Corona Virus

[paddyor]

The vaccines give better immunity than infection - at least for all the variants to date

Right but if the risk from infection is so low, how many will bother with a vaccine and twice yearly boosters?

I'm not sure I understand... The risk of infection is quite high it seems. Risk of serious illness isn't clear yet. Not sure I have picked up your point

Sent from my LE2123 using Tapatalk

If the IFR of the disease is that low vaccines become surplus to requirements and we move to herd immunity through natural infection. It's how the spanish flu epidemic(and others) eventually ended. And IMO how this one will end. We seem to have decided there's some precise suite of technocratic tools to micromanage the pandemic to an end and i think these will fail.

[paddyor]

Trust the experts! Here's an expert tarring the CMO as borderline anti science.

https://twitter.com/michaelmina_lab/sta ... 48001?s=20

From my own experience, I'd have been in work Monday and out and about if not for the antigen test the gf took(we were at the theatre and the cinema so she wanted to be cautious). People aren't going to wait around for 3 days for a HSE PCR(private ones cost €95) because they think they have a head cold. It's winter respiratory season. This is +18 months in and the IFR is less than .5%. If we just tell people to stay home no matter what! On top of that PCR tests can return positive results for months after so we could actually be diagnosing other viruses as COVID if the patient was previously infected.

[Oldschoolsocks]

https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/a83 ... en-testing

official advice from the government:

Antigen testing
Public health advice recognises the potential value of more general use of antigen tests in particular situations if you do not have symptoms of COVID-19.

Engagement has taken place with leading retailers and wholesalers on the availability of affordable antigen tests through the retail sector. Early indications are that price reductions have already been brought forward by a number of large retailers in recent days. The pricing and availability of antigen tests continue to be closely monitored, with a focus on ensuring their continued availability to the public at affordable prices.

Key messages
The public health advice is that the future trajectory remains uncertain. The three steps everyone can take to help reduce the spread of the virus are:

1. Get vaccinated and get your booster when you are called.

2. If you have symptoms of COVID-19, get a PCR test, self-isolate until you get your result and then follow the public health advice.

3. In every situation, reduce your risk of catching / transmitting COVID-19 over the coming weeks by:

• prioritising close friends and family and being conscious of vulnerable people (including yourself) in your circle

• meeting outdoors where possible and opening windows and doors to let fresh air in if meeting indoors

• wearing a mask, keeping your distance and cleaning your hands frequently

• using antigen tests appropriately

Notes
In the case of antigen testing, the test cannot be self-administered. It must be taken and certified by an established operator in the relevant country.

Anyone who does not have a Digital COVID Certificate based on vaccination or recovery or other appropriate valid proof of vaccination or recovery will continue to be required to take a pre-departure PCR test.

Use an antigen test if you:

• have been identified as a close contact of a confirmed case

• have no symptoms

• are fully vaccinated

Use an antigen test twice a week if you are regularly in high-risk environments and you have no symptoms.

You will be offered free antigen tests for your child in primary school if:

• there is a confirmed case in their pod

• there are 2 or more confirmed cases in their class in different pods within a 7-day period

[paddyor]

Also officical govt advice.

Department of Health
@roinnslainte
·
22h
“It is vital that if you experience any symptoms of COVID-19, you isolate immediately and arrange a PCR test – not an antigen test. Do not go to work, school, college or socialise if you are symptomatic.

#ForUsAll @CMOIreland

[Oldschoolsocks]

Good stuff, so we’re all on the same page then?

[paddyor]

No. The wait for a HSE test is up to 3 days and in some cases 40 hours for the results. People aren't going to wait 3 days for a head cold. He should be telling people to test with antigen straight up and he should probably be using it to expand testing capacity, administered if needs be.

JFC

https://twitter.com/HSELive/status/1466 ... 30346?s=20

[paddyor]

We massively undershot the modelling for their most optimistic scenario so they've gone back to the lab and developing fresh restrictions because they probably jumped the gun again.



€9 meals anyone?

[Oldschoolsocks]

No. The wait for a HSE test is up to 3 days and in some cases 40 hours for the results. People aren't going to wait 3 days for a head cold. He should be telling people to test with antigen straight up and he should probably be using it to expand testing capacity, administered if needs be.

