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

bb1234567

European Union has passed the milestone of 100 million vaccinations today. Nice!

timsey tiger

bb1234567 wrote: »

European Union has passed the milestone of 100 million vaccinations today. Nice!

700m to go

MerlinSouthDub

GP referral data for the week so far, the trend is good!

https://tomorrowscare.ie/covid/2021-04-15_COVID_GP_Survey_Results.pdf

Eod100

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1382673304918622215?s=19

Lucas Hood

418 positive swabs, 2.81% positivity on 14,862 tests.
7 day test positivity is 2.8%.

- Thursday, April 15th 2021

stephenjmcd

Lucas Hood wrote: »

418 positive swabs, 2.81% positivity on 14,862 tests.
7 day test positivity is 2.8%.

- Thursday, April 15th 2021

Quite impressive to be honest after Easter. GP data all still going the right way. Things look good

is_that_so

Eod100 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1382673304918622215?s=19

Common sense thinking! We can be good on that sometimes.

Doctor Jimbob

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Give those "senior sources" a payrise for slowly backpedalling on an absurd divisive proposal.

I'm not sure that Leo needs a pay rise to be fair.

Faugheen

is_that_so wrote: »

No, it's actually the HSPC with the numbers and always has been. NPHET just do all the fancy data stuff.

Sorry, you're actually correct here. It's NPHET that just releases the info.

OwenM

timmyntc wrote: »

An R number with a range as large as that is effectively useless.

A range of 0.5 to 1.0 would mean we are either suppressing the virus, or we are not. Its totally inconclusive and is basically a cop-out by Nolan et al - afraid to commit to one number so they give a broad range which means they are always "right", but the data they present is of no use to anyone.

An essential talent if you are to succeed in the Irish Public/Civil service

MrMusician18

OwenM wrote: »

An essential talent if you are to succeed in the Irish Public/Civil service

They cannot commit to one number because of the uncertainties that are inherent in modelling human behaviour. In fact as case numbers decline the uncertainty will increase as the impact of one eejit superspreading has a greater impact on the statistical set.

The fact that they've said that R is at 1 or below means they're confident that the disease spread is stable to falling.

If they were really hedging their bets they would've said that R was between 0.5 and 1.2, where it would mean that they couldn't tell if it was rising or falling.

Some people are far too quick to stick the boot into the CS. Quite ignorant actually.

Salvation Tambourine

Sorry if this is common knowledge but how often are patients in hospital with Covid tested? Are their positive tests included in the daily figures?

Derek Zoolander

MrMusician18 wrote: »

They cannot commit to one number because of the uncertainties that are inherent in modelling human behaviour. In fact as case numbers decline the uncertainty will increase as the impact of one eejit superspreading has a greater impact on the statistical set.

The fact that they've said that R is at 1 or below means they're confident that the disease spread is stable to falling.

If they were really hedging their bets they would've said that R was between 0.5 and 1.2, where it would mean that they couldn't tell if it was rising or falling.

Some people are far too quick to stick the boot into the CS. Quite ignorant actually.

not really - they can only calculate the historical R number... there is no reason they can't present it factually see how switzerland do it - historical 2 week actual R number number

https://www.covid19.admin.ch/en/repro/val

the estimate for the current R value is way too broad and they are hedging far to much - that number doesn't add any value

Faugheen

Mitch Connor wrote: »

If people are looking for them, it is news worthy, and the state broadcaster should be providing news worthy news.

RTE running an agenda is a constant complaint on here - RTE deciding that case numbers are no longer news worthy would also be them pushing an agenda.

IMO, the cases should be reported, but the context of the cases should be clearly reported with them.

What is the positivity rate of swabs/cases. What is the ratio of cases where people are asymptomatic or a mild case. how does it stack up vs ICU/Hospital admissions. What does the R number look like. What do the case numbers mean with respect to lockdown measures (government should be fecking telling us this).
400 cases is a huge number when we were in low double digits previously. But when you consider the positivity rate of swabs is consistently below 3% again is the case number more reflective of there being far more testing than previously.

