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

Ficheall

blowitupref wrote: »

Worth taking into account that most of not all of those that died of or with Covid are reported now.

While I'm sure we had plenty that died in early part of the first wave that didn't know they had covid as they weren't tested for it.

I thought the fashionable complaint at the time was that in the first wave we were reporting cause of death as covid when people had actually been run over by a bus?

tigger123

Anyone know the 7 day average after today?

Or the last 5 Wednesdays?

I regurgitate the news

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0217/1197573-covid-19/

Last year we were told that up to 85,000 could die from Covid 19.

In the UK Neil Ferguson forecast 500,000 deaths over there.

Does anyone know what were the forecasting tools that used?

Considering how off they were, should we be listening to the same people again for future forecasts?

Highest occurrence of deaths in the US is in the states with the strictest lockdowns though there is little difference overall per population in Covid deaths for lockdown versus non lockdown states. This would prove that lockdowns are not responsible for saving lives. So hard to know how the forecasters got it so wrong

PowerToWait

Ficheall wrote: »

I thought the fashionable complaint at the time was that in the first wave we were reporting cause of death as covid when people had actually been run over by a bus?

That's what I heard from at least 3 different people IRL. Not the bus part but heart attack, brain aneurysm and something else. All recorded as C19 deaths. 2 had apparently not even been tested but they stuck it down as C19 anyway 'to get the numbers up'.

Always_Running

tigger123 wrote: »

Anyone know the 7 day average after today?

Or the last 5 Wednesdays?

7-day average is 838 today. Last Wednesday it was 944.

Ficheall wrote: »

I thought the fashionable complaint at the time was that in the first wave we were reporting cause of death as covid when people had actually been run over by a bus?

We still report deaths as the WHO outline. Possible and probable many other countries still don't do that.

Gruffalux

PowerToWait wrote: »

That's what I heard from at least 3 different people IRL. Not the bus part but heart attack, brain aneurysm and something else. All recorded as C19 deaths. 2 had apparently not even been tested but they stuck it down as C19 anyway 'to get the numbers up'.

At a séance?

Jim_Hodge

Have you heard about restrictions to prevent those projected figures?

gozunda

I believe those figures were worst case scenarios.

How many cases were prevented by observing hygiene and distance regulations?

How many cases prevented by restrictions on movements?

Looking at other countries like Italy who were unfortunate to be one of the first European coutries to be hit we can have a fair idea.


Italy Coronavirus: 2,751,657 Cases and 94,540 Deaths

Thankfully the worst case scenarios did not happen here ...

timeToLive

This thread is definitely going to be locked haha

Ficheall

PowerToWait wrote: »

That's what I heard from at least 3 different people IRL. Not the bus part but heart attack, brain aneurysm and something else. All recorded as C19 deaths. 2 had apparently not even been tested but they stuck it down as C19 anyway 'to get the numbers up'.

What sort of delusional Whatsapp groups are you in?

Turtwig

brick tamland wrote: »

There's a lot that I find hard to believe about this more transmissible variant. Still think there is an element of scaring the general public to it. About 2 weeks ago, Martin said the UK variant was increasing the R number by half a percent. Nolan said later that day the R number was currently anout 0.6 Someone's talking out of their arse there and my money isn't on nolan.

Martin was probably referring to the unmitigated number. Nolan was using the effective number.
Neither person may not be contradicting the other.

Imagine a virus typically infects 10 people in a room containing 100 people. Next imagine you have a virus that would infect 90 out of 100 in the same room. How would the difference between both viruses measured if the nobody is ever permitted to enter the room?

Beasty

Threads merged

Sanjuro

PowerToWait wrote: »

That's what I heard from at least 3 different people IRL. Not the bus part but heart attack, brain aneurysm and something else. All recorded as C19 deaths. 2 had apparently not even been tested but they stuck it down as C19 anyway 'to get the numbers up'.

