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

ShineOn7

Always_Running wrote: »

Would be expected not disappointing.

Monday to Friday are the possible downward days not Saturday and Sunday.

Ah yes, I forgot there's no discharge numbers at weekends

SleetAndSnow

SleetAndSnow wrote: »

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1375933038866137095?s=20

Hmm?

I wonder if this is true, and if so, what do we need to do in return

I think the UK have to start helping Ireland with vaccinations. If restrictions start to diverge too much, the CTA will become hard to manage and that is not in the UKs interests

Oranage2

I thought it was established that with schools opened the best we can hope for is a slow stagnation, no chance of downward trends now.

Widdensushi

Carefree88 wrote: »

Slovakia did similar not sure how they got on with it.

They have double our cases, it didn't work for them.

User142

https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1375946330674188295

Government preparing to let us know that strict restrictions required for April and May according to the Sindo

ShineOn7

Oranage2 wrote: »

I thought it was established that with schools opened the best we can hope for is a slow stagnation, no chance of downward trends now.

The virus vectors are taking up all the R0 too

So no hope of anything major opening till they close again in the Summer, I think it's early June for Secondary and early July for Primary when they close?

Tredstone.

Oranage2 wrote: »

I thought it was established that with schools opened the best we can hope for is a slow stagnation, no chance of downward trends now.

Media has to keep driving the covid hysteria

Wolf359f

User142 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1375946330674188295

Government preparing to let us know that strict restrictions required for April and May according to the Sindo

And here I was foolishly thinking nightclubs would be open next month.
We don't need leaks to tell us we won't be moving to level 3 ffs.

Tredstone.

Demonstrates the calibre of reporting here and hysteria

Government covid response descends into "chaos" allegedly over a couple of minor incidents according to Sunday independent

stephenjmcd

User142 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1375946330674188295

Government preparing to let us know that strict restrictions required for April and May according to the Sindo

Shock horror, government not expected to move past what's been signaled for weeks. How is this even a story. We all know they're only looking at a handful of things and nothing more

Klonker

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Shock horror, government not expected to move past what's been signaled for weeks. How is this even a story. We all know they're only looking at a handful of things

It does sound like they are planning to leave 6 weeks between review of restrictions again. So from 5th April that would be to 17th May. If they do the same again after that that's 28th June. There will be a huge backlash from the public if they go for the 6 week intervals again. 4 weeks, 5 at most is more than enough to look at the trends.

Golfman64

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Shock horror, government not expected to move past what's been signaled for weeks. How is this even a story. We all know they're only looking at a handful of things

Too busy worrying about International travel and other nonsenses to come up with any sort of plan or balance of restrictions and the economy. A complete and utter failure of a government.

Watch now as the UK provide us with additional vaccines and we won’t have any plan to be able to administer them quickly.

External Association

Klonker wrote: »

It does sound like they are planning to leave 6 weeks between review of restrictions again. So from 5th April that would be to 17th May. If they do the same again after that that's 28th June. There will be a huge backlash from the public if they go for the 6 week intervals again. 4 weeks, 5 at most is more than enough to look at the trends.

Just looking at the Covid hub on my phone..529,984 first doses and 202,694 second doses.

At the end of March that's poor.

Still 6 weeks seems too long an extension period, surely 4 weeks would be more than adequate.

Tredstone.

Klonker wrote: »

It does sound like they are planning to leave 6 weeks between review of restrictions again. So from 5th April that would be to 17th May. If they do the same again after that that's 28th June. There will be a huge backlash from the public if they go for the 6 week intervals again. 4 weeks, 5 at most is more than enough to look at the trends.

You think so

I'm not seeing any signs of backlash brewing

Klonker

External Association wrote: »

Just looking at the Covid hub on my phone..529,984 first doses and 202,694 second doses.

At the end of March that's poor.

Still 6 weeks seems too long an extension period, surely 4 weeks would be more than adequate.