Context is key, and it isn't clear enough.

This entire post is spot on.

I understand some people here don’t want to be inundated with the numbers and all of that, but they are still important and the problem has been how they have been reported by the media rather than them being reported in the first place.

MrMusician18

Derek Zoolander wrote: »

not really - they can only calculate the historical R number... there is no reason they can't present it factually see how switzerland do it - historical 2 week actual R number number

https://www.covid19.admin.ch/en/repro/val

the estimate for the current R value is way too broad and they are hedging far to much - that number doesn't add any value

Yes they could go back on the data and refine R for the past but there is little or no value in that academic exercise when commenting on the current or near current disease trend. The Swiss their R value is the mid point between the upper and Lower bound with the true R number having a 95% probability of lying within that range.

If we were reporting like the Swiss we would be saying that R is 0.75 which is wrong.

Turtwig

OwenM wrote: »

An essential talent if you are to succeed in the Irish Public/Civil service

Meh every single measurement in science and engineering is done in this way. Every number from the age of the universe to the size of an atom has an estimate with an uncertainty attached. Even the speedometer in your car works the same way. It may indicate your speed to be 110 km/h. In reality, your actual speed could be anywhere between 100 km/h and 110.01 km/h.

Think you're blaming the wrong sectors here. It's also an international standard. Every measurement and calculation has sources of error that need to be quantified.
The attached image probably invokes trauma in the people who recognise it.

Derek Zoolander

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Yes they could go back on the data and refine R for the past but there is little or no value in that academic exercise when commenting on the current or near current disease trend. The Swiss their R value is the mid point between the upper and Lower bound with the true R number having a 95% probability of lying within that range.

If we were reporting like the Swiss we would be saying that R is 0.75 which is wrong.

They are calculating historical R values within a stated confidence interval - the value is historical and is a lot more accurate than the broad range we currently report... which is useless.

I do take your point that historical R-values are of no real relevance to current disease state

MrMusician18

Derek Zoolander wrote: »

They are calculating historical R values within a stated confidence interval - the value is historical and is a lot more accurate than the broad range we currently report... which is useless.

I do take your point that historical R-values are of no real relevance to current disease state

The broad range we report is the confidence interval.

Eod100

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1382707102209163278

Batattackrat

Eod100 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1382707102209163278

I'm starting to like Leo more and more as the weeks go by.

Mehole Martin is out of his depth.

Eod100

Batattackrat wrote: »

I'm starting to like Leo more and more as the weeks go by.

Mehole Martin is out of his depth.

Must be Stockholm Syndrome from the lockdown :pac:

leahyl

Batattackrat wrote: »

I'm starting to like Leo more and more as the weeks go by.

Mehole Martin is out of his depth.

He's preparing for when he takes over again as Taoiseach next year

pauldry

Go Leako!

Can we make Leo a High King?

LeakyLime

Leo always hops in with the good news first.

Hopefully it is actually the plan - great news if it is!

LeakyLime

Batattackrat wrote: »

I'm starting to like Leo more and more as the weeks go by.

Mehole Martin is out of his depth.

Always disliked Leo, but he is one of the only politicians willing to question the NPHET status quo so I've taken to him more over recent months.

timmyntc

Batattackrat wrote: »

I'm starting to like Leo more and more as the weeks go by.

Mehole Martin is out of his depth.

Varadkar only looks good as he is running circles around Martin - he knows what to say and when, however Leos word is worth nothing.

Dont forget him "looking out" for the people who get up early in the morning.

Klonker

Eod100 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1382707102209163278

July's plan better be "ye can do whatever the hell ye like"

Corholio

'Leo waves donut at people'

'Oo I like you because you said words, all is forgiven'

Multipass

Eod100 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1382707102209163278

2 weeks before they even consider them? Click and collect at a minimum needs to be right now, the pure stupidity at this stage. But sure what’s another 2 weeks of inactivity. Ugh.