Look at this leaked footage from those early NPHET meetings.

igCorcaigh

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0217/1197573-covid-19/

Last year we were told that up to 85,000 could die from Covid 19.

In the UK Neil Ferguson forecast 500,000 deaths over there.

Does anyone know what were the forecasting tools that used?

Considering how off they were, should we be listening to the same people again for future forecasts?

Highest occurrence of deaths in the US is in the states with the strictest lockdowns though there is little difference overall per population in Covid deaths for lockdown versus non lockdown states. This would prove that lockdowns are not responsible for saving lives. So hard to know how the forecasters got it so wrong

I predicted tens of thousands of deaths in this country at the very start of the pandemic.
Thankfully, that hasn't happened.
Of course, the pandemic isn't over yet, and any end point is arbitrary.

I was genuinely surprised that lockdown measures were imposed.
I didn't think that the economy would have been put on hold like that.

Bobeagleburger

Great to see things trending the right way.

Onwards.

pjohnson

Ficheall wrote: »

What sort of delusional Whatsapp groups are you in?

Probably the type that still thinks "its only a flu lolz"

sonofenoch

Diabhalta wrote: »

so where did all the covid checkpoints go since the storm started last tuesday or when was it? Is there no checkpoints in bad weather? Why? Seems like they are doing checkpoints every other week.

---

meanwhile in the US, the government went absolutely nuts. Agree with Shapiro. the answer is: No.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dwX4MSZ_9k&t=178s

Had to laugh, not a sign of them last week in Dubland in the freezing cold any I did see they were sat in their vayhicles at checkpoints .........out comes the sun and they're out in force 'what's the manner of your business'


eeeyorrr what was yours last week

What Username Guidelines

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/2021/0217/1197573-covid-19/

Last year we were told that up to 85,000 could die from Covid 19.

And now we’ve had 210,000 cases with 4,000 deaths. So about 1 in 22 confirmed, which would equate to 88,000 deaths if we had all caught it. Ok, so we didn’t all catch it, nor are we likely too at this stage with vaccines, and thankfully our health services coped due to lockdowns, so the CFR remained static.

But given what we knew back then I don’t know why so many people bring this up. The theory was at the time, just that... a theory. I’m pretty sure it included “up to” and “could”.

At least we’re near the end now hopefully so can at least confirm we did a lot better than than worst case scenario. But if the experts got it wrong and we therefore don’t trust them any more, who should we trust? Ivor Cummins who said the same thing last summer after <1,500 deaths, saying it was over?

KrustyUCC

landofthetree wrote: »

Nothing opening bar schools till April. Not even construction.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/varadkar-says-next-easing-of-covid-19-restrictions-will-be-very-limited-1.4487812

Brilliant from the government

They're doing fabulously at keeping expectations at rock bottom and messing up the economy further

Bigfatmichael

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

And now we’ve had 210,000 cases with 4,000 deaths. So about 1 in 22 confirmed, which would equate to 88,000 deaths if we had all caught it. Ok, so we didn’t all catch it, nor are we likely too at this stage with vaccines, and thankfully our health services coped due to lockdowns, so the CFR remained static.

But given what we knew back then I don’t know why so many people bring this up. The theory was at the time, just that... a theory. I’m pretty sure it included “up to” and “could”.

At least we’re near the end now hopefully so can at least confirm we did a lot better than than worst case scenario. But if the experts got it wrong and we therefore don’t trust them any more, who should we trust? Ivor Cummins who said the same thing last summer after <1,500 deaths, saying it was over?

I'd say the case numbers are probably really double or treble that. Now thats just my opinion in case anyone tries to bite my head off.

I regurgitate the news

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

And now we’ve had 210,000 cases with 4,000 deaths. So about 1 in 22 confirmed, which would equate to 88,000 deaths if we had all caught it. Ok, so we didn’t all catch it, nor are we likely too at this stage with vaccines, and thankfully our health services coped due to lockdowns, so the CFR remained static.