Vaccines should really ramp from now too (at least that's what we keep being told). 1m doses to be received between now and end of April. Every week going forward we should be in a noticeable better position than the previous week.

Wolf359f

External Association wrote: »

Just looking at the Covid hub on my phone..529,984 first doses and 202,694 second doses.

At the end of March that's poor.

Still 6 weeks seems too long an extension period, surely 4 weeks would be more than adequate.

As may will point out, short of injecting saline, there's nothing much can be done. You swear we're the slowest in the world at this.

The 6 weeks extension is not embedded in the constitution or anything, it's just a set of guidelines they have chosen, it's a pandemic, things can change over the course of days, let alone weeks.

Tyrone212

BlondeBomb wrote: »

Aren’t the UK set to be behind on the vaccines in April due to shortages?

We won’t see vaccines from the UK before June

I can't see it to be honest. They're having a slow down from March 29 through for all of April. Situation in India is getting worse were they're getting a lot of vaccines from and the Indian government is delaying the export of 5m vaccines for how long? Also the UK has imported 21m vaccines from the EU, with the drama currently between the two they can't be as confident about supply going forward as they have been.

In September they're suppose to give over 70s a new updated AstraZeneca shot for variants as it doesn't work as well against the South african variant so maybe they're looking to scrap any left overs by then.

stephenjmcd

Klonker wrote: »

It does sound like they are planning to leave 6 weeks between review of restrictions again. So from 5th April that would be to 17th May. If they do the same again after that that's 28th June. There will be a huge backlash from the public if they go for the 6 week intervals again. 4 weeks, 5 at most is more than enough to look at the trends.

While the business post says 4 weeks....

Main point is we all know what they're looking at next week so I'm not sure why there's such a shock to limited easing next week

https://twitter.com/businessposthq/status/1375938187890147330?s=19

Klonker

Tredstone. wrote: »

You think so

I'm not seeing any signs of backlash brewing

It hasn't been announced yet, how would there be

Klonker

stephenjmcd wrote: »

While the business post says 4 weeks....

Main point is we all know what they're looking at next week so I'm not sure why there's such a shock to limited easing next week

https://twitter.com/businessposthq/status/1375938187890147330?s=19

Yeah. 5km limit, click and collect, kids sports, golf and tennis and construction. I don't think there's anything else on the table.

ShineOn7

Wolf359f wrote: »

And here I was foolishly thinking nightclubs would be open next month.
We don't need leaks to tell us we won't be moving to level 3 ffs.

Media headlines in September when they've run out of nonsense:

Did Covid come from Aliens? New study says there's a 0.00000000000007% chance

gozunda

Wolf359f wrote: »

I think they were trying to make the point that taking the vulnerable out of the equation (via vaccination), young and healthy people will still need hospital care.
The 3.5% seems a little high (it's currently 2.6% of under 65*)
Once would assume with cohort 4 being vaccinated, that 2.6% would drop.

*That's based on the 14 days reports, but if someone tests positive and are hospitalized after the 14 day report is complied, they would not be counted, so that figure could be wildly understated.

It would appear that the continued stagnation of new cases is what is of some concern. Whilst cases have dropped dramatically since mid January - new cases are still significantly higher than they were for most of December 2020. Afaik its being suggested that the much higher transmissibility of the UK varient has been identified as a factor in keeping case numbers up.

With regard to the age profile of new cases.

Today's HSE press release shows that of the 624
new cases - 75% are under 45 years of age and a median age of 32 years old

Exactly a month ago those figures were 738 new cases. Of which 71% were under 45 years of age and a median age of 32 years old

Two months ago those figures were 1,335 new cases with 54% under 45 years of age and a medin age of 43 years old.

And btw I know that's just a snapshot - but the trends for all the data seems to be consistent.

Overall the stats appear to indicate that the profile of new cases is increasingly skewed towards a younger cohort - which is perhaps not surprising given the current rollout of vaccinations targeting the elderly and medically vulnerable.

