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

Ficheall

Turtwig wrote: »

Close contacts who don't show for tests are assumed positive.

You're going to have to back this up, or it should be deleted as a dangerous lie that some people will be only too willing to run with.

is_that_so

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

It makes a nonsense of the case figures imo.

If you're fixated on them it may do but it does provide a level of granularity about who showed up and gives them a starting point for a further contact trace. I tend to look at the trends and hospital numbers for indications.

iamwhoiam

Ficheall wrote: »

You're going to have to back this up, or it should be deleted as a dangerous lie that some people will be only too willing to run with.

It cant be right .Then the positive swab count is close enough to the positive cases announced .If they counted no show close contacts then it would be way off

iamwhoiam

is_that_so wrote: »

No idea but with the huge numbers of positives it's academic.

when numbers were 7-8K positive cases and they were not testing close contacts then but counting them as positive the swab count and numbers would have been way way differnt .It could have quadrupled the positive cases .So I doubt very much that its actually a fact .

Turtwig

Ficheall wrote: »

You're going to have to back this up, or it should be deleted as a dangerous lie that some people will be only too willing to run with.

Yeah trying to find a link for it.


This was my understanding anyway. They count the individual as positive if the option to test was there and the individual declined. They kind of have to.

I should have been more pedantic though. The swab doesn't become positive but for all intents and purposes the individual is assumed positive and their close contacts are traced and recommended for testing. To put it another way, if a colleague of the poster I was replying to refused a test because that is what they are recommending you do more of his work colleagues would end up being inconvenienced and recommended for tests.

Plumbthedepths

is_that_so wrote: »

If you're fixated on them it may do but it does provide a level of granularity about who showed up and gives them a starting point for a further contact trace. I tend to look at the trends and hospital numbers for indications.

I'm not but those figures are used to justify the closing of the country. I would expect them to be correct.

Pitch n Putt

Ficheall wrote: »

As a general rule, no harm to assume everyone is positive unless you know otherwise, but that's hardly the same thing as counting them in the stats.

Not a personal attack on you op but this is the very type of thing we need to drop and quickly.

This crap talk from Dr Tony Holohan to let’s assume/pretend everyone has the virus
Absolute rubbish statement to be making.

If we turn that statement another way by saying” You have to actually have the virus to spread it “ we might actually be on the road to getting out of this mess and help those scarred by the fear of the virus.

Only two weeks ago the good Dr Holohan came out with another doom statement to knock any little bit of positive thinking people may have got from seeing the vaccine rollout.

“ We should assume that nobody is vaccinated until everyone is vaccinated “

What good is this man doing for the people of this country with negativity like that ?

NPHET and Dr Tony’s time on the main stage is long overstayed.Doing way more harm than good at this stage.

eagle eye

The positive swabs numbers and the daily case numbers are very similar. If you didn't get tested you wouldn't be showing up in the swab numbers.

is_that_so

iamwhoiam wrote: »

when numbers were 7-8K positive cases and they were not testing close contacts then but counting them as positive the swab count and numbers would have been way way differnt .It could have quadrupled the positive cases .So I doubt very much that its actually a fact .

No idea if it is but I just don't sweat this stuff at all. Positivity rates, trends of the disease, R0 and hospital numbers are the metrics that matter.

Ficheall

Turtwig wrote: »

Yeah trying to find a link for it.


This was my understanding anyway. They count the individual as positive if the option to test was there and the individual declined. They kind of have to.

I should have been more pedantic though. The swab doesn't become positive but for all intents and purposes the individual is assumed positive and their close contacts are traced and recommended for testing. To put it another way, if a colleague of the poster I was replying to refused a test because that is what they are recommending you do more of his work colleagues would end up being inconvenienced and recommended for tests.

That sounds like contact tracing much more efficient than I thought we had, given the two-day history etc. Would be interested in seeing that.


Might be no harm to edit your original post anyway, as it's very easy to misinterpret as is.

is_that_so

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I'm not but those figures are used to justify the closing of the country. I would expect them to be correct.

Well, even if there are anomalies they were right when you look at where our hospital cases went.

Ficheall

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Not a personal attack on you op but this is the very type of thing we need to drop and quickly.

This crap talk from Dr Tony Holohan to let’s assume/pretend everyone has the virus
Absolute rubbish statement to be making.

...

It's not negativity, it's being cautious. I wear a condom (it's been a while, thanks covid..) not because someone has something, but in case they might have it, because I don't want to catch it. Doom-mongering and all though some may perceive that to be..

Jim_Hodge

iamwhoiam wrote: »

So in early January when they were not testing close contacts at all were they counting them as positive ?

They weren't counting them as positive. Have some sense. The individuals are to be assumed positive until they get tested and should take all the prescribed precautions until such time as they are shown not to be positive.

MizMix

Close contacts were not counted in the daily figures unless actually tested ! Testing of Close contacts only resumed about two weeks ago - this is why numbers are not dropping as quickly - in January our numbers were much lower than the reality

Turtwig

Ficheall wrote: »

That sounds like contact tracing much more efficient than I thought we had, given the two-day history etc. Would be interested in seeing that.


Might be no harm to edit your original post anyway, as it's very easy to misinterpret as is.

Unfortunately what's strived for and what happens are two very different things. That said, it was they aim for. If I get a chance later I'll try to find it links for you.

Mea culpa with the original wording. Still waking up, didn't for one second think people would assume we'd include them in the official statistics. Have hopefully clarified that now.

iamwhoiam

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

They weren't counting them as positive. Have some sense. The individuals are to be assumed positive until they get tested and should take all the prescribed precautions until such time as they are shown not to be positive.

