Covid 19 Part XXXIV-249,437 ROI(4,906 deaths) 120,195 NI (2,145 deaths)(01/05)Read OP

72sheep

It's going to be so exciting to see which variant wins the Covid championship league this year. Make sure to cheer for your favorite and buy all the merchandise. Isn't it all so much better in this new virtual world that you have been gifted!

Remember that the politicians are protecting you and you must stay inside for the safety of your community. (You should ignore the fact that not a single powerful nor rich person seems to be scared of covid-19. Their lives are completely unaffected but that is not relevant to you.)

Meanwhile in the real world, the behavioural psychologists are absolutely stunned by your docile compliance. Wouldn't you rather take a micro-dose of an anti-depressant, along with your next vaccine booster shots, so that you could "go hard" and self-isolate for another couple of a years? Answers on a postcard to the Caribbean islands which is where we all are.

Miike

72sheep wrote: »

It's going to be so exciting to see which variant wins the Covid championship league this year. Make sure to cheer for your favorite and buy all the merchandise. Isn't it all so much better in this new virtual world that you have been gifted!

Remember that the politicians are protecting you and you must stay inside for the safety of your community. (You should ignore the fact that not a single powerful nor rich person seems to be scared of covid-19. Their lives are completely unaffected but that is not relevant to you.)

Meanwhile in the real world, the behavioural psychologists are absolutely stunned by your docile compliance. Wouldn't you rather take a micro-dose of an anti-depressant, along with your next vaccine booster shots, so that you could "go hard" and self-isolate for another couple of a years? Answers on a postcard to the Caribbean islands which is where we all are.

What have you been taking? and more importantly, where can I get some?

Loafing Oaf

Miike wrote: »

What have you been taking?

humberklog

saabsaab wrote: »

Nothing to show for it? What did you expect from a pandemic? Wehave avoided probably 50,000 deaths and now the vaccine is on the way. That's something.

Where are you getting 50,000 deaths from?

Even the worst performing country for deaths p/m (Czechia) "only" has 27,466 registered deaths.

Cluedo Monopoly

saabsaab wrote: »

Nothing to show for it? What did you expect from a pandemic? Wehave avoided probably 50,000 deaths and now the vaccine is on the way. That's something.

It's like we have gone back to the very first Covid thread.

saabsaab

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

It's like we have gone back to the very first Covid thread.

You weren't posting back then at least under that name. We didn't have 50,000 that's the point we did something about it as most have. 1% death rate of cases allowing it to spread.

ceadaoin.

saabsaab wrote: »

You weren't posting back then at least under that name. We didn't have 50,000 that's the point we did something about it as most have. 1% death rate of cases allowing it to spread.

The death rate isnt as high as 1%. This is established fact at this stage

Deeper Blue

saabsaab wrote: »

You weren't posting back then at least under that name. We didn't have 50,000 that's the point we did something about it as most have. 1% death rate of cases allowing it to spread.

There's zero chance we'd have come close to 50,000 deaths, regardless of restrictions or lack thereof

Wolf359f

ceadaoin. wrote: »

The death rate isnt as high as 1%. This is established fact at this stage

As it's an established fact, would you like to share the death rate with the rest of us?

eagle eye

Deeper Blue wrote:

There's zero chance we'd have come close to 50,000 deaths, regardless of restrictions or lack thereof

Can you explain that with math please. Like you are making a factual statement there.

kippy

Deeper Blue wrote: »

There's zero chance we'd have come close to 50,000 deaths, regardless of restrictions or lack thereof

Back in March we didn't have enough capacity to deal with the situation. Without restrictions the health system would have crumbled. Same again this winter.
Lots more people would be dead without restrictions.
Jesus it beggers belief that some people cannot see this.

Probes

I’m not sure where the research is, but there was a paper that looked into this and the ifr in the UK increased during times when the nhs was stressed. So it’s very plausible that the ifr would increase if there were no restrictions. I don’t think anyone would want what’s happening in Brazil to happen here.

is_that_so

Probes wrote: »

I’m not sure where the research is, but there was a paper that looked into this and the ifr in the UK increased during times when the nhs was stressed. So it’s very plausible that the ifr would increase if there were no restrictions. I don’t think anyone would want what’s happening in Brazil to happen here.

IFR increases in stressed systems, look at Germany v Italy back last March. Numbers of deaths may increase but is that the same as an actual change in IFR?
Always found this debate about IFR a bit pointless, apart from its statistical value, especially when a health system at risk is a far more worse scenario.

Probes

is_that_so wrote: »

IFR increases in stressed systems, look at Germany v Italy back last March. Numbers of deaths may increase but is that the same as an actual change in IFR?
Always found this debate about IFR a bit pointless, apart from its statistical value, especially when a health system at risk is a far more worse scenario.

I don’t know if it changes the IFR. It increases the number of people who die from the disease.

is_that_so

Probes wrote: »

I don’t know if it changes the IFR. It increases the number of people who die from the disease.

Rising cases can do that anyway but it's only that very large Christmas surge that's had an appreciable effect on deaths. Even with a herd immunity people may still die from it, just as some are at risk of dying from flu.

CruelSummer

kippy wrote: »

Back in March we didn't have enough capacity to deal with the situation. Without restrictions the health system would have crumbled. Same again this winter.
Lots more people would be dead without restrictions.
Jesus it beggers belief that some people cannot see this.

A year of severe lockdown on the Irish people and the first port of call re any strategy containing Covid is not a viable option. Lockdown should only be used as a tool to buy time, create a targeted approach. NPHET / Government decided a long time ago that this would be their strategy - despite more information available, mass / rapid tests, now vaccines. We’ve the longest lockdown in the western world - shameful with the youngest population in the EU.
And now we’ve NPHET / Stephen Donnelly declaring that the fully vaccinated nurse in quarantine needs to stay there because there’s no ‘international travel cert yet’ - and basically no proof they won’t bring in a variant? This is outrageous and I hope the state lose this case.

