Covid 19 Part XXXV-956,720 ROI (5,952 deaths) 452,946 NI (3,002 deaths) (08/01) Read OP

Vicxas

Qiaonasen wrote: »

For now.

You're a glass is full of sh!t kinda person, arent you

Doctor Jimbob

Qiaonasen wrote: »

For now.

Aliens haven't turned up to wipe all life off the surface of the earth for now either. Better retreat into deep underground bunkers just in case it happens sometime in the future though.

Doctor Jimbob

Vicxas wrote: »

You're a glass is full of sh!t kinda person, arent you

I'd have left 7 words out of that.

Qiaonasen

Qiaonasen wrote: »

Too many unknowns. Pfizer efficacy against one Indian strain is down to 75%. Still completely acceptable of course. However the more the virus spreads the more likely we are to get a variant which will cause problems. We open up faster we enhance the risk. With the virus is Asia currently surging it is far from over. It is not over anywhere until it is over everywhere. Expect more lockdowns in the next year or two or three.

Worldwide just 1 billion jabs have been administered. Still a long long long way to go.

Wrong

leahyl

Random comment here....but we are on thread number 35 :eek:

Azatadine

leahyl wrote: »

Random comment here....but we are on thread number 35 :eek:

Slowing down though! Sure fire indicator that we are coming out of this nightmare!!

Qiaonasen

Qiaonasen wrote: »

For now.

If there ever even is a variant that by passes the vaccines, we still can't rely on lockdown anymore.

No business would be able to operate with the constant threat of closures or restrictions.
The government can't keep paying PUP and business supports.
The public are not going to accept many more years of lockdown.

We would need a new vaccine developed, tested and administered to everybody. And sure then another variant could come along...

leahyl

Azatadine wrote: »

Slowing down though! Sure fire indicator that we are coming out of this nightmare!!

Absolutely! I had a quick browse through the earlier threads and for a while, at the beginning, there was a new thread being started nearly every day!!

gozunda

Multipass wrote: »

Too bad, let people be hospitalised, same concern as any other disease now. Better to spend this money (we are still squandering in the billions) on catching up the waiting lists for conditions with far higher risk.

Ah I see the fuq the restrictions school of pandemic control. Not a fan personally.

But no - it's not a case of either / or.

It would be absolutely ridiculous and downright irresponsible to waste the resources which have been been brought into play to help reduce and keep down the rate of infection to current levels whilst our vaccination programme is being completed.

Treatments of those with conditions which were put on hold are now running again. We will need to keep that momentum up but that does not mean we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.

timmyntc

gozunda wrote: »

Nope. You attempted to use statistics irrelevant to the point I made that the risk to the general public now is not miniscule. I showed how underlying conditions exist in all age groups albeit decreasing in proportion by age.

And again hypertension is just one example of a common undiagnosed underlying condition. There are many other conditions to add to that statistic.

So it remains Underlying conditions are a feature of covid infection for all age groups. See the linked report showing the statistics for those diagnosed with covid with underlying conditions by age

And again your claiming things not said. Not one mention of the word "loads" btw. But no undiagnosed conditions are not new "variants excuse" used "to justify disproportionate restrictions" (sic)

We know that underlying conditions are an serious issue with respect to known issues relative to comorbidities and covid. That remains unchanged for all those with undiagnosed underlying conditions yet to be fully vaccinated.

Underlying conditions are a factor, but so too is age.
93% of deaths with an underlying condition is significant - but so too is the fact that less than 10 people under 24 have died from covid, this despite the fact that ~10% of all cases in that age bracket have an underlying condition.

So despite 1 in 10 covid cases in that age group (90,000 cases, so ~9000 underlying condition) - only 10 or less deaths.

25-44 age bracket has ~18% underlying condition in positive cases
and 44 deaths overall (85k cases, so ~17k underlying conditions)

Twice the underlying conditions with covid, but over 4 times the deaths. And it only gets starker as you progress through the age groups. Basically - age is a significant factor, just as underlying conditions are. But an underlying condition in a 30 year old is not the same as an underlying condition in a 60,70, or 80 year old.
And of course this is all assuming that most deaths in younger groups are in underlying conditions, if it isnt then that just means that your excuse of undiagnosed conditions has even less credence.

