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

mandrake04

caveat emptor wrote: »

Yeah not great.



https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=sJzEf_1611890384

I said that anal swabs were more accurate early last year, stool shows virus in some cases within 36 hrs of infection and maybe 3-4 days before symptoms well before cultures in the nose and throat. Small intestine and stomach has a lot of the viral receptor ACE2 so naturally if infected through the mouth then food drink can pull the virus into the digestive tract where it will culture quickly and shed easily within the stool.

Wouldn't be that uncomfortable actually probably less uncomfortable than a nasopharyngeal swab, just more embarrassing but you could probably do it yourself and not stuff it up like you would with a nose or throat swab. Anal swabs are nothing new they are used a lot in STD testing.

The problem is the thought would probably put people off getting tested.

lawred2

Gruffalux wrote: »

You can say that unironically after one year going at it arseways?

what's your at all costs plan then?

lawred2

robfowler78 wrote: »

Is this not the same attitude that countries are having at the moment get as many of the vaccines at all cost. See people are effected differently someone who is working at home on full pay doesn’t have the same thoughts about lockdown as someone who has been made unemployed for the guts of a year. So if you are working and paid lockdown is good but opening is bad and vice versa.

What is obvious is that when the hits the fan it’s Every man / country for themselves lol.

I don't have that attitude at all

robfowler78

lawred2 wrote: »

I don't have that attitude at all

Sorry didn’t mean your attitude personally i was responding to the idea that we could go to Zero Covid at all costs. Might have quoted you by mistake. 🙈🙈

Gruffalux

ShyMets wrote: »

A level of herd immunity was gained but a dreadful cost. The virus towards the end of 1919 mutated in to a milder strain which is still with us today

50 million deaths. World population in 1919 = just under 2000 million

2 million deaths Covid. World population = just under 8000 million

So to get to 50 million deaths we would need 25 times more dead. And to get proportionally the same level of loss we would need 100 times more dead. And people still think the Spanish flu kind of petered out...

Plumbthedepths

mandrake04 wrote: »

I said that anal swabs were more accurate early last year, stool shows virus in some cases within 36 hrs of infection and maybe 3-4 days before symptoms well before cultures in the nose and throat. Small intestine and stomach has a lot of the viral receptor ACE2 so naturally if infected through the mouth then food drink can pull the virus into the digestive tract where it will culture quickly and shed easily within the stool.

Wouldn't be that uncomfortable actually probably less uncomfortable than a nasopharyngeal swab, just more embarrassing but you could probably do it yourself and not stuff it up like you would with a nose or throat swab. Anal swabs are nothing new they are used a lot in STD testing.

The problem is the thought would probably put people off getting tested.

Having had several prostate exams, I would suspect a rectal swab would be slightly less unpleasant when compared with a nasal swab . Although I haven't had a nasal test yet I'm basing my opinion on the description I have heard.

froog

luke o' neill just said he has a mate in AZ who says they have loads of data on >65 year olds they haven't released yet.

mad thing to blurt out on morning radio but hopefully it's true.

ShyMets

Gruffalux wrote: »

50 million deaths. World population in 1919 = just under 2000 million

2 million deaths Covid. World population = just under 8000 million

So to get to 50 million deaths we would need 25 times more dead. And to get proportionally the same level of loss we would need 100 times more dead. And people still think the Spanish flu kind of petered out...

Bear in mind historians who have studied this period believe the 50 million to be an underestimation. There is a view by some that the figure could have been double that

Gruffalux

lawred2 wrote: »

what's your at all costs plan then?

It does not matter what my plan is, though I have said follow places like Hong Kong, Thailand, Australia etc numerous times, because I am certain we will keep on messing it up, unless ordered to do otherwise from above. But i am entitled to express my opinion that it is wrong.

I don't know exactly how many died of covid since the Christmas surge but most of those people died directly because of mishandling of the pandemic, and there have been many hundreds of them. On December 30th we had 2200 deaths approx, and as of today we have 3200 covid deaths. 1000 in a month.

But no, let's keep doing what we have been doing.

robfowler78

ShyMets wrote: »

Bear in mind historians who have studied this period believe the 50 million to be an underestimation. There is a view by some that the figure could have been double that

Also need to bear in mind that medical treatment and social hygiene and living conditions are greatly improved since then also. But no doubt the cost in lives of the Spanish flu was huge.

caveat emptor

mandrake04 wrote: »

I said that anal swabs were more accurate early last year, stool shows virus in some cases within 36 hrs of infection and maybe 3-4 days before symptoms well before cultures in the nose and throat. Small intestine and stomach has a lot of the viral receptor ACE2 so naturally if infected through the mouth then food drink can pull the virus into the digestive tract where it will culture quickly and shed easily within the stool.

