Only 6% of those tested in Ireland , tested positive

Brendan Burgess

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
52,187
Apparently only 6% of tests proved positive which looks as if they were not prioritising properly at all.

Or else, there were a huge proportion of worried well?

Or maybe people had got better by the time the test was done?

Brendan
 
I've no idea what the figure is Brendan but I think it is much lower than 6%.

6% would mean that there are about 300,000 currently infected with 60,000 expected to be severe or critical. With a fatality rate of say 2% that would be 6,000 expected to pass away in the next few weeks. Stark figures.
 
The fatality rate is very skewed by demographics
6% of school kids, students and under 60s infected has a very different rate to 6 percent spread over all ages.
 
40 have been admitted to ICU so far with Covid 19. Supposing these are 1% of cases, that's 4000 cases. Less than 0.1% of population.

Agree with you odyssey about figures being skewed, I'm not going to claim these figures are accurate, just putting them out there for discussion.

If incidence is currently 6% this will be over soon as rate of new infections will only increase.
 
One wonders do they actually know what they're doing and I say that with respect. I do hope this post is not deleted, because it is a concern for me, and friends of mine, and theirs, who are now voicing that concern too.
 
The test is not great in that if you test too soon, someone incubating the virus will show as negative.

Then there are the mysterious cases of people who presented at a&e with severe respiratory issues, had not travelled or had known contacts. Then tested positive.
And seem to have infected many hospital staff.

I cant reconcile the low rate with how easily this virus seems to spread.
And that people without symptoms are infectious for 24-48 hours before they manifest.
 
Hey Brendan given the number of positive cases in every other country in the world has not exceeded 1% of the population of those countries why would you assume that 6% is low?
 
It's not 6% of population, as I understand it; it's 6% of all the tests done.

New York has 33k cases, I don't recall what their testing figures are, be interesting to compare what % of their tests were positive.
 
There was an academic from Northern Ireland on Morning Ireland just now.

He did this backward estimation.

7 people have died in Northern Ireland.
About 1 in 100 infected people die
It takes 17 days from infection to death.

So, 17 days ago, there were 700 people infected in Northern Ireland

The numbers infected double every 6 days.

So 11 days ago, there were 1400 infected
7 days ago, there were 2800

Today, there are 5,000 infected in Northern Ireland.

I think that the numbers are too small and the assumptions too big for the calculation to be reliable, but it's interesting.

Brendan
 
Eireog007 said:
Hey Brendan given the number of positive cases in every other country in the world has not exceeded 1% of the population of those countries why would you assume that 6% is low?
Click to expand...

Maybe I am just panicking.

Have they done randomised testing anywhere to measure the incidence in the population.

We have tested suspect cases and only 6% had the virus.

So it does look as if the incidence in the general population must be rare indeed.

Brendan
 
Thirsty said:
It's not 6% of population, as I understand it; it's 6% of all the tests done.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I wish people would slow down a bit before posting opinions when they are based on an incorrect understanding of what has been said.
As Brendan said, it is only 6% of the tests carried out to date that have returned positive results. Nobody anywhere said 6% of the population have it so please Ilgon try and think before you post.
It clearly shows as Brendan alluded to that there were a lot of worried well out there. I can understand the anxiety right now but I also completely understand and agree with the change in policy around who should be referred for a test. I think the HSE and government are doing their best here in trying circumstances.
 
not easy circumstances at all, 1/4 cases are healthcare workers which is worrying, will undoubtedly see an increase in positive tests percentage with narrowing of criteria, though this will cause more pressure on GP setting with many individuals who have not been allocated a testing date will have to be re 'triaged' based on the new testing criteria. health services in Spain and Italy are collapsing, the UK rate of positive test is around 9.8%
 
Ok apologies Ilgon I missed that, but please can we stick to facts only here, leave hunches and opinion out of it. There is no point extrapolating from a fact of 6% of tests returning a positive result, to saying we could have "300,000 currently infected with 60,000 expected to be severe or critical. With a fatality rate of say 2% that would be 6,000 expected to pass away in the next few weeks ". That is just scaremongering and is not based on fact.
 
Realistically when it comes down to accurate numbers and stats on this virus I think we are still far too early into the growth to have any confidence in stating what we know to date is what the situation actually is.
The numbers from each country will all have their own idiosyncrasies based on the average age of the infected population, the standard of the health service, the ability of the government to enforce a lockdown and social distancing and even the truthfulness of the reported figures in some countries eg Russia & China.
 
Apology accepted but your replies show you are missing the facts, not me. Did you also miss this:

llgon said:
I've no idea what the figure is Brendan but I think it is much lower than 6%.
Click to expand...

Please read the posts properly before commenting. The rest of my post was based on what I believe are well accepted figures ie
20% of cases are severe or critical
1-4% are fatal depending on the study.
That's not scaremongering, that's the reality.

Bredan speculated on the figure of 6%, not me. I commented on it. I said I thought it was much lower and gave my reasons. Apologies if that is unacceptable in a discussion forum.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Maybe I am just panicking.

Have they done randomised testing anywhere to measure the incidence in the population.

We have tested suspect cases and only 6% had the virus.

So it does look as if the incidence in the general population must be rare indeed.

Brendan
Click to expand...

Being worried is only natural in this unprecedented situation but another way to look at those figures is that we tested far more than was necessary initially which isn’t really a negative.
 
I already posted what you said and it was scaremongering. I will just ignore any such posts in the future as clearly you cannot accept that.
 
Best figure I can get for New York State is 78k tests and 30k cases.

So around 38% positives; and from what I can gather they are testing 'on demand' through drive in centres as well as hospitals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top