Age and health conditions are the 2 big factors here, and despite health conditions, younger people are still at a miniscule risk.
In the under 44s, only 44-54* people have died. Well over half the total cases are in these age brackets, but not even 1% of the deaths. Absurd that you would think these people are at any risk at this stage of the pandemic.

*Data doesnt record exact number when there's less than 5 cases in a category.

marno21

8 deaths reported in the last 12 days since the reporting stopped due to the cyberattack.

HSE describing a “collapse in deaths”

gozunda

timmyntc wrote: »

Underlying conditions are a factor, but so too is age.
93% of deaths with an underlying condition is significant - but so too is the fact that less than 10 people under 24 have died from covid, this despite the fact that ~10% of all cases in that age bracket have an underlying condition.

So despite 1 in 10 covid cases in that age group (90,000 cases, so ~9000 underlying condition) - only 10 or less deaths.

25-44 age bracket has ~18% underlying condition in positive cases
and 44 deaths overall (85k cases, so ~17k underlying conditions)

Twice the underlying conditions with covid, but over 4 times the deaths. And it only gets starker as you progress through the age groups. Basically - age is a significant factor, just as underlying conditions are. But an underlying condition in a 30 year old is not the same as an underlying condition in a 60,70, or 80 year old.
And of course this is all assuming that most deaths in younger groups are in underlying conditions, if it isnt then that just means that your excuse of undiagnosed conditions has even less credence.

Age and health conditions are the 2 big factors here, and despite health conditions, younger people are still at a miniscule risk.
In the under 44s, only 44-54* people have died. Well over half the total cases are in these age brackets, but not even 1% of the deaths. Absurd that you would think these people are at any risk at this stage of the pandemic.

*Data doesnt record exact number when there's less than 5 cases in a category.

Yup I've already referred to age as a control.

underlying conditions exist in all age groups albeit decreasing in proportion by age.

Again it's not just about deaths. Its also about keeping the infection rate low whilst we roll out our vaccination programme.

And to repeat myself with a risk of going blue in the face - its not known underlying conditions which are only relevant btw (as given in your stats) - its also all those of all age groups with diagnosed/ undiagnosed conditions who are not yet fully vaccinated

Nothing changes that. And yes 'younger people' are statistically less likely to get seriously ill overall however that does not equate to the risk of infection for the general public being "miniscule" as you previously suggested.

timmyntc

gozunda wrote: »

Yup I've already referred to age as a control.
And yes 'younger people' are statistically less likely to get seriously ill overall however that does not equate to the risk of infection for the general public being "miniscule" as you previously suggested.

The risk to the rest of the general public (excluding younger groups) is minimised by way of vaccines - you know, those vaccines we've been rolling out for months?

We're currently giving 1st doses to what? 50-59? I would say that goes a long way to minimising risks to the public, given the data I have previously posted showing the minimal risk to people 44 and under.

iamwhoiam

timmyntc wrote: »

The risk to the rest of the general public (excluding younger groups) is minimised by way of vaccines - you know, those vaccines we've been rolling out for months?

We're currently giving 1st doses to what? 50-59? I would say that goes a long way to minimising risks to the public, given the data I have previously posted showing the minimal risk to people 44 and under.

Looks like you have forgotten Cohort 7 , much like the media and the HSE

JRant

iamwhoiam wrote: »

You dont need undiagnosed conditions even to justify restrictions . A large number of cohort 7 have not yet been vaccinated
Cohort 7 which is deemed high risk has been largely forgotten by everyone and many left with no clue when they will be done

One small cohort of people is not enough of a justification to keep severe restrictions in place for longer than they have to be though.

iamwhoiam

JRant wrote: »

One small cohort of people is not enough of a justification to keep severe restrictions in place for longer than they have to be though.

Small ? How many are left to be vaccinated do you know ? There were 300k in that cohort .

JRant

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If there ever even is a variant that by passes the vaccines, we still can't rely on lockdown anymore.

No business would be able to operate with the constant threat of closures or restrictions.
The government can't keep paying PUP and business supports.
The public are not going to accept many more years of lockdown.

We would need a new vaccine developed, tested and administered to everybody. And sure then another variant could come along...

What sane person is going to try start a business in the next 2 years anyway? Sure, a small number will give it a go but not many. You'd need your head examined to even think about it with the governments willingness to **** everything down for months on end.

JRant

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Small ? How many are left to be vaccinated do you know ? There were 300k in that cohort .