However whilst we can say that those under 65 have a much lower morality rate than those over 65 - young people do get sick with this group currently making up approx 50% of all those in hospital with covid.

And we know that its not only the medically vulnerable who make up the main group in hospital with covid. Thd latest data for all age groups show that approx 75% of those in hospital with covid did not have underlying conditions.

From that perhaps - it is not be unreasonable to suggest that if restrictions are rolled back too early and before a significant number of younger age groups are vaccinated - case numbers may well rise and we will continue to see younger age groups being treated in hospital in significant numbers.

The question is where does that leave us with rolling back on current restrictions?

Wolf359f

gozunda wrote: »

It would appear that the continued stagnation of new cases is what is of some concern. Whilst cases have dropped dramatically since mid January - new cases are still significantly higher than they were for most of December 2020. Afaik its being suggested that the much higher transmissibility of the UK varient has been identified as a factor in keeping case numbers up.

With regard to the age profile of new cases.

Today's HSE press release shows that of the 624
new cases - 75% are under 45 years of age and a median age of 32 years old

Exactly a month ago those figures were 738 new cases. Of which 71% were under 45 years of age and a median age of 32 years old

Two months ago those figures were 1,335 new cases with 54% under 45 years of age and a medin age of 43 years old.

And btw I know that's just a snapshot - but the trends for all the data seems to be consistent.

Overall the stats appear to indicate that the profile of new cases is increasingly skewed towards a younger cohort - which is perhaps not surprising given the current rollout of vaccinations targeting the elderly and medically vulnerable.

However whilst we can say that those under 65 have a much lower morality rate than those over 65 - young people do get sick with this group currently making up approx 50% of all those in hospital with covid.

And we know that its not only the medically vulnerable who make up the main group in hospital with covid. Thd latest data for all age groups show that approx 75% of those in hospital with covid did not have underlying conditions.

From that perhaps - it is not be unreasonable to suggest that if restrictions are rolled back too early and before younger age groups are vaccinated - case numbers may well rise and we will continue to see younger age groups being treated in hospital in significant numbers.

The question is where does that leave us and rolling back on current restrictions?

In relation with easing restrictions, I think there's a worry if they are eased too quickly you could have a massive surge of cases (mainly the young) but they still need hospital care. Even the UK with a much much higher rate of vaccination are going with a slow reopening. Well slow at the start, I'd argue opening pubs maybe risky too early. But it shows that even with so many vaccinated, and in the presence of the ken variant, they are being really cautious.

Over here, the Government haven't actually presented a plan, but people seem to think we should open quicker than the UK and expect good results.

The 5km limit removed, meeting outdoors, click and collect opening, those kids of things are less risky and definitely have to be on the table.
I'd also argue hair dressers and barbers should be allowed open very soon after, a few weeks later.

Tyrone212

The Sunday Times in England has an article about possible vaccines being sent to Ireland. It's behind a paywall but I could read the first couple of paragraphs. Their heart is in the right place.......

"It would be the first time the UK has exported vaccines to the EU, but the plan was described by a British cabinet minister as a “poke in the eye for Brussels” because it could disrupt EU unity."

Utterly pathetic.

gozunda

Wolf359f wrote: »

In relation with easing restrictions, I think there's a worry if they are eased too quickly you could have a massive surge of cases (mainly the young) but they still need hospital care. Even the UK with a much much higher rate of vaccination are going with a slow reopening. Well slow at the start, I'd argue opening pubs maybe risky too early. But it shows that even with so many vaccinated, and in the presence of the ken variant, they are being really cautious.

Over here, the Government haven't actually presented a plan, but people seem to think we should open quicker than the UK and expect good results.

The 5km limit removed, meeting outdoors, click and collect opening, those kids of things are less risky and definitely have to be on the table.
I'd also argue hair dressers and barbers should be allowed open very soon after, a few weeks later.

