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

shinzon

AdamD wrote: »

https://twitter.com/FergalBowers/status/1377275983535951875

Are they just pretending vaccines don't exist?

No is the answer to that question there talking about unvaccinated people continuing to mix and spread the disease now which will give an exponential spurt growth to the numbers with the b117 variant much more transmissable.

Vast majority of us are still not vaccinated so we need to cop on now or face a potential 4th wave of the virus down the line thats what they meant.

Shin

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

Watch the bloody briefing.

Philip Nolan said that was worse case scenario if there’s a big increase in mixing. He added the caveat that if people stick by the restrictions then the vaccination rollout reduces any future risks of such an increase like the above.

He went into clear, concise detail about this, including how in 8 weeks time if people stick to restrictions then the vaccination programme will cut a theoretical R number of 1.4 by half to 0.7. He compared this to if there was no vaccine at all.

Watch the briefing instead of looking at a single tweet.

Its Fergal Bowers responsibility to contextualise what he tweets. Not everyone can watch the briefing. Pretty shocking use of twitter by him TBH

Wolf359f

Benimar wrote: »

Cases were 17 lower than swabs yesterday, so any delay look minimal. As always, tomorrow will tell a lot regarding any backlog.

Ah I meant a lab not reporting swabs. I don't mean the delay/backlog from swabs becoming cases.
It's just quite a jump or the preceding days dropped quite alot.

AdamD

Faugheen wrote: »

Watch the bloody briefing.

Philip Nolan said that was worse case scenario if there’s a big increase in mixing. He added the caveat that if people stick by the restrictions then the vaccination rollout reduces any future risks of such an increase like the above.

He went into clear, concise detail about this, including how in 8 weeks time if people stick to restrictions then the vaccination programme will cut a theoretical R number of 1.4 by half to 0.7. He compared this to if there was no vaccine at all.

Watch the briefing instead of looking at a single tweet.

Apologies, I should have not trusted the tweet from an RTE correspondent. Instead ill watch the briefing at 3pm on a work day?

Christ

shinzon wrote: »

No is the answer to that question there talking about unvaccinated people continuing to mix and spread the disease now which will give an exponential spurt growth to the numbers with the b117 variant much more transmissable.

Vast majority of us are still not vaccinated so we need to cop on now or face a potential 4th wave of the virus down the line thats what they meant.

Shin

The timeline given is up to September, we'll have huge numbers vaccinated by May.

funnydoggy

Faugheen wrote: »

Read my last post where the same health correspondent put that tweet into context.

Watch the briefings instead of looking at individual tweets.

He put out the next tweet over 20 minutes later. It is his job to provide a balanced, timely reporting of events that take place.

I completely agree with you that the briefings need to be watched for full context but we know that the majority of people who see that tweet, will take just that tweet into consideration.

Faugheen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Its Fergal Bowers responsibility to contextualise what he tweets. Not everyone can watch the briefing. Pretty shocking use of twitter by him TBH

And he did contextualise that in a later tweet.

That poster took one tweet in isolation, and posted it here to cause outrage.

Fergal Bowers, like everyone else, has 280 characters to make his point. Philip Nolan’s modelling can be very complex and it’s not going to fit into one tweet. It was a tweet later (which I have posted) where you see that the poster’s question of pretending vaccines don’t exist was answered.

Whereas if people watched the briefings then they’d see all of it for themselves. But no, they take one tweet in isolation and don’t bother their arses to do any research.

Faugheen

funnydoggy wrote: »

He put out the next tweet over 20 minutes later. It is his job to provide a balanced, timely reporting of events that take place.

I completely agree with you that the briefings need to be watched for full context but we know that the majority of people who see that tweet, will take just that tweet into consideration.

He did provide a balanced, timely reporting of events. Nolan spoke for a long time.

funnydoggy

Faugheen wrote: »

He did provide a balanced, timely reporting of events. Nolan spoke for a long time.

Ah okay, fair point there.

