glad you don't think it will be a problem. I'm not holding out for a vaccine, that's a dumb strategy given we've never made a vaccine for a corona virus. You do know the mechanics of reinfection play a role in efficacy of a potential vaccine. Glad to see people moving from "it's impossible" to "its possible but not a problem". I wonder how long it'll take to get to "it's a problem but there's nothing we can do about it" and finally "perhaps we should have done something about it but it's too late."

ECDC conducting a risk assessment tells you that experts think otherwise. Otherwise why would there be a need for said threat assessment.

I know we are focused on the here and now but it's important to watch out for the things coming down the tract that could make your national strategy redundant. Reinfection and long term (long covid) are to biggest questions that'll impact and shape our response to it.

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/Re-infection-and-viral-shedding-threat-assessment-brief.pdf

hynesie08

MOR316 wrote: »

The next 10 posts are critical

Do we need to redouble our efforts??

eagle eye

Plumbthedepths wrote:

I would have thought considering you like to protray yourself as an intelligent person ,so I assumed you could work out what 'willfully naive' means. These are not obsure words with an arcane meaning. I didn't say Kawasaki disease is the same as PIMs but both are an inflammatory disease which affects children in very rare cases. Thanks for admitting you had to research PIMs, you just didn't use Google. ;-) Edit Researching everything that may impact you child is not the sign of a good parent. It's a sign alright but not necessarily good tbh.

So you still haven't explained what willfully naive is, just waffled rubbish.
I just said that that Pims and Kawasaki are not the same but similar and you repeat that?
I am always staying up to date with everything to do with covid-19. You suggested yesterday that I was googling stuff on the spot which I never do. I read, digest the information and then discuss it.
Being ignorant of anything that may impact your child is the sign of a poor parent. How are you going to prepare them to stay safe and be successful in life if you aren't knowledgeable enough to impart the knowledge?

Eod100

Does anyone know if someone's covid app automatically contacts close contacts if their number gets a positive case back? Seems a bit mad that it might take days to be followed up by contact tracing to do things with requesting access and uploading encryption keys if all data is anonymous anyway. In terms of notifying close contacts asap and avoiding more work (and possibly duplicate work) for contact tracers would think it would be helpful.

Or would that be too blunt? Or other issues might prevent it happening?

Plumbthedepths

eagle eye wrote: »

So you still haven't explained what willfully naive is, just waffled rubbish.
I just said that that Pims and Kawasaki are not the same but similar and you repeat that?
I am always staying up to date with everything to do with covid-19. You suggested yesterday that I was googling stuff on the spot which I never do. I read, digest the information and then discuss it.
Being ignorant of anything that may impact your child is the sign of a poor parent. How are you going to prepare them to stay safe and be successful in life if you aren't knowledgeable enough to impart the knowledge?

I managed to raise two sons both in their 20's ( 29 and 20 ) without feeling it necessary to wind myself up with fear or them for that matter , I 'm not sure you can say the same in light of your pervious posting history. Both are in excellent health. Ones a Garda and the other is in the course in college he always wanted.
You seem to want to make things very personal no idea why as I don't know you and from your posts here I'm happy to keep things that way.
Telling me what is a good parent, personally I find that to be a very arrogant commemt. There is no set definition. You feel you are , I feel I am . So best leave it at that.

eagle eye

Plumbthedepths wrote:

I managed to raise two sons both in their 20's ( 29 and 20 ) without feeling it necessary to wind myself up with fear or them for that matter , I 'm not sure you can say the same in light of your pervious posting history. Both are in excellent health. Ones a Garda and the other is in the course in college he always wanted. You seem to want to make things very personal no idea why as I don't know you and from your posts here I'm happy to keep things that way. Telling me what is a good parent, personally I find that to be a very arrogant commemt. There is no set definition. You feel you are , I feel I am . So best leave it at that.

You claiming anybody else is insulting or arrogant is funny.
Maybe you need to read back your posts in this thread and see how you come across.

And again you never explained what willfully naive is.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

Based on the HSE dashboard, probably about 14,000 swabs done in the last 24 hours. Should yield 300-400 positive swabs.

Backlog of 50-70 from yesterday. Optimistically looking at the announcement of ~350 new cases today. And that would be a rather good, stable number.

398 positive tests on 14612 swabs. 2.72% positivity rate.

A little up, but nothing dramatic.

Could be upwards of 400 cases notified today.

Benimar

398 positive swabs from 14,373 tests - positivity rate of 2.77%

MerlinSouthDub

398 positive tests, 14373 tests. Positivity rate = 2.8%. Not great.

Plumbthedepths

eagle eye wrote: »

And again you never explained what willfully naive is.

You're right I didn't, get a dictionary and read. ;-)

wadacrack

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1309148871730368518

eigrod

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

398 positive tests, 14373 tests. Positivity rate = 2.8%. Not great.

Pretty high alright at a time we hoped to see some stabilisation given Dublin almost 7 days under restrictions now.

Benimar

Sunday to thursday (last 5 days) positive swabs:
2 weeks ago - 803
Last week - 1,306
This week - 1,658

TonyMaloney

seamus wrote: »

398 positive tests on 14612 swabs. 2.72% positivity rate.

A little up, but nothing dramatic.

Could be upwards of 400 cases notified today.

Benimar wrote: »

398 positive swabs from 14,373 tests - positivity rate of 2.77%

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

398 positive tests, 14373 tests. Positivity rate = 2.8%. Not great.

It's going to be fascinating to discover who wins here

Boggles

seamus wrote: »

398 positive tests on 14612 swabs. 2.72% positivity rate.

A little up, but nothing dramatic.

Could be upwards of 400 cases notified today.

Have you taken over NPHET lites job?

Benimar

TonyMaloney wrote: »

It's going to be fascinating to discover who wins here

2.769081% to the nearest 6 decimal places

seamus

seamus wrote: »

398 positive tests on 14612 swabs. 2.72% positivity rate.

A little up, but nothing dramatic.

Could be upwards of 400 cases notified today.

Benimar wrote: »

398 positive swabs from 14,373 tests - positivity rate of 2.77%

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

398 positive tests, 14373 tests. Positivity rate = 2.8%. Not great.

Which two of you want to borrow my abacus?