I think that's the crux of the issue atm. Roll back too many restrictions too early and likley the number of new cases in younger cohorts will rise and that rise will keep hospitals very busy.

Personally I would suggest a slower rollback for the reason that whilst some of those activities may not be considered overtly risky - activities such as meeting outdoor may carry more risk due to higher transmissibility of the UK varient. Culmatively with each restriction rolled back / removed - the bigger the risk of infection. Can we expect good results where that remains a significant issue?

Klonker

gozunda wrote: »

And we know that its not only the medically vulnerable who make up the main group in hospital with covid. Thd latest data for all age groups show that approx 75% of those in hospital with covid did not have underlying conditions.

Where did you find hospital stats for people with underlying conditions? I was finding it very hard to find anything on it.

gozunda

Klonker wrote: »

Where did you find hospital stats for people with underlying conditions? I was finding it very hard to find anything on it.

There's data from two reports available atm

One with data up to 12/12/2020 which is published

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/underlyingconditionsreports/

And a second which updates the information in the first report up to the 31st of January 2021 and although unpublished the main findings have been reported.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40237760.html

Unfortunately neither provide an age breakdown of of those in hospital with covid who have underlying conditions.

CowboyTed

Lets look it like this...

83% of the cases today were from 8 Leinster counties and Donegal...

Keep them locked down and let the others have some relief....

Klonker

gozunda wrote: »

There's data from two reports available atm

One with data up to 12/12/2020 which is published

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/underlyingconditionsreports/

And a second which updates the information in the first report up to the 31st of January 2021 and although unpublished the main findings have been reported.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40237760.html

Unfortunately neither provide an age breakdown of of those in hospital with covid who have underlying conditions.

Thanks for that.

Both those links you gave say around 75% of cases had no underlying issue, not hospitalisations,a big difference.

The HSE link actually has the hospitalisation breakdown up to 12th December and its 63.3% with an underlying issue. That's if we assumed all the 14.3% unknowns had no undertook issue so that 63.3% is the minimum who had an underlying issue.

gozunda

Klonker wrote: »

Thanks for that.

Both those links you gave say around 75% of cases had no underlying issue, not hospitalisations,a big difference.

The HSE link actually has the hospitalisation breakdown up to 12th December and its 63.3% with an underlying issue. That's if we assumed all the 14.3% unknowns had no undertook issue so that 63.3% is the minimum who had an underlying issue.

Not referring to data just on hospitalisations there btw. You had asked about data for 'hospitalisations with underlying conditions' so thats the two links above for those.

The published report linked above - as you saw gives a figure of 63.3% of those in hospital with covid - having an underlying condition up to and including the 12/12/2020 (Table 1)

The second link details that this figure has altered dramatically with "Almost 75% of all Covid-19 patients in Ireland had no underlying conditions" up to and including the 31st of January 2021.

When I first saw the headline - my first reaction was that there was a mistake. But no reading through the finding of the second report show that there's been a fairly major seachange with regard to the data and those in hospital with covid having no underlying conditions.

The findings on underlying conditions in the first report up to the 12/12/2020 are obviously pre vaccination rollout.

The reported findings of the second report up to 31 January 2021 - cover about a month of the vaccine rollout to a total of approx 200,000 jabs given.

The other notable change between those two periods was the spread of the UK varient here.

Looking at the data - we see that up to the 12/12/2020 approx 37% of those in hospital with covid had no underlying conditions. And yet approx a month and a half later that had risen to 73.1% of those in hospital with covid having no underlying condition.

(Btw I'm leaving the unknowns aside ftm as potentially they could be used to skew the data either way)

What accounts for this fairly dramatic change?

Looking at the data I can't see how vaccinations up to 31st January 2021 could account for the observed change.

If the other change ie - the UK varient is responsible or at least partially responsible then it would appear that the new varient has increased the number of people of all ages in hospital with covid having no underlying conditions.

That's a worrying possible outcome imho.