But given what we knew back then I don’t know why so many people bring this up. The theory was at the time, just that... a theory. I’m pretty sure it included “up to” and “could”.

At least we’re near the end now hopefully so can at least confirm we did a lot better than than worst case scenario. But if the experts got it wrong and we therefore don’t trust them any more, who should we trust? Ivor Cummins who said the same thing last summer after <1,500 deaths, saying it was over?

I have to disagree. I think they did a terrible job on their predictions. Neil Ferguson in the UK has a history of terrible predictions.

With our economy destroyed, the day will come for our health service. Would it not have been better off to let people keep paying taxes and reinvest in the health service instead of stopping people from working and diminishing tax revenue?

No difference in death rates in lockdown states versus non lockdown in the US(if anything lockdown causes more deaths)

When you lock people up, unless they are getting vitamin D supplements they will have a weakened immune system compared to if they were getting sun. For this reason I would suggest the seasons have a far great baring on virus deaths than lockdowns do.

So I would have to be more critical of the people making predictions than you appear to be.

Ted_YNWA

PowerToWait wrote: »

That's what I heard from at least 3 different people IRL. Not the bus part but heart attack, brain aneurysm and something else. All recorded as C19 deaths. 2 had apparently not even been tested but they stuck it down as C19 anyway 'to get the numbers up'.

Mod - Do you have any further supporting evidence than "I heard".

This is not a dumping ground for rumour mills.

I regurgitate the news

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

Mod - Do you have any further supporting evidence than "I heard".

This is not a dumping ground for rumour mills.

I do know of three people who were marked as Covid 19 deaths (and I am not disputing that they were tested positive) however one was suffering from Cancer for many months, one had pneumonia and in the other case the son of the person was not happy with having cause of death of Covid 19.

I know in the last instance you can say that this is hearsay however I do think it is disingenuous to put a cancer victim down as a Covid 19 death.

MerlinSouthDub

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Brilliant from the government

They're doing fabulously at keeping expectations at rock bottom and messing up the economy further

Leaks from parliamentary party meetings seems to the government's communications strategy at the moment. Bizarre approach.

boardise

6 wrote: »

Great to see things trending the right way.

Onwards.

Onwards and downwards !

spookwoman

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I do know of three people who were marked as Covid 19 deaths (and I am not disputing that they were tested positive) however one was suffering from Cancer for many months, one had pneumonia and in the other case the son of the person was not happy with having cause of death of Covid 19.

I know in the last instance you can say that this is hearsay however I do think it is disingenuous to put a cancer victim down as a Covid 19 death.

But if the cause of death was covid then it's covid, doesn't matter if they had cancer. Do we change all the deaths then for people who died from covid with underlying conditions to to non covid deaths?

igCorcaigh

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I do know of three people who were marked as Covid 19 deaths (and I am not disputing that they were tested positive) however one was suffering from Cancer for many months, one had pneumonia and in the other case the son of the person was not happy with having cause of death of Covid 19.

I know in the last instance you can say that this is hearsay however I do think it is disingenuous to put a cancer victim down as a Covid 19 death.

Underlying issues that caused the Covid illness to be more severe?

KrustyUCC

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

Leaks from parliamentary party meetings seems to the government's communications strategy at the moment. Bizarre approach.

Yeah it's almost like they have the journalists on the zoom call lol

Three months of level 5+ and only schools returning in a gradual manner for another month until after Easter is not going to go down well with people imo

prunudo

While trying to take as many positives as possible from the daily covid news and not become downbeat by leaks of what restrictions may or may not be lifted, I think its great that this highly infectious virus means only 1 in 3 close contacts in a household setting end up testing positive.

jackboy

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I know in the last instance you can say that this is hearsay however I do think it is disingenuous to put a cancer victim down as a Covid 19 death.

It depends how they report it. If they report it as death with covid rather than death from covid then they can do this without being dishonest. If someone has late stage cancer there is a good chance that covid will reduce their life span.