Covid 19 Part XXXII-215,743 ROI (4,137 deaths)111,166 NI (2,036 deaths)(22/02)Read OP

Stateofyou

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Well, yes, it’s very possible that they are.

The quality of homeschooling probably varies wildly and different families have different levels of time and capability to provide a good and well-rounded education to children. If homeschooling involves a parent hammering it into a child’s head that they will go to hell if they read Harry Potter for example, or that Gandalf is an emissary of Satan, then one could quite reasonably say that the child is being deprived.



Is there a compelling reason why those parents who are comfortable enough with their children going to school should not be able to let them?

It is for parents to weigh up what they perceive to be in the best interest of their children and family home. If a parent decides that the risk of sending their child to school outweighs the benefits to the child’s development then that is a choice for them. I do not see it as being beyond the realms of human endeavour that our education system could at least cater to some extent for children whose parents do not wish to send their children to school. Extra work for teachers yes — but these are extraordinary times and we are all having to dig deep into our resolve.

At the end of the day education is happening but it's certainly not ideal. The alternative is to let 1million plus in the education sector be on the move at a time where cases are high and hospitals are stretched and we have a new dominant strain that is more contagious. Most of the population isn't vaccinated. I replied to a poster who said education has stopped (it hasn't) and to reopen schools. My response is to that sentiment, when the first priority above education is to protect health and lives and our health care system. I'm not getting into the weeds about homeschooling vs in person schooling, it's not the point.

seamus

ICU down 6 on last night.

ICU numbers are down 30 in the last week, and appear to dropping quite sharply after a plateau.

Rough figures suggest we could be down as low as 120 in ICU by the end of February, and touching Leo's magic number of 50 by the end of March.

spookwoman

seamus wrote: »

ICU down 6 on last night.

ICU numbers are down 30 in the last week, and appear to dropping quite sharply after a plateau.

Rough figures suggest we could be down as low as 120 in ICU by the end of February, and touching Leo's magic number of 50 by the end of March.

Sad reality the drop in ICU numbers is down to a lot of deaths. Last 2 days we have only see an increase in discharges compared to admissions.
I do hope we see the trend of increased discharged and the deaths decreasing.

Widdensushi

hynesie08 wrote: »

https://mobile.twitter.com/adriancummins/status/1357637954039123970


Let the floodgates open.....

Probably appealed to Europe and turned over.

BorneTobyWilde

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/newsireland/pub-owners-should-be-compensated-by-fbd-insurance-for-covid-19-losses-high-court-says-in-landmark-ruling/ar-BB1dpGE7?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBr5KbJ

That's a big call.

frozen3

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/newsireland/pub-owners-should-be-compensated-by-fbd-insurance-for-covid-19-losses-high-court-says-in-landmark-ruling/ar-BB1dpGE7?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBr5KbJ

That's a big call.

What the country needs

When banks and insurance companies start getting hit, this malarkey of closing places will be over

FishOnABike

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Maybe a slight easing of restrictions in early March though?

Would like to get to the stage where we can travel within our own county or at least as far as 10km. It would open up so many more possibilities.

Sweet.Science

Widdensushi wrote: »

Probably appealed to Europe and turned over.

No chance . FBD didnt have a leg to stand on.

mohawk

FishOnABike wrote: »

Would like to get to the stage where we can travel within our own county or st least as far as 10km. It would open up so many more possibilities.

It would help with the monotony of the same walks over and over again.

MerlinSouthDub

Sweet.Science wrote: »

No chance . FBD didnt have a leg to stand on.

Yes. FBD had specific cover for infectious diseases within their business interruption product. This decision relates specifically to FBD, and has no impact on other insurers.

cameramonkey

IF an insurance company goes bust I suppose they cannot pay out.
This also translates into huge insurance hikes for all.

Eggs For Dinner

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

Yes. FBD had specific cover for infectious diseases within their business interruption product. This decision relates specifically to FBD, and has no impact on other insurers.

They nearly all have infectious disease cover, but that is not what decided this case. Without getting too technical, policies which clearly state the outbreak must occur "at the premises" will get little comfort from this ruling. FBD's policy stipulated that an outbreak must occur "within 25 miles of the premises"

Eggs For Dinner

Sweet.Science wrote: »

No chance . FBD didnt have a leg to stand on.