Probes

is_that_so wrote: »

Rising cases can do that anyway but it's only that very large Christmas surge that's had an appreciable effect on deaths. Even with a herd immunity people may still die from it, just as some are at risk of dying from flu.

No, it increases the ratio of people that die from the disease.

is_that_so

Probes wrote: »

No, it increases the ratio of people that die from the disease.

Ratio? How?

kippy

CruelSummer wrote: »

A year of severe lockdown on the Irish people and the first port of call re any strategy containing Covid is not a viable option. Lockdown should only be used as a tool to buy time, create a targeted approach. NPHET / Government decided a long time ago that this would be their strategy - despite more information available, mass / rapid tests, now vaccines. We’ve the longest lockdown in the western world - shameful with the youngest population in the EU.
And now we’ve NPHET / Stephen Donnelly declaring that the fully vaccinated nurse in quarantine needs to stay there because there’s no ‘international travel cert yet’ - and basically no proof they won’t bring in a variant? This is outrageous and I hope the state lose this case.

The post I was responding to stated we wouldn't have any more deaths now whether we introduced restrictions or not.
Do you agree with that assertion because there are a cohort of people who firmly believe the country would be completely sound if we didnt introduce restrictions last march and continue to use restrictions when numbers of cases increased?


Twist my post how you want but ANYONE with the standpoint that restrictions weren't needed to save peoples lives is an absolute idiot.

The way out of this is vaccinations - no doubt.

dodzy

Just watching the tv here. 14 deaths reported yesterday.... from April, March, Feb & Jan. Apologies as I’m sure it’s been asked before but how is this? Did they “forget” those other deaths until this week?

is_that_so

dodzy wrote: »

Just watching the tv here. 14 deaths reported yesterday.... from April, March, Feb & Jan. Apologies as I’m sure it’s been asked before but how is this? Did they “forget” those other deaths until this week?

The law allows people up to 3 months to report. That law should be changed.

Probes

is_that_so wrote: »

Ratio? How?

I feel like I'm having to go backwards and forwards on what was a pretty simple point. More people die of the disease when capacity in health care is strained. i.e. the ratio of people with infections vs deaths from the infection changes.

dodzy

is_that_so wrote: »

The law allows people up to 3 months to report. That law should be changed.

The mind boggles. Thanks for the clarification.

robbiezero

gozunda wrote: »

Ballcocks. The wording is "older or vulnerable". And a parent "living alone" does not exclude the other two criteria.

Now I don't know about anyone else but I've yet to meet anyones parents (as we were discussing) who are younger than them. (I'm sure there's some somewhere maybe). And some may be both ie vulnerable and older, or indeed all three - ie vulnerable, older and living alone. Or they just may be older!

The above wording is detailed relating to essential travel but is also explained for those that live here - as giving care to a vulnerable person or attending to other vital family matters

To paraphrase yet more evidence that those with 'de anti gubermint / anti restrictions nonsense will do the damnest to fudge the actual facts or misinterpret them to suit themselves

So basically that boils down to a large amount of people that cannot visit their parents under those restrictions no matter what way you try to shill it.

daydorunrun

dodzy wrote: »

The mind boggles. Thanks for the clarification.

Say it three times in the mirror and he’ll appear in this thread to tell you what your opinion is;)

CIARAN_BOYLE

dodzy wrote: »

The mind boggles. Thanks for the clarification.

To be specific

If someone dies in a hospital or a care home obviously of a notifiable disease (such as covid) it generally gets notified within a week.

If someone dies in a hospital or care home and an autopsy is required to identify cause of death it can take over a month for the death to be notified.

If someone dies in the community (ie not in hospital) the family have 3 months to file a death cert and their death won't be notified until it is filed.

CruelSummer

kippy wrote: »

The post I was responding to stated we wouldn't have any more deaths now whether we introduced restrictions or not.
Do you agree with that assertion because there are a cohort of people who firmly believe the country would be completely sound if we didnt introduce restrictions last march and continue to use restrictions when numbers of cases increased?


Twist my post how you want but ANYONE with the standpoint that restrictions weren't needed to save peoples lives is an absolute idiot.

The way out of this is vaccinations - no doubt.

Nobody is twisting your post, however I do see a concerted effort to twist mine into a ‘no restrictions’ type which I am not. Nor did I state I was in above post.
If you actually read the post you would understand the method used to control Covid in Ireland has been way over the top in my view, which will have huge societal and economic consequences.

M_Murphy57

Half way through April and we are still only vaccinating 100k people a week. When is the "ramping up" to 250k people a week that we are "holding firm" for kicking in ?

kippy

CruelSummer wrote: »

Nobody is twisting your post, however I do see a concerted effort to twist mine into a ‘no restrictions’ type which I am not. Nor did I state I was in above post.
If you actually read the post you would understand the method used to control Covid in Ireland has been way over the top in my view, which will have huge societal and economic consequences.

Read the post my initial reply was to. Saying that deaths would be the same now had we "done nothing".


A lot of people have different views depending on their own circumstances.
I believe too that things could have been handled much better at certain junctures and that some of the optics of what senior politicians did haven't helped.

Covid restrictions will have huge societal and economic consequences everywhere - no matter the levels of restrictions as every where has had to implement restrictions.

Pussyhands

Really don't get the MHQ. They say it's variants but why did they not care about that months and months ago and we weren't vaccinating.

Seems strange that NOW they want to quarantine people when the vulnerable and elderly are almost vaccinated.

And what happens if a variant generates IN Ireland? Is that automatically back to level 5?