300k out of a population of 5 million is a small percentage (16%). Plus, they will be done in the next few weeks.

iamwhoiam

JRant wrote: »

300k out of a population of 5 million is a small percentage (16%). Plus, they will be done in the next few weeks.

Glad you know more than many in that cohort do .

gozunda

timmyntc wrote: »

The risk to the rest of the general public (excluding younger groups) is minimised by way of vaccines - you know, those vaccines we've been rolling out for months?

We're currently giving 1st doses to what? 50-59? I would say that goes a long way to minimising risks to the public, given the data I have previously posted showing the minimal risk to people 44 and under.

Yes. I believe I already covered that. And whilst those of the general public with underlying conditions/ undiagnosed underlying condition are not fully vaccinated then that risk remains.

Vaccination of the remaining cohorts will reduce that risk to miniscule levels. And that goal is now within sight.

PatrickDoherty

Deleted User wrote: »

The public are not going to accept many more years of lockdown..

This idea is still doing the rounds, Ireland is a nation of obedient people they will do what their told like they have for the last 14 months, if a level 5 was announced again tomorrow 80% or more would follow the rules.

Economics101

marno21 wrote: »

8 deaths reported in the last 12 days since the reporting stopped due to the cyberattack.

HSE describing a “collapse in deaths”

Are these 8 deaths officially recorded (i.e. reported), or actually occurring in the past 12 days? Given the frequent long lag between the actual date of death and the official official HSE reporting date, the true up-to-date collapse in deaths may be greater.

If you want good statistics, wait for the professionals (the CSO) to do the job.

PatrickDoherty

PatrickDoherty wrote: »

This idea is still doing the rounds, Ireland is a nation of obedient people they will do what their told like they have for the last 14 months, if a level 5 was announced again tomorrow 80% or more would follow the rules.

I agree about Ireland. But I don't think the public in other countries will tolerate years more of lockdown and we'll follow what others are doing.

Jinglejangle69

RTÉ have just stated why people are so worried about the variant, the presenter wasn't even aware.

They don't realise that 33% efficacy only means you can catch it and have symptoms only.

Doesn't mean it's a chance of death or serious illness.

Media are to blame for this scaremongering without the facts.

All the vaccines are still excellent regardless of variants.

marno21

Whatever about a date for indoor dining; we need a date from which we don’t have to hear Zero Covid merchants anymore.

Today FM atm talking about another surge, hospitals overwhelmed by the Indian variant. Come here now.

timmyntc

marno21 wrote: »

Whatever about a date for indoor dining; we need a date from which we don’t have to hear Zero Covid merchants anymore.

Today FM atm talking about another surge, hospitals overwhelmed by the Indian variant. Come here now.

Hospitals where, in Bangalore?

Jinglejangle69

marno21 wrote: »

Whatever about a date for indoor dining; we need a date from which we don’t have to hear Zero Covid merchants anymore.

Today FM atm talking about another surge, hospitals overwhelmed by the Indian variant. Come here now.

They really don't understand the science of vaccines.

Shouldn't be allowed talk lies on air when they don't even understand it.

Jinglejangle69

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

They really don't understand the science of vaccines.

Shouldn't be allowed talk lies on air when they don't even understand it.

The indian variant is 75% of cases now in GB
People in their 50s and 60s who got astrazenica are going to be poorly protected all summer as that variant takes hold here and it will
Theres a strong case for 2nd dosing them sooner and giving jaansen excusively to under 50s along with pfizer and moderna at this stage

Jinglejangle69

Marine Layer wrote: »

The indian variant is 75% of cases now in GB
People in their 50s and 60s who got astrazenica are going to be poorly protected all summer as that variant takes hold here and it will
Theres a strong case for 2nd dosing them sooner and giving jaansen excusively to under 50s along with pfizer and moderna at this stage

Poorly protected from what?

stephenjmcd

Marine Layer wrote: »

The indian variant is 75% of cases now in GB

They actually don't really know.

"Indian variant is still spreading, with the latest estimates showing that almost half, and possibly three-quarters of all new cases are of this variant.

Mr Hancock says we must remain vigilant, and the aim is to break the link to hospitalisations and deaths so that cases alone no longer require stringent restrictions.

The increase in cases remains focused in hotspots and we are doing all we can,"

Also noted that hospitalisations are not rising