Wouldn't be that uncomfortable actually probably less uncomfortable than a nasopharyngeal swab, just more embarrassing but you could probably do it yourself and not stuff it up like you would with a nose or throat swab. Anal swabs are nothing new they are used a lot in STD testing.

The problem is the thought would probably put people off getting tested.

I remember yeah. There was lots of stories of sars being spread via poor ventilation in bathrooms etc.

Having had quite a few of the nasopharyngeal swabs the other one would probably be easier but the thought of it is of putting for some.

It must be more accurate if China doing it. No need for a debate there.

Plumbthedepths

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Having had several prostate exams, I would suspect a rectal swab would be slightly less unpleasant when compared with a nasal swab . Although I haven't had a nasal test yet I'm basing my opinion on the description I have heard.

Depends how skilled the person doing it is, my first nasal swab hurt for the rest of the day. The 2nd one was not painful at all. Slight discomfort as it happened but no pain after.

mandrake04

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Having had several prostate exams, I would suspect a rectal swab would be slightly less unpleasant when compared with a nasal swab . Although I haven't had a nasal test yet I'm basing my opinion on the description I have heard.

Big difference between a finger up the jacksy to check the prostate and a swab like this. Bleeding nose can be common in nose swabs.




Really you just have to pick up a bit of poo on the end you wouldn't even need to push it more than a few centimeters, or you just give a stool sample in Brown top jar that would probably work but god help the lab staff.

lawred2

Gruffalux wrote: »

It does not matter what my plan is, though I have said follow places like Hong Kong, Thailand, Australia etc numerous times, because I am certain we will keep on messing it up, unless ordered to do otherwise from above. But i am entitled to express my opinion that it is wrong.

I don't know exactly how many died of covid since the Christmas surge but most of those people died directly because of mishandling of the pandemic, and there have been many hundreds of them. On December 30th we had 2200 deaths approx, and as of today we have 3200 covid deaths. 1000 in a month.

But no, let's keep doing what we have been doing.

Well when you conclude that one approach is arseways for over a year now, you'd usually have an approach in mind that you believe not to be arseways.

Otherwise you're just hurling on the ditch.

Gruffalux

lawred2 wrote: »

Well when you conclude that one approach is arseways for over a year now, you'd usually have an approach in mind that you believe not to be arseways.

Otherwise you're just hurling on the ditch.

After the first comma in the first sentence you quote from me, you will find your answer.

mandrake04

caveat emptor wrote: »

I remember yeah. There was lots of stories of sars being spread via poor ventilation in bathrooms etc.

Having had quite a few of the nasopharyngeal swabs the other one would probably be easier but the thought of it work.

It must be more accurate if China doing it. No need for a debate there.

The problem is... like I have said many times when it comes to testing people everyone is different and might not present virus at the test site (nose or throat) at the time of testing.

If you picked up virus from surfaces and not washed your hands before handling food or anything related to the mouth... probably the most common way to get infected aside from someone sneezing on you. You be sh!tting virus long before its had enough time to replicate and spread up to the nose to get a decent sample.

Anal swab you cant fail to stuff it up, visually you could tell you got sample on the swab from the colour.

Gruffalux

This is a good result from Israel. They will be interesting to watch for the next month or so.

Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine is showing 92 percent effectiveness in Israel, according to the world’s first big controlled investigation on how it works outside of clinical tests.

Only 31 out of 163,000 Israelis vaccinated by Maccabi Healthcare Services were diagnosed with COVID-19 in their first 10 days of full-strength protection, its top vaccine statistics analyst, Anat Ekka Zohar, told The Times of Israel on Thursday.
Maccabi found that an equivalent sample of unvaccinated Israelis was 11 times more likely to be diagnosed with the coronavirus, which allowed it to calculate the effectiveness rate.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/vaccine-found-92-effective-in-israel-in-first-controlled-result-outside-trials/

Plumbthedepths

mandrake04 wrote: »

Big difference between a finger up the jacksy to check the prostate and a swab like this. Bleeding nose can be common in nose swabs.




Really you just have to pick up a bit of poo on the end you wouldn't even need to push it more than a few centimeters, or you just give a stool sample in Brown top jar that would probably work but god help the lab staff.

Testing stool samples is common, I suspect lab staff have a tolerance built up to nasty smells.

mandrake04

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Testing stool samples is common, I suspect lab staff have a tolerance built up to nasty smells.

