Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1215216218220221324

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,477 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    OK, slightly relieved, but still that telegraph stat worries me...

    Stop reading the Telegraph. :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 83 ✭✭LeakyLime


    #Scamdemic now trending in Ireland on Twitter with some really bat**** stuff.

    The longest, strictest lockdown is only fuelling the far-right in this country.

    I heard there was a 4000% rise in the use of far-right groups on Telegram last year.

    It's vulnerable, disenfranchised people who will join these groups. The rich have gotten significantly richer this last 13 months - again this supports these groups' agenda and recruits new members for them.

    And when our politicians get it so wrong (experts too - Luke O'Neill has been wrong more than right - although I like him still) and promote falseholds (e.g. "this is a completely new virus"... not true, never was, never will be), it really gives these groups the opportunity to flourish.

    Trouble is a-brewing over the next few years.

    Stop feeding it - time to follow the data and live with COVID.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,172 ✭✭✭wadacrack


    I usually use the terms "worrying", "turning point" etc with sarcasm ... but this :
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-56731801

    Extremely worrying, Chile have ~66% of population with 1st dose, ~27% with 2 doses.

    Also this
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/14/science-proves-boris-johnson-wrong-vaccines-reducing-deaths/

    appears as a good news story, but



    This doesn't seem like a good result - only 8% reduction in hospitalisation due to vaccine ??? Still 32% of vaccinated people in hospital ???


    If this is true than the vaccines won't get us out of this sh1t ....

    i thinks its a combination of factors. Relaxing restrictions too quickly. Less-than-desired levels of effectiveness of the Sinovac vaccine. Vaccinated people become infected before the vaccine illicit an immune response. Variants in South America seem to be pretty serious. Its hard to say at this stage but the virus seems to be impacted younger people more severely than previous waves.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 624 ✭✭✭arccosh


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Denmark are claiming a 1 in 40,000 occurrence, which is way higher. AZ doesn't need to be a core vaccine now in the EU but they still need to get to the bottom of these clots.

    of their sample take... would be interesting to see what their total of vaccinated people with AZ was

    You need to cross correlate to other sample groups to get a definitive number...

    put simply....

    they could have vaccinated 40,000 only and had 1 case, which is a small sample size

    you could have had that occurrence of blood clots on the third vaccination, giving it a 1/3 chance at that point ...

    sample size correlation is needed for context


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,628 ✭✭✭✭Vicxas


    wadacrack wrote: »
    i thinks its a combination of factors. Relaxing restrictions too quickly. Less-than-desired levels of effectiveness of the Sinovac vaccine. Vaccinated people become infected before the vaccine illicit an immune response. Variants in South America seem to be pretty serious. Its hard to say at this stage but the virus seems to be impacted younger people more severely than previous waves.

    I would put this mostly down to the questionable efficacy of Sinovac


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,748 ✭✭✭firemansam4


    I usually use the terms "worrying", "turning point" etc with sarcasm ... but this :
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-56731801

    Extremely worrying, Chile have ~66% of population with 1st dose, ~27% with 2 doses.

    Also this
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/14/science-proves-boris-johnson-wrong-vaccines-reducing-deaths/

    appears as a good news story, but



    This doesn't seem like a good result - only 8% reduction in hospitalisation due to vaccine ??? Still 32% of vaccinated people in hospital ???


    If this is true than the vaccines won't get us out of this sh1t ....

    Like many news articles, the headline is very misleading....

    if you read more into the BBC article it goes into more detail about the sinovac vaccine they are using in chile.

    Studys show that it only gives 3% protection after the first dose, then over 50% on second dose.
    As most their population has still only had one dose then that would explain their high infection levels.

    As for the Telegarph article, Its behind a paywall and im not going to register a free trial with that rag to try and see the article....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,812 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    I usually use the terms "worrying", "turning point" etc with sarcasm ... but this :
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-56731801

    Extremely worrying, Chile have ~66% of population with 1st dose, ~27% with 2 doses.

    Also this
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/14/science-proves-boris-johnson-wrong-vaccines-reducing-deaths/

    appears as a good news story, but



    This doesn't seem like a good result - only 8% reduction in hospitalisation due to vaccine ??? Still 32% of vaccinated people in hospital ???


    If this is true than the vaccines won't get us out of this sh1t ....