Faugheen

AdamD wrote: »

Apologies, I should have not trusted the tweet from an RTE correspondent. Instead ill watch the briefing at 3pm on a work day?

Christ

So you take one tweet and didn’t make any effort to look for any context, which Fergal Bowers did long before you posted that tweet.

Why did you take one tweet and post it with a question that had actually been answered in a later tweet?

eastie17

ninebeanrows wrote: »

Pretty much flat from last Wednesday. Not too bad but bump in announced cases likely tomorrow.

Queue RTE hysteria, best avoid all media for the next 24 hours while they wet themselves with glee and accuse the Government of "opening up too early" and "ignoring NPHETs advice"

Its pretty simple, more movement of people, numbers are going to go up, they should know what the threshold of "oh we're into bad territory again"
They keep quoting the reproductive number but that is always going to go up when people move around again, with more elderly and at risk populations vaccinated that has to build more tolerance into us being able to absorb a higher R number and higher percent of positives as long as the ratio of positive tests to hospitalizations stays somewhat reasonable.
That's the logic I thought they were going to use in "living with covid" but that seems to have gone out the window a long time ago.

Media are just going to **** themselves now when the numbers go up and pressure the government for more lockdowns, if they bend then pressure them to open up and on we go.

AdamD

Faugheen wrote: »

So you take one tweet and didn’t make any effort to look for any context, which Fergal Bowers did long before you posted that tweet.

Why did you take one tweet and post it with a question that had actually been answered in a later tweet?

For what it's worth - Twitter's refusal to show a chronological timeline also caused this, the other tweet was nowhere to be seen on my timeline..

Anyways, seems i've caused outrage, with you and nobody else.

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

And he did contextualise that in a later tweet.

That poster took one tweet in isolation, and posted it here to cause outrage.

Fergal Bowers, like everyone else, has 280 characters to make his point. Philip Nolan’s modelling can be very complex and it’s not going to fit into one tweet. It was a tweet later (which I have posted) where you see that the poster’s question of pretending vaccines don’t exist was answered.

Whereas if people watched the briefings then they’d see all of it for themselves. But no, they take one tweet in isolation and don’t bother their arses to do any research.

I wont go down this rabbit hole, but the use of twitter to report on COVID in this country is pretty shocking. We are in a world where most people (obviously not you) absorb their news in soundbites. Our journalists, FB included, are after only one thing, and that is being first to the punch. They shirk their journalistic responsibility in the race to hit send. They might add some context later when they get chance.....that is secondary to the tabloid headline.

have little respect for any of them, Bowers, Lee, any of them

Turtwig

AdamD wrote: »

Apologies, I should have not trusted the tweet from an RTE correspondent..

Well yeah you really shouldn't.
Even more if the statement goes against common credulity.

Instead ill watch the briefing at 3pm on a work day?

Not required. Checking sources and context is recommended though. Especially if you are going to make a statement of outrage or claiming something to be stupid. Stop. Check.
This doesn't just apply to NPHET, COVID etc related stuff. It's a good idea for anything in this day and age. Check the sources. Bowers is not a reliable source.

In this instance I'd recommend reading the NPHET letter practically everything in that was the subject of today's briefing. As well as the risk to case numbers in the shot term and vaccination in the longer term.

Reading is always quicker than watching too.

Faugheen

AdamD wrote: »

For what it's worth - Twitter's refusal to show a chronological timeline also caused this, the other tweet was nowhere to be seen on my timeline..

Anyways, seems i've caused outrage, with you and nobody else.

Of course I’m annoyed.

You’ve taken a tweet and tried to whip up a frenzy having not bothered your arse to read more into it.

It feeds this narrative that NPHET are all doom and gloom when Nolan’s contribution was supposed to be a positive one, because it showed exactly the impact of vaccines on the population at different levels of social mixing.

People take one tweet in isolation and it feeds those narratives all over again, and the common denominator is that none of them will actually watch the briefing or look for any context.