They did, though I'm glad they lost. An appeal is not out of the question

Sweet.Science

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

They did, though I'm glad they lost. An appeal is not out of the question

Well then they will just be wasting their money. Which they will need .

seamus

20,241 swabs, 1,009 positive.....4.98% ! 7-day now down to 6.08%

Great result today. Great news after a few iffy days.

Hopefully it may continue.

Just Saying

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

Yes. FBD had specific cover for infectious diseases within their business interruption product. This decision relates specifically to FBD, and has no impact on other insurers.

While this decision relates specifically to FBD it may have an impact for other insurers.The wording of the FBD policy made it the easiest Business Interruption Policy to take a successful legal action against.
However the interpretation of the verdict may mean that other policies may also now be able to have a successful legal legal challenge taken against them.
As well as winning the ruling there will be close scrutiny given to the level of damages awarded.Just because you had cover in place based on the amount of the loss of Gross Profits doesn't mean you will get the full amount.
For example how much did closure actually cost you?Even if the pubs were open what level of business would they have had given the Govt. stay at home advisory,the travel restrictions and the reluctance of many to come out(in the early stages of the pandemic at least).
Also the level of state support especially in the form of the CRSS may also be a factor..

cjyid

Now that's some good numbers!

KrustyUCC

seamus wrote: »

20,241 swabs, 1,009 positive.....4.98% ! 7-day now down to 6.08%

Great result today. Great news after a few iffy days.

Hopefully it may continue.

That's great progress

Super to be under 5% positivity rate

Eggs For Dinner

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Well then they will just be wasting their money. Which they will need .

On what do you base that?

cameramonkey

is this the licensed vintners and insurance thread?

Eggs For Dinner

cameramonkey wrote: »

is this the licensed vintners and insurance thread?

It's an aspect of Covid-19 which has affected the vast majority of businesses in Ireland.

Gruffalux

the corpo wrote: »

Up to 100 UK children a week hospitalised with rare post-Covid disease

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/05/up-to-100-uk-children-a-week-hospitalised-with-rare-post-covid-disease

I just saw this and in spite of you getting a reply here that it says ''It is rare'', I am still a bit WTAF at that...I mean ''rare'' is not up to a 100 children a week hospitalised with an inflammatory disease that can put them in ICU.

While specialists do not believe the disease has increased in frequency relative to cases in the wider community, numbers are higher than in the first wave, with hospitals understood to have been admitting up to 100 young people a week during the second wave, compared with about 30 a week last April.

Normal One

35 deaths, 1047 cases

hynesie08

Normal One wrote: »

35 deaths, 1047 cases

Well, it's a drop.

KrustyUCC

Normal One wrote: »

35 deaths, 1047 cases

RIP

not bad cases

207 less than this day last week

is_that_so

Gruffalux wrote: »

I just saw this and in spite of you getting a reply here that it says ''It is rare'', I am still a bit WTAF at that...I mean ''rare'' is not up to a 100 children a week hospitalised with an inflammatory disease that can put them in ICU.

With the UK, at one stage, hitting 60K cases a day, 100 cases a week is pretty rare.

Galwayhurl

Not bad from a numbers point of view. Tragic for the families bereaved.

Hopefully we can get a few days with under 1000 cases next week.

Just Saying

cameramonkey wrote: »

is this the licensed vintners and insurance thread?

It is Covid related and its hardly the most off topic item ever discussed on one of these threads.

In any event it didn't prevent you from highlighting your lack of knowledge of the topic with your contribution in post # 4034.:D

polesheep

Gruffalux wrote: »

I just saw this and in spite of you getting a reply here that it says ''It is rare'', I am still a bit WTAF at that...I mean ''rare'' is not up to a 100 children a week hospitalised with an inflammatory disease that can put them in ICU.

Only it wasn't a reply. It was a direct quote from the article. Did you read it all?

Stateofyou

is_that_so wrote: »

With the UK, at one stage, hitting 60K cases a day, 100 cases a week is pretty rare.

400 hundred children a month with an inflammatory disease is 400 too many.