Of course they werent , I didnt bring it up I was arguing that of course they werent .Must you be so abrasive in your replies to me ? Its not the first time.Read the room



This was part of that conversation if you took time to read it instead of rudely replying

iamwhoiam wrote: »

when numbers were 7-8K positive cases and they were not testing close contacts then but counting them as positive the swab count and numbers would have been way way differnt .It could have quadrupled the positive cases .So I doubt very much that its actually a fact .

Pitch n Putt

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

What good is this man doing for the people of this country with negativity like that ?

NPHET and Dr Tony’s time on the main stage is long overstayed.Doing way more harm than good at this stage.

NPHET should have been disbanded in summer and replaced with a National Covid Management Advisory Board.

Its members should have been told that they can either serve on it, or be celebrities appearing on the Late Late Show, but not both.

Away With The Fairies

Pitch n Putt wrote: »

Refuse a test unless you have symptoms. Simple and easy way to stop this nonsense carryon.

We’re a year into this situation and it’s more cautious we’re getting. It’s crazy stuff.

We’ve turned the people of this country into judgemental fools. Everyone and everything they do is judged by covid this and covid that.

If people want to live their life let them live it. If others want to hide in fear then let them too. But give up this sh1t of judging people for their personal choices.

5 k /10 k travel limit is a load of rubbish when people can travel all over the country for work.

Soon someone needs to step back and have a real look at the situation. Make some proper decisions of how to move forward and not make decisions based on who’s going to be blamed if we do this and something happens.

As we’re progressing the restrictions are getting more severe. Ridiculous really ..

If people want to live and if others want to hide.

The problem is you don't know who has the virus. You're infectious before showing symptoms as well. So you just don't know.

Letting people off to do what they want is all great but they're also mixing with people and spreading it more.

We should be like New Zealand, the only type of lockdown we should ever have to go through is when they find a case. Lockdown hard and find cases. What we're doing now is not working and that's very clear. We cannot continue to open up and let cases increase and then lockdown for months again.

Ficheall

b0nk1e wrote: »

NPHET should have been disbanded in summer and replaced with a National Covid Management Advisory Board.

Its members should have been told that they can either serve on it, or be celebrities appearing on the Late Late Show, but not both.

And would you not then have been on here bitching about the NCMAB instead and claiming it was all a big conspiracy so they could get to be on the telly?

Jim_Hodge

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Of course they werent , I didnt bring it up I was arguing that of course they werent .Must you be so abrasive in your replies to me ? Its not the first time.Read the room



This was part of that conversation if you took time to read it instead of rudely replying

The entire post I replied to was

So in early January when they were not testing close contacts at all were they counting them as positive ?

To me that a question bordering on believing the assertation, rather than any arguing of a point.
Apologies if you took offense: the 'have some sense' was more directed to the general pick up and run people did with the false statement.
As for your critique. I'll write as I wish. You read it as you wish. Two very current things.

daydorunrun

Away With The Fairies wrote: »

If people want to live and if others want to hide.

The problem is you don't know who has the virus. You're infectious before showing symptoms as well. So you just don't know.

Letting people off to do what they want is all great but they're also mixing with people and spreading it more.

We should be like New Zealand, the only type of lockdown we should ever have to go through is when they find a case. Lockdown hard and find cases. What we're doing now is not working and that's very clear. We cannot continue to open up and let cases increase and then lockdown for months again.

How do we deal with freight traffic? 100's of drivers entering the country everyday from the UK and the continent.

agoodpunt

we have a goverment united on something that doesnt work and still going for more, jayus its what they are good at

Need to get out and protest big time its killing our country and out of step with most

iamwhoiam

Once schools are back the 5km will have to be scrapped .It will make absolutely no sense then.Not that it ever made sense in all honesty

prunudo

b0nk1e wrote: »

NPHET should have been disbanded in summer and replaced with a National Covid Management Advisory Board.

Its members should have been told that they can either serve on it, or be celebrities appearing on the Late Late Show, but not both.

It suits the government to have them there. It muddies the water, means the politicians aren't the fall guys and deflects from their inability to manage the situation.

TheDoctor

Were last nights hospital figures posted on here?

stephenjmcd

TheDoctor wrote: »

We’re last nights hospital figures posted on here?

Not sure, if not they were,

882 in hospital down from 894

167 in ICU down from 169, however 4 ICU deaths from 8am Friday to 8am Saturday

TheDoctor

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Not sure, if not they were,

882 in hospital down from 894

167 in ICU down from 169, however 4 ICU deaths from 8am Friday to 8am Saturday

Cheers. The peak was what about 2000 in hospital, 230 ICU?

Happydays2020

daydorunrun wrote: »

How do we deal with freight traffic? 100's of drivers entering the country everyday from the UK and the continent.

An inconvenient reality which is ignored. Not to mention deep and essential business between Dublin and neighbouring jurisdictions. Plus of course the border.

prunudo

BlowHard wrote: »

Proper governance

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-auckland-placed-into-three-day-lockdown-after-three-coronavirus-cases-detected-12217821

Compare this to the wishy washy half baked rubbish we have to put up with here.

But I thought zero covid meant no lockdowns.
I still believe there is a happy medium between what we have and what they have in Australia/ New Zealand. At present I think a level 4 style is the best way to live with the virus. Non essential retail, hairdressing open, county travel restrictions and cafes open but unfortunately no pubs indoor or outdoor as its too hard to get a happy balance.

lawred2

Ficheall wrote: »

As a general rule, no harm to assume everyone is positive unless you know otherwise, but that's hardly the same thing as counting them in the stats.

There's actually a lot of harm in that.