Turtwig

Deleted User wrote: »

I wont go down this rabbit hole, but the use of twitter to report on COVID in this country is pretty shocking. We are in a world where most people (obviously not you) absorb their news in soundbites. Our journalists, FB included, are after only one thing, and that is being first to the punch. They shirk their journalistic responsibility in the race to hit send. They might add some context later when they get chance.....that is secondary to the tabloid headline.

have little respect for any of them, Bowers, Lee, any of them

I will go down the rabbit hole.

Some of them will get awards for their coverage of this event. They'll be talking about it for decades to come. They've been nothing short of wind up merchants at times with little responsibility or empathy for the how their tweets might be received. Or how they are contextualising information.

The thing to really consider here is how responsible are they reporting on anything else? They didn't suddenly change their competence and behaviour because of COVID. Yes, the subject matter became different and a bit more complicated, some accommodation can be made for that, but I do wonder how reliable they were stuff we really took for face value and didn't question.

It's like when you read a magazine. It's filled with information with stuff you know very little about but that one area where you actually have knowledge on is riddled with errors. How much stock can you place in what you read elsewhere in the magazine? Given that you have no familiarisation with that subject matter.

Banana Republic 1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So what if none them end up in hospital. The 10% will have minor illness only.

Also, the strong data on the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing spread means that the R0 will also be suppressed meaning the virus wont spread either.

That’s someone else quote. It all started because people won’t accept that new virus strain are new viruses and thus there is a real risk that the vaccines won’t at some stage work at all.

funnydoggy

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

That’s someone else quote. It all started because people won’t accept that new virus strain are new viruses

Nope, still COVID-19.

there is a real risk that the vaccines won’t at some stage work at all.

The mRNA ones can be changed on the fly. There are already variant vaccines in production going through trials.

Wolf359f

donalsim wrote: »

It took over a year to get 235,000 infections, but now with 1,000,000 with a vaccine or a prior covid infection and 100,000 being vaccinated every week we will suddenly will 578,000 infections in less than half a year, in the summer

Laughable science

Only took 1 month to get 100,000 infected.
It's was worst case modeling. Even Glynn doesn't envision us getting a 4th wave. Unless of course the public goes mad, like with Christmas.
Media will report those crazy figures but not the modelling showing how we can end up reducing cases as vaccinations increase. Media picking out all the negatives/worst case scenarios, no surprise there

Always_Running

Last seven days compared to the previous 7 days.

221 fewer cases
13 few positive swabs
20,901 more tests carried out.
7-day positivity in testing 3.3% (3.9% last Wednesday)
5 fewer reported deaths
32 fewer in hospital
8 fewer in ICU

nocoverart

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

That’s someone else quote. It all started because people won’t accept that new virus strain are new viruses and thus there is a real risk that the vaccines won’t at some stage work at all.

“Are you Kermit?
Are you Kermit?
Are you Kermit in disguise?”

I miss the auld soccer chants, wont be long now till fans are back in the stadiums.

shinzon

AdamD wrote: »

The timeline given is up to September, we'll have huge numbers vaccinated by May.

We need to get to May first thats the issue

Shin

Goldengirl

Turtwig wrote: »

I will go down the rabbit hole.

Some of them will get awards for their coverage of this event. They'll be talking about it for decades to come. They've been nothing short of wind up merchants at times with little responsibility or empathy for the how their tweets might be received. Or how they are contextualising information.

The thing to really consider here is how responsible are they reporting on anything else? They didn't suddenly change their competence and behaviour because of COVID. Yes, the subject matter became different and a bit more complicated, some accommodation can be made for that, but I do wonder how reliable they were stuff we really took for face value and didn't question.

It's like when you read a magazine. It's filled with information with stuff you know very little about but that one area where you actually have knowledge on is riddled with errors. How much stock can you place in what you read elsewhere in the magazine? Given that you have no familiarisation with that subject matter.

Totally agree and have been saying this all along about people taking their opinions and statistics from less than reliable sources.
Anything on Twitter Facebook or other "fast" media needs to be checked before believing and spreading.
That is everyone's responsibility, not just the journalists.
If you spread a rumour that turns out to be Untrue or even a half truth, you are just as bad as the bots and trolls on those sites trying to pervert public opinion and destroy democracy.
Not saying Adam D but he has been sucked in by the personal tweeting of a disgruntled below average journalist.

Bowers understanding is compromised not only by his rudimentary grasp of what the public health team is trying to convey but by his prejudice, which can be seen all through this by his offhand minimising reporting.
Even at our worst in January he reported hospital numbers as ' stable' and 'improved'.
The way he has the notebook in front of him to prompt him, and watch how he
never answers the questions posed, but carries on with what he has obviously written down, ignoring everything else.
He never interviews a health care worker, probably too afraid he might be told what is really going on and it might go against his narrative.
All the other reporters interview the relevant sectors and are more open and unbiased.
For example, the education correspondent, she has even interviewed the children in special schools.
He is one example of a person who has been unable to rise to the challenge in this whole scenario and should be retired ASAP..

Deeper Blue

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

That’s someone else quote. It all started because people won’t accept that new virus strain are new viruses and thus there is a real risk that the vaccines won’t at some stage work at all.

I think it's time you stopped posting about this stuff, you clearly haven't a fecking notion.

hmmm

Turtwig wrote: »

The thing to really consider here is how responsible are they reporting on anything else? They didn't suddenly change their competence and behaviour because of COVID. Yes, the subject matter became different and a bit more complicated, some accommodation can be made for that, but I do wonder how reliable they were stuff we really took for face value and didn't question.

It has been a bit of an eye opener. There isn't a single Irish journalist I've been going to for accurate news & analysis of Covid developments, either at home or abroad, and like you say who knows how good their reporting has been for other stuff.

The biggest news of the past few days in my opinion was the CDC report on transmission. Even Brian MacCraith mentioned it, and I didn't see one single Irish reporter picking up on it or tweeting about it. Just parroting whatever they were told at the press conference, and often badly interpreted parroting.

Goldengirl

hmmm wrote: »

It has been a bit of an eye opener. There isn't a single Irish journalist I've been going to for accurate news & analysis of Covid developments, either at home or abroad, and like you say who knows how good their reporting has been for other stuff.

The biggest news of the past few days in my opinion was the CDC report on transmission. Even Brian MacCraith mentioned it, and I didn't see one single Irish reporter picking up on it or tweeting about it. Just parroting whatever they were told at the press conference, and often badly interpreted parroting.

It was said at the briefing today, and George Lee mentioned it also in fairness , with his usual excitement earlier in the week. Most people probably not listening to him 😊
We haven't had a briefing this week so it just shows how poor all those reporters are that not one of them independently report anything that is not FED to them anymore.
I fact first place I read that was your post on the vaccine thread, hmmm.

Banana Republic 1

Goldengirl wrote: »

It was said at the briefing today, and George Lee mentioned it also in fairness , with his usual excitement earlier in the week. Most people probably not listening to him 😊
We haven't had a briefing this week so it just shows how poor all those reporters are that not one of them independently report anything that is not FED to them anymore.
I fact first place I read that was your post on the vaccine thread, hmmm.

I remember when Enda Kennys government car was egged it was reported on tv3 but not on RTE

CalamariFritti

411 cases, 6 deaths?

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0331/1207270-nphet-briefing/

SPDUB

donalsim wrote: »

It took over a year to get 235,000 infections, but now with 1,000,000 with a vaccine or a prior covid infection and 100,000 being vaccinated every week we will suddenly will 578,000 infections in less than half a year, in the summer

Laughable science

It took only about 3 months to get 135,000 approx of those 235,000

manofwisdom

When running with the fear mongering headline RTÉ could have picked a better picture than what appears like a pair of knickers in Dr Glynns hands..

Faugheen

donalsim wrote: »

That's only 45,000 a month average, NPHET are forecasting 96,333 a month average

15% of the country pcr infected in 178 days

Nowhere in the world has had that confirmed infection rate

Yes, before B117 was dominant.

It was well after the peak when B117 made up the amount of cases it does now.