I have seen it done, making cultures.

Use a safety cabinet you don't smell anything, as it sucks sucks the smell into the filter. Just a bit unsightly.



Still its a crap job no matter how you look at it.

DraftDodger

froog wrote: »

luke o' neill just said he has a mate in AZ who says they have loads of data on >65 year olds they haven't released yet.

mad thing to blurt out on morning radio but hopefully it's true.

That guy is a complete con job. Isn't he the one who just under a year ago appeared on the late late show telling everyone not to worry about the virus. Millions of dead people and their families would beg to differ i think.

lawred2

Gruffalux wrote: »

After the first comma in the first sentence you quote from me, you will find your answer.

Follow what specifically?

froog

DraftDodger wrote: »

That guy is a complete con job. Isn't he the one who just under a year ago appeared on the late late show telling everyone not to worry about the virus. Millions of dead people and their families would beg to differ i think.

he's the go to positive guy which i'm okay with. there's enough doom and gloom talking heads around.

Sanjuro

DraftDodger wrote: »

That guy is a complete con job. Isn't he the one who just under a year ago appeared on the late late show telling everyone not to worry about the virus. Millions of dead people and their families would beg to differ i think.

As opposed to who? Every other person who said it was just a virus that we shouldn’t worry about? The governments who kept normality as the virus crept in and then started to run rampant? He was hardly a lone voice of dissent pretending everything was fine. Nobody could even make a concrete decision about masks, lockdowns, and all the other things that we’ve learned over time. Luke O’Neill is infinitely more informed and knowledgeable than you or 99% of the rest of us on this bloody forum.

zuutroy

Also by the common metric used to judge contribution to academic research, he's in the top 1000 people in history, so I wouldn't call him a con job.

wadacrack

robfowler78 wrote: »

Looks like Italy are reducing some of their lockdown measures. If they are going to reduce some now I’d imagine they will for summer as they really need the summer season. Be interesting to see what happens

https://www.wantedinrome.com/news/italy-eases-covid-19-restrictions-for-rome-and-milan.html

Severe restrictions again within 6 weeks, hospitals under pressure. Won't be that interesting tbh. Israel situation I think is one follow

CoronaBlocker

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Having had several prostate exams, I would suspect a rectal swab would be slightly less unpleasant when compared with a nasal swab . Although I haven't had a nasal test yet I'm basing my opinion on the description I have heard.

Username checks out.

*gets coat*

robfowler78

wadacrack wrote: »

Severe restrictions again within 6 weeks, hospitals under pressure. Won't be that interesting tbh. Israel situation I think is one follow

That’s certainly what should happen according to some and others say it won’t but it will prove a point one way or another. Either it will continue as is or it will go completely to the wall so it will be interesting to see for any country that is thinking of relaxing it’s restrictions.

DraftDodger

froog wrote: »

he's the go to positive guy which i'm okay with. there's enough doom and gloom talking heads around.

He was part of the problem for months as a talking head on every other radio or TV show. We needed pragmatic people informing us not nutty professor types.

caveat emptor

Sanjuro wrote: »

As opposed to who? Every other person who said it was just a virus that we shouldn’t worry about? The governments who kept normality as the virus crept in and then started to run rampant? He was hardly a lone voice of dissent pretending everything was fine. Nobody could even make a concrete decision about masks, lockdowns, and all the other things that we’ve learned over time. Luke O’Neill is infinitely more informed and knowledgeable than you or 99% of the rest of us on this bloody forum.

zuutroy wrote: »

Also by the common metric used to judge contribution to academic research, he's in the top 1000 people in history, so I wouldn't call him a con job.

DraftDodger wrote: »

He was part of the problem for months as a talking head on every other radio or TV show. We needed pragmatic people informing us not nutty professor types.

I kinda agree with all of these points.

He pissed me off with the late late appearance stating "people watched too many movies" and the current diktat of the time "wash your hands, it'll be grand"

Putting that to one side and the implications of that advice he wasn't really qualified to give frankly. He is an immunologist, not an aerosol scientist.

He is one of the most distinguished scientists in the country, very rich now due to his work and a very affable, sunny side up kind of guy. I'd say he's doing his bit to help people through and he knows more virtually anyone in Ireland around immunology and vaccines so great to hear his two cents. I'm not a big Pat Kenny fan but glad he has him on.

Sanjuro

DraftDodger wrote: »

He was part of the problem for months as a talking head on every other radio or TV show. We needed pragmatic people informing us not nutty professor types.

Nutty professor type? Okay, you're clearly either not serious or a dope. Either way, trot on.