JFC

https://twitter.com/HSELive/status/1466 ... 30346?s=20

why are we not on the same page though?

2. If you have symptoms of COVID-19, get a PCR test, self-isolate until you get your result and then follow the public health advice.

...

Use an antigen test if you:
have been identified as a close contact of a confirmed case
have no symptoms
are fully vaccinated

the guidance has always been to self isolate if you have symptoms and book a PCR test, why should this change?
the PCR test and Antigen test are being used in different ways for good reason,I believe this is because the risk of false negative from antigen tests is higher than for the PCR tests.

So what happens if you have symptoms, take an antigen test and it comes in negative? DO you say that's grand - off you go and not bother with a PCR test. That seems a lot riskier than necessary Paddy.

I just don't get it

[paddyor]

No. The wait for a HSE test is up to 3 days and in some cases 40 hours for the results. People aren't going to wait 3 days for a head cold. He should be telling people to test with antigen straight up and he should probably be using it to expand testing capacity, administered if needs be.

JFC

https://twitter.com/HSELive/status/1466 ... 30346?s=20

why are we not on the same page though?

2. If you have symptoms of COVID-19, get a PCR test, self-isolate until you get your result and then follow the public health advice.

...

Use an antigen test if you:
have been identified as a close contact of a confirmed case
have no symptoms
are fully vaccinated

the guidance has always been to self isolate if you have symptoms and book a PCR test, why should this change?
the PCR test and Antigen test are being used in different ways for good reason,I believe this is because the risk of false negative from antigen tests is higher than for the PCR tests.

So what happens if you have symptoms, take an antigen test and it comes in negative? DO you say that's grand - off you go and not bother with a PCR test. That seems a lot riskier than necessary Paddy.

I just don't get it

A lot riskier? How exactly? I mean telling people with symptoms NOT to take an antigen test and wait 3-4 days for a PCR result seems like a much bigger risk to me. Especially when the vaccine means they might only feel a head cold. I do get the apprehension about them being self administered, but if that's worrying you then you shouldn't really expect those same people you don't trust to take an antigen test to hang around until you get your sh!t together with timely PCR testing. ANd of course PCR testing is useless once you've had the virus as you'll test positive months after you've had the virus anyway.

It's not based on any kind of risk assessment and as Mina has pointed out it's borderline anti science. True to form philip Nolan has waded in again with more BS about HEPA filters.

https://www.thejournal.ie/should-hepa-a ... =shortlink

[Oldschoolsocks]

No. The wait for a HSE test is up to 3 days and in some cases 40 hours for the results. People aren't going to wait 3 days for a head cold. He should be telling people to test with antigen straight up and he should probably be using it to expand testing capacity, administered if needs be.

JFC

https://twitter.com/HSELive/status/1466 ... 30346?s=20

why are we not on the same page though?

2. If you have symptoms of COVID-19, get a PCR test, self-isolate until you get your result and then follow the public health advice.

...

Use an antigen test if you:
have been identified as a close contact of a confirmed case
have no symptoms
are fully vaccinated

the guidance has always been to self isolate if you have symptoms and book a PCR test, why should this change?
the PCR test and Antigen test are being used in different ways for good reason,I believe this is because the risk of false negative from antigen tests is higher than for the PCR tests.

So what happens if you have symptoms, take an antigen test and it comes in negative? DO you say that's grand - off you go and not bother with a PCR test. That seems a lot riskier than necessary Paddy.

I just don't get it

A lot riskier? How exactly? I mean telling people with symptoms NOT to take an antigen test and wait 3-4 days for a PCR result seems like a much bigger risk to me. Especially when the vaccine means they might only feel a head cold. I do get the apprehension about them being self administered, but if that's worrying you then you shouldn't really expect those same people you don't trust to take an antigen test to hang around until you get your sh!t together with timely PCR testing. ANd of course PCR testing is useless once you've had the virus as you'll test positive months after you've had the virus anyway.

It's not based on any kind of risk assessment and as Mina has pointed out it's borderline anti science. True to form philip Nolan has waded in again with more BS about HEPA filters.

https://www.thejournal.ie/should-hepa-a ... =shortlink

Paddy,

can we stick to one thing at a time? let's talk about the testing and leave the filters for another time.

so wrt Antigen testing - is it true that it it less accurate and a lot more likely to give a false negative? if so, should it be relied upon?


https://www.healthline.com/health/how-a ... rate-is-it

Accuracy for people with COVID-19 symptoms

For people with symptoms of COVID-19, the tests correctly gave a positive result an average of 72 percent of the time. The 95 percent confidence intervals were 63.7 to 79 percent, meaning that the researchers were 95 percent confident that the average fell between these two values.

Accuracy for people without COVID-19 symptoms

The researchers found that people without COVID-19 symptoms correctly tested positive in 58.1 percent of rapid tests. The 95 percent confidence intervals were 40.2 to 74.1 percent.

so is it not inherently risky to rely upon a a self administered test with at least a moderate to high level of chance of false negative as part of the testing strategy. I would say it is entirely sensible to ask people wo book a PCR test and self isolate if they are symptomatic. Further to the point as you say yourself you don't think people will wait 3 days for a PCR test plus 40 hours for a result, what do you think will happen if the official advice to to take an antigen test, won't people just assume that a negative means it's negative and that they can just carry on about their business and not self isolate and wait for a PCR appointment as per the official advice?

wrt Mina and her "anti science" statement - I don't agree with her at all - the tweet matches the official advice - if you have symptoms self isolate, and book a PCR test

[ronk]

So if you rapid test everyone at the RDS or a nightclub for a game you'll catch over half the people with Covid. i.e. less effective than masks, more useful than nothing.

It would make sense for indoor meals, to slow down outbreaks in schools and a few other scenarios like contacts of vulnerable people.

If you have symptoms it'll give you early warning while you isolate for peace of mind. But if you have a 1/3 chance of having Covid (a false negative anyway) you should isolate, of course.

There's lots of testing and the positive rate is still 14.2%, it's everywhere.

[Oldschoolsocks]

So if you rapid test everyone at the RDS or a nightclub for a game you'll catch over half the people with Covid. i.e. less effective than masks, more useful than nothing.

It would make sense for indoor meals, to slow down outbreaks in schools and a few other scenarios like contacts of vulnerable people.

If you have symptoms it'll give you early warning while you isolate for peace of mind. But if you have a 1/3 chance of having Covid (a false negative anyway) you should isolate, of course.

There's lots of testing and the positive rate is still 14.2%, it's everywhere.

yup, I think (emphasis on think) that official policy does not translate well to the character restriction on twitter. IF you have symptoms get a PCR test but don't rely on an antigen test which is how I read that tweet that me and Paddy (Paddy and I ?) are chatting about.

in general I don't think twitter is a place to decide on public policy...

[paddyor]

Paddy,

can we stick to one thing at a time? let's talk about the testing and leave the filters for another time.

so wrt Antigen testing - is it true that it it less accurate and a lot more likely to give a false negative? if so, should it be relied upon?


https://www.healthline.com/health/how-a ... rate-is-it

Accuracy for people with COVID-19 symptoms

For people with symptoms of COVID-19, the tests correctly gave a positive result an average of 72 percent of the time. The 95 percent confidence intervals were 63.7 to 79 percent, meaning that the researchers were 95 percent confident that the average fell between these two values.

Accuracy for people without COVID-19 symptoms

The researchers found that people without COVID-19 symptoms correctly tested positive in 58.1 percent of rapid tests. The 95 percent confidence intervals were 40.2 to 74.1 percent.

so is it not inherently risky to rely upon a a self administered test with at least a moderate to high level of chance of false negative as part of the testing strategy. I would say it is entirely sensible to ask people wo book a PCR test and self isolate if they are symptomatic. Further to the point as you say yourself you don't think people will wait 3 days for a PCR test plus 40 hours for a result, what do you think will happen if the official advice to to take an antigen test, won't people just assume that a negative means it's negative and that they can just carry on about their business and not self isolate and wait for a PCR appointment as per the official advice?

wrt Mina and her "anti science" statement - I don't agree with her at all - the tweet matches the official advice - if you have symptoms self isolate, and book a PCR test

I only referenced the filters to demonstrate this stuff isn't all science.

The false negatives are mostly due to people with low viral load(as in the least infectious), and typically that's people who are symptomatic. So no, it's not inherently risky to rely in it if the object is to reduce the spread as opposed to track which seems to be our priority. You're better off identifying 90% of high viral load carriers asap than hoping your creaking PCR infrastructure will catch them after a few days.

Here's Mina(He)
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/tra ... -1.4588528

Antigen tests are sufficient to detect anyone who is likely to spread the virus,” Prof Mina said.

He pointed out that the slower, more expensive PCR tests, favoured by the CMO, detect Covid for up to 30 days, while anyone carrying the virus was at their most infectious for just 10 days.

On that basis, a test designed to limit Covid’s spread only needs to have sensitivity rates of 30 per cent to 40 per cent, he said. “So 50 per cent is actually a good value if that test is only meant to detect infection,” Prof Mina noted.

He told the committee that data increasingly showed that using rapid screening before large gatherings could prevent 90 per cent to 95 per cent of transmissions.

On top of this we have 92.5% of the adult population vaxxed(though some indication the HSE are using the 2016 census figures and there may actually be as many as 800k unvaxxed over 12s) and there's s till a lot of social distancing and limited social contacts.

So circling back to the PCR testing. We did 36K tests yesterday which I think is high for this wave. We've had 2 backlogs in the past fortnight.Tere's no way they will be able to maintain that level thru to January and well March if they get there way.

I don't know how you explain away the way they delayed looking at them, ignoring the report their own scientists compiled for them and then outright spreading disinfo.

[paddyor]

So if you rapid test everyone at the RDS or a nightclub for a game you'll catch over half the people with Covid. i.e. less effective than masks, more useful than nothing.

It would make sense for indoor meals, to slow down outbreaks in schools and a few other scenarios like contacts of vulnerable people.

If you have symptoms it'll give you early warning while you isolate for peace of mind. But if you have a 1/3 chance of having Covid (a false negative anyway) you should isolate, of course.

There's lots of testing and the positive rate is still 14.2%, it's everywhere.

No, you'd catch the most infectious people and it would be vastly more effective than masking which I think is mostly public health theatre at this stage. Pretty much every PH body dismissed their use as negligible in iwdespread use at the start. And if you look at the spread in care settings that tends to confirm it. Like surgical masks are fitted for medical staff.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/tra ... -1.4588528

[Oldschoolsocks]

Paddy,

can we stick to one thing at a time? let's talk about the testing and leave the filters for another time.

so wrt Antigen testing - is it true that it it less accurate and a lot more likely to give a false negative? if so, should it be relied upon?


https://www.healthline.com/health/how-a ... rate-is-it

Accuracy for people with COVID-19 symptoms

For people with symptoms of COVID-19, the tests correctly gave a positive result an average of 72 percent of the time. The 95 percent confidence intervals were 63.7 to 79 percent, meaning that the researchers were 95 percent confident that the average fell between these two values.

Accuracy for people without COVID-19 symptoms

The researchers found that people without COVID-19 symptoms correctly tested positive in 58.1 percent of rapid tests. The 95 percent confidence intervals were 40.2 to 74.1 percent.

so is it not inherently risky to rely upon a a self administered test with at least a moderate to high level of chance of false negative as part of the testing strategy. I would say it is entirely sensible to ask people wo book a PCR test and self isolate if they are symptomatic. Further to the point as you say yourself you don't think people will wait 3 days for a PCR test plus 40 hours for a result, what do you think will happen if the official advice to to take an antigen test, won't people just assume that a negative means it's negative and that they can just carry on about their business and not self isolate and wait for a PCR appointment as per the official advice?

wrt Mina and her "anti science" statement - I don't agree with her at all - the tweet matches the official advice - if you have symptoms self isolate, and book a PCR test

I only referenced the filters to demonstrate this stuff isn't all science.

The false negatives are mostly due to people with low viral load(as in the least infectious), and typically that's people who are symptomatic. So no, it's not inherently risky to rely in it if the object is to reduce the spread as opposed to track which seems to be our priority. You're better off identifying 90% of high viral load carriers asap than hoping your creaking PCR infrastructure will catch them after a few days.

Here's Mina(He)
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/tra ... -1.4588528

Antigen tests are sufficient to detect anyone who is likely to spread the virus,” Prof Mina said.

He pointed out that the slower, more expensive PCR tests, favoured by the CMO, detect Covid for up to 30 days, while anyone carrying the virus was at their most infectious for just 10 days.

On that basis, a test designed to limit Covid’s spread only needs to have sensitivity rates of 30 per cent to 40 per cent, he said. “So 50 per cent is actually a good value if that test is only meant to detect infection,” Prof Mina noted.

He told the committee that data increasingly showed that using rapid screening before large gatherings could prevent 90 per cent to 95 per cent of transmissions.

On top of this we have 92.5% of the adult population vaxxed(though some indication the HSE are using the 2016 census figures and there may actually be as many as 800k unvaxxed over 12s) and there's s till a lot of social distancing and limited social contacts.

So circling back to the PCR testing. We did 36K tests yesterday which I think is high for this wave. We've had 2 backlogs in the past fortnight.Tere's no way they will be able to maintain that level thru to January and well March if they get there way.

I don't know how you explain away the way they delayed looking at them, ignoring the report their own scientists compiled for them and then outright spreading disinfo.

it is too early into this variant to be making assumptions about how long the incubation period is or how long a person will only be infectious for or how much protection vaccination will offer or how many people this variant will make very sick.

Until these are established it is entirely appropriate to be risk averse.

The risk averse approach is to self isolate and book a PCR test if you have symptoms.

everything else is just noise

[Oldschool]

If I thought I had COVID I wouldn't get a test, I'd simply self isolate for 10 days.
The only reasons I can think of for having a test are-
A. I was feeling unwell.
B. I hadn't been vaccinated.
C. I had plans to travel within the next six months.

Otherwise what's the point, you're just a statistic.
Please add to the list above if you think it's appropriate.

[Oldschoolsocks]

If I thought I had COVID I wouldn't get a test, I'd simply self isolate for 10 days.
The only reasons I can think of for having a test are-
A. I was feeling unwell.
B. I hadn't been vaccinated.
C. I had plans to travel within the next six months.

Otherwise what's the point, you're just a statistic.
Please add to the list above if you think it's appropriate.

I think the self isolation is the most important piece, but I do actually think it's important to be part of the statistics, the more data we have the better

[The Doc]

If I thought I had COVID I wouldn't get a test, I'd simply self isolate for 10 days.
The only reasons I can think of for having a test are-
A. I was feeling unwell.
B. I hadn't been vaccinated.
C. I had plans to travel within the next six months.

Otherwise what's the point, you're just a statistic.
Please add to the list above if you think it's appropriate.

The bigger imperative is getting a test where you don't think you have COVID i.e. if a contact has COVID. Then the testing informs whether to isolate and avoid further spreading

[Oldschool]

If I thought I had COVID I wouldn't get a test, I'd simply self isolate for 10 days.
The only reasons I can think of for having a test are-
A. I was feeling unwell.
B. I hadn't been vaccinated.
C. I had plans to travel within the next six months.

Otherwise what's the point, you're just a statistic.
Please add to the list above if you think it's appropriate.

The bigger imperative is getting a test where you don't think you have COVID i.e. if a contact has COVID. Then the testing informs whether to isolate and avoid further spreading

Not a bigger imperative but just as important and you should behave as if you have COVID.
You always have the option to get a test.

[ronk]

If I thought I had COVID I wouldn't get a test, I'd simply self isolate for 10 days.
The only reasons I can think of for having a test are-
A. I was feeling unwell.
B. I hadn't been vaccinated.
C. I had plans to travel within the next six months.

Otherwise what's the point, you're just a statistic.
Please add to the list above if you think it's appropriate.

Having Covid would also be valuable information for deciding on medical care if you were sick.

Contact tracing too.

So if you care about yourself, your circle of contacts and having society able to make decisions based on good data then you should get tested.