    The Chile article needs more context. They just reached 65 vaccines per 100 (not 66% of the population with one shot) and have 380 cases per million. Israel at 65 vaccines per 100 had 800 cases per million. In fact, Israel at 100 vaccines per 100 had 425 cases per million, its only after they reached the 100 per 100 number that cases started to really tail off. Israel are currently at about 20 cases per million. Vaccination does work at reducing cases but you need a lot of people vaccinated. Less than 40% of people in Chile have gotten at least one shot. They need more vaccinations.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,748 ✭✭✭firemansam4


    snotboogie wrote: »
    The Chile article needs more context. They just reached 65 vaccines per 100 (not 66% of the population with one shot) and have 380 cases per million. Israel at 65 vaccines per 100 had 800 cases per million. In fact, Israel at 100 vaccines per 100 had 425 cases per million, its only after they reached the 100 per 100 number that cases started to really tail off. Israel are currently at about 20 cases per million. Vaccination does work at reducing cases but you need a lot of people vaccinated. Less than 40% of people in Chile have gotten at least one shot. They need more vaccinations.

    You cant even compare the two countries. Chile are using a completely different vaccine for the vast majority of their population.

    The sinovac vaccine has shown to have very poor efficacy after 1 dose only.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,628 ✭✭✭✭Vicxas


    Anyone have a breakdown of hospital numbers, was it an increase of ICU or just general beds?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,809 ✭✭✭Hector Savage


    Like many news articles, the headline is very misleading....

    if you read more into the BBC article it goes into more detail about the sinovac vaccine they are using in chile.

    Studys show that it only gives 3% protection after the first dose, then over 50% on second dose.
    As most their population has still only had one dose then that would explain their high infection levels.

    As for the Telegarph article, Its behind a paywall and im not going to register a free trial with that rag to try and see the article....

    Here

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ftfIVRYIIAfDBolkIKErMKEoZ-69EM04aXD4W2QJde8/edit?usp=sharing


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,286 ✭✭✭✭Eod100




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Vicxas wrote: »
    Anyone have a breakdown of hospital numbers, was it an increase of ICU or just general beds?
    Tiny increase in both. ICU up by 2, hospital up by 6.

    Hospital admissions actually went up by 8 yesterday and dropped by 2 overnight.

    This is almost unheard of (admissions always increase overnight), which leads me to believe that it's probably a statistical blip overall.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,748 ✭✭✭✭ednwireland


    Eod100 wrote: »

    FFS at this point there will more exceptions than people quarantining good to know that the virus knows who these exceptions are.

    My weather

    https://www.ecowitt.net/home/share?authorize=96CT1F



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,468 ✭✭✭✭stephenjmcd


    Eod100 wrote: »

    They really dont want the High Court ruling on this. Every case that's come so far has had a change made on the back of it and the state giving in before it comes back infront of a judge


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭zebastein


    FFS at this point there will more exceptions than people quarantining good to know that the virus knows who these exceptions are.

    Especially when your exemptions are rugby players do a contact sport, or surrogacy that may involve going to the hospital or other care facility, which are places where the virus is more likely to spread


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,783 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    zebastein wrote: »
    Especially when your exemptions are rugby players do a contact sport, or surrogacy that may involve going to the hospital or other care facility, which are places where the virus is more likely to spread

    amongst healthy young people likely to be asymptomatic...

    ooohhh scary

    to think they might bring it home to their vaccinated parents and grandparents...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭zebastein


    I am not discussing the actual level of threat, but the fact that if these people are allowed to get in, I see plenty of other people who should be allowed if the criteria is solely the health risk for the country (let's remember that the criteria cannot be discriminatory)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    They really dont want the High Court ruling on this. Every case that's come so far has had a change made on the back of it and the state giving in before it comes back infront of a judge
    That's exactly it.

    The court won't say, "OK, if you're a surrogate you don't have to go into MHQ", or, "OK, if you have a family member who is about to die you can go".

    The court will rule on a much broader ground than the specific one the person is appealing on. In most cases the court will decide that where there is a compelling humanitarian reason for the person to be allowed out, then they must be allowed out.
    This will then make it next to impossible to keep MHQ standing because we can all come up with "compelling humanitarian reasons" why we shouldn't be stuck in a hotel room.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,783 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    seamus wrote: »
    That's exactly it.

    The court won't say, "OK, if you're a surrogate you don't have to go into MHQ", or, "OK, if you have a family member who is about to die you can go".

    The court will rule on a much broader ground than the specific one the person is appealing on. In most cases the court will decide that where there is a compelling humanitarian reason for the person to be allowed out, then they must be allowed out.
    This will then make it next to impossible to keep MHQ standing because we can all come up with "compelling humanitarian reasons" why we shouldn't be stuck in a hotel room.

    But Stephen doesn't care. He believes MHQ isn't in contravention of any constitutional provisions or European laws

    "Doesn't care one bit" were his words

    Stephen is proper hard


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,783 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    zebastein wrote: »
    I am not discussing the actual level of threat, but the fact that if these people are allowed to get in, I see plenty of other people who should be allowed if the criteria is solely the health risk for the country (let's remember that the criteria cannot be discriminatory)

    The whole thing is an exercise in showmanship. Look at what I can get done. He's pure middle management.

    It was one thing he could say "I got that done"

    Whereas tackling HSE bloat, mismanagement, waste and exploding waiting lists?

    Too hard. Sod that. Look over here at how hard I am. I get sh!t done!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭DebDynamite


    lawred2 wrote: »
    The whole thing is an exercise in showmanship. Look at what I can get done. He's pure middle management.

    It was one thing he could say "I got that done"

    Whereas tackling HSE bloat, mismanagement, waste and exploding waiting lists?

    Too hard. Sod that. Look over here at how hard I am. I get sh!t done!

    To be fair, he’s not in the job that long and his tenure so far has been kind of dedicated to Covid, not surprisingly. He’s hardly going to sort out in less than a year what other health ministers failed to do during a full term.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 860 ✭✭✭OwenM


    lawred2 wrote: »
    The whole thing is an exercise in showmanship. Look at what I can get done. He's pure middle management.

    It was one thing he could say "I got that done"

    Whereas tackling HSE bloat, mismanagement, waste and exploding waiting lists?

    Too hard. Sod that. Look over here at how hard I am. I get sh!t done!

    Exactly, zero leadership. He's also a smarmy git, I really wish he was standing in my constituency so I could not vote for him.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,783 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    To be fair, he’s not in the job that long and his tenure so far has been kind of dedicated to Covid, not surprisingly. He’s hardly going to sort out in less than a year what other health ministers failed to do during a full term.

    Did I say that? To be fair.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,748 ✭✭✭✭ednwireland


    zebastein wrote: »
    Especially when your exemptions are rugby players do a contact sport, or surrogacy that may involve going to the hospital or other care facility, which are places where the virus is more likely to spread

    id have less problem with elite sport exemptions as the professional squads are bubbles ( to a certain extent !) and do a lot of testing - twice weekly i think.

    My weather

    https://www.ecowitt.net/home/share?authorize=96CT1F



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,468 ✭✭✭✭stephenjmcd


    Wonder will Mr Donnelly be as abrupt to the commission as he was on Prime Time last night

    https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1383007593883443203?s=20


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,751 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    lawred2 wrote: »
    The whole thing is an exercise in showmanship. Look at what I can get done. He's pure middle management.

    It was one thing he could say "I got that done"

    Whereas tackling HSE bloat, mismanagement, waste and exploding waiting lists?

    Too hard. Sod that. Look over here at how hard I am. I get sh!t done!


    He is right. We're too soft in this country. About time that people get things done.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,751 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Wonder will Mr Donnelly be as abrupt to the commission as he was on Prime Time last night

    https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1383007593883443203?s=20


    I am sure he will clarify our position.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,426 ✭✭✭brickster69


    Wonder will Mr Donnelly be as abrupt to the commission as he was on Prime Time last night

    https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1383007593883443203?s=20

    Oh oh, not the dreaded letter. Next will be the call to the headmistress's office for 6 of the best. Naughty naughty :D

    "if you get on the wrong train, get off at the nearest station, the longer it takes you to get off, the more expensive the return trip will be."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭DebDynamite


    lawred2 wrote: »
    Did I say that? To be fair.

    Ok well, you suggested he should’ve at least started trying to reform the HSE. Like that’s going to happen in the middle of a pandemic...


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 624 ✭✭✭arccosh


    zebastein wrote: »
    Especially when your exemptions are rugby players do a contact sport, or surrogacy that may involve going to the hospital or other care facility, which are places where the virus is more likely to spread


    I think it's more a case that these people are getting tested on a far more regular basis compared to Jo soap who went on